Hi there, Anyone know if it's better to have the windows swap file on your system drive or audio drive? e.g. C: drive (SATA) - windows system, applications etc incl Cubase SX2 X: drive (SATA) - audio drive - all cubase files - windows swap file on this drive! I have 2GB RAM, and no swap file on C drive - just on the X drive swapfile size is set to 2048 min/max - which seems to work well for me. This is not (unfortunately) a dedicated audio PC, so I'm looking for the best "all round" option. i.e. I know moving the swap file away from the windows drive gives better performance for general computer use, but does this compromise Cubase performance when it's accessing the same drive for it's audio? Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? If it is used much (obviously RAM dependent) then I imagine it would probably be better to have the swap file back on the windows disk, so Cubase can use all the bandwidth on one drive for it's audio...?
On 17 Mar 2006 01:21:21 -0800, "gBOT" <> wrote: >Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? Shouldn't do. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Hallo gBOT, gBOT schrieb: > Hi there, > > Anyone know if it's better to have the windows swap file on your system > drive or audio drive? > > e.g. > > C: drive (SATA) - windows system, applications etc incl Cubase SX2 > > X: drive (SATA) - audio drive - all cubase files - windows swap file on > this drive! > > I have 2GB RAM, and no swap file on C drive - just on the X drive > > swapfile size is set to 2048 min/max - which seems to work well for me. You should set the swapfile size to 3072 (1,5xRAM), even if it works with a smaller swapfile, to avoid issues with the windows memory manager. > Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for applications wich are already running or to be started. 42, Hlmar
I have mine in the partition next to the C drive. Yes, I only run Cubase and there is swap file on drive D partition.... It isn't very big though. I only have 1 Gig of RAM. Terry
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:39:23 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >> Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? > >Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager >tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for >applications wich are already running or to be started. What if there is plenty of physical memory?
Hallo Laurence Payne, Laurence Payne schrieb: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:39:23 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer > <> wrote: > >>> Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? >> >>Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager >>tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for >>applications wich are already running or to be started. > > > What if there is plenty of physical memory? The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. 42, Hilmar
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >Hallo Laurence Payne, > >Laurence Payne schrieb: > >> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:39:23 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer >> <> wrote: >> >>>> Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? >>> >>>Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager >>>tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for >>>applications wich are already running or to be started. >> >> >> What if there is plenty of physical memory? > >The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. > >42, >Hilmar Remember..... ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 Ap
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >> What if there is plenty of physical memory? > >The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap file altogether?
Hallo Laurence Payne, Laurence Payne schrieb: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer > <> wrote: > >>> What if there is plenty of physical memory? >> >>The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. > > What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap > file altogether? This may cause trouble and provides absolutely no performance gain. 42, Hilmar
Hallo Aphelion, Aphelion schrieb: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer > <> wrote: > >>Hallo Laurence Payne, >> >>Laurence Payne schrieb: >> >>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:39:23 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer >>> <> wrote: >>> >>>>> Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? >>>> >>>>Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager >>>>tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for >>>>applications wich are already running or to be started. >>> >>> >>> What if there is plenty of physical memory? >> >>The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. >> >>42, >>Hilmar > > > Remember..... > > ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 Yepp. Back then, memory management tuning was a bit effective. Nowadays the windows memory manager does it's job very well, even if it uses the swap file. It's an UL that swapping affects performance generally. 42, Hilmar
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:17:15 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >Hallo Aphelion, > >Aphelion schrieb: > >> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer >> <> wrote: >> >>>Hallo Laurence Payne, >>> >>>Laurence Payne schrieb: >>> >>>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:39:23 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer >>>> <> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Does the swapfile even get used when running Cubase and plugins? >>>>> >>>>>Yes. The swapfile is always in use, because the windows memory manager >>>>>tries to provide as much fast physical memory as possible for >>>>>applications wich are already running or to be started. >>>> >>>> >>>> What if there is plenty of physical memory? >>> >>>The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. >>> >>>42, >>>Hilmar >> >> >> Remember..... >> >> ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 > >Yepp. Back then, memory management tuning was a bit effective. Nowadays >the windows memory manager does it's job very well, even if it uses the >swap file. It's an UL that swapping affects performance generally. I've never found it to be a problem, it's not usually done when high priority tasks are executing. Ap
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:12:56 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >> What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap >> file altogether? > >This may cause trouble and provides absolutely no performance gain. But as some people seem convinced that the swap file on a modern system with ample RAM will be constantly churning and causing audio glitches...... I'm writing this on a laptop with Windows XP and 1GB RAM. Yesterday, just for fun, I disabled the swapfile. I'll let you know when something doesn't work. I'll also try doing the same on my music desktop when I have a protect to do without clients watching.
Hallo Laurence Payne, Laurence Payne schrieb: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:12:56 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer > <> wrote: > >>> What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap >>> file altogether? >> >>This may cause trouble and provides absolutely no performance gain. > > But as some people seem convinced that the swap file on a modern > system with ample RAM will be constantly churning and causing audio > glitches...... Maybe, on badly configured systems. 42, Hilmar
Am Sat, 18 Mar 2006 01:25:58 +0000 schrieb Laurence Payne: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer > <> wrote: > >>> What if there is plenty of physical memory? >> >>The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. > > What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap > file altogether? Windows Swap can be disabled in the control panel and if you have enough RAM (for Cubase at least more than 1.5GB) your system will never swap (see in the system monitor). Windows won't have a problem with no swap. If you really hit the limit for the physical range, you get an error message like (Not enough RAM to execute blablabla). I tried it but the difference is not big. I have 2 GB dual channel RAM, disabled swap, and I get a very fast machine. Lukas
2G's o'RAM in dual channel is equivalent to 1G since you are only optimising the method that the data is stored in RAM. It really is no big deal...you machine doesn't magically improve. You'll need a swap file if you plan on using any plug-ins that are memory hogs or if you are planning to use more than 1 app (which I am sure you will). Not only that since it is not a dedicated machine don't even bother. There are apps (Photoshop for one) which will not run until you set a swap file. I did it myself with 1G. Like I said no big deal. If you are concerned about speed and laying down 32 tracks at once go Raptor or something similar. I have been tracking for 10 years. Machines today are more than adequate. SOS just finished writing an article on swap drive placement...I am not sure which month and I am not inclined to hunt/copy a link so you either ignore me or not *wink*. If you are planning on laying down large takes you might want to consider creating "current audio" partition on the outer rim of the disk (check out partition magic). this will speed up disk access time. In your case you might want to do that with the swap drive. For example: Drive 1 - Partition A - Current Project - outer ring - Partition B - OS - inner ring Drive 2 - Partition A - Swap File - outer ring - Partition B - Apps ***better yet get a 3rd drive for swap or current projects***** Have fun!! Lucid SfX "leutholl" <> wrote in message news:... > Am Sat, 18 Mar 2006 01:25:58 +0000 schrieb Laurence Payne: > >> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:03:47 +0100, Hilmar Steinhauer >> <> wrote: >> >>>> What if there is plenty of physical memory? >>> >>>The windows memory manager swaps even then. It's much less, though. >> >> What if (on a system with ample RAM, say 2GB) you disable the swap >> file altogether? > > Windows Swap can be disabled in the control panel and if you have enough > RAM (for Cubase at least more than 1.5GB) your system will never swap (see > in the system monitor). Windows won't have a problem with no swap. If you > really hit the limit for the physical range, you get an error message like > (Not enough RAM to execute blablabla). > I tried it but the difference is not big. > I have 2 GB dual channel RAM, disabled swap, and I get a very fast > machine. > > Lukas
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:13:52 -0400, "Giganews TEMP" <> wrote: >2G's o'RAM in dual channel is equivalent to 1G since you are only >optimising the method that the data is stored in RAM. It really is no big >deal...you machine doesn't magically improve. You're saying that dual-channel halves the effective memory? Really? > >You'll need a swap file if you plan on using any plug-ins that are memory >hogs or if you are planning to use more than 1 app (which I am sure you >will). No you won't. > >Not only that since it is not a dedicated machine don't even bother. There >are apps (Photoshop for one) which will not run until you set a swap file No it doesn't. Don't argue - try. I have one machine with 2GB of RAM than has been running without a swapfile for several weeks now. Multiple programs, sample-playing plugins, the lot. That computer doesn't have Photoshop. But this one does (Pentium 4 laptop, 1GB). I just set all drives to "No Paging File", clicked "Set" and restarted. Then opened Photoshop, loaded a large image and pulled it around a bit. No problem. I think your theories need re-examining.
Laurence Payne schrieb: > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 22:13:52 -0400, "Giganews TEMP" <> > wrote: > >>Not only that since it is not a dedicated machine don't even bother. There >>are apps (Photoshop for one) which will not run until you set a swap file > > No it doesn't. > > Don't argue - try. I have one machine with 2GB of RAM than has been > running without a swapfile for several weeks now. Multiple programs, > sample-playing plugins, the lot. That computer doesn't have > Photoshop. But this one does (Pentium 4 laptop, 1GB). I just set all > drives to "No Paging File", clicked "Set" and restarted. Then opened > Photoshop, loaded a large image and pulled it around a bit. No > problem. Photoshop does not (only) use the windows swap, but it's own. You can't deactivate that. "Giganews TEMP" mixed that up. 42, Hilmar
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:35:48 +0200, Hilmar Steinhauer <> wrote: >Photoshop does not (only) use the windows swap, but it's own. You can't >deactivate that. >"Giganews TEMP" mixed that up I expect he just heard it somewhere. I've heard it too. But it ain't so. What IS interesting is that my 2GB desktop machine performs just the same with or without (Windows) swap file. The 1GB laptop is noticeably slower at opening some applications without a swapfile. From which I deduce that Windows makes intelligent use of paged memory for caching often-used files. With 2GB installed, those pages can all be in RAM. With only 1GB they can't.
