Re: Word 2000 /2003
- From: "Terry Farrell" <terryfarrell@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:45:37 +0100
I see your problem: RDRAM was never popular and now it obsolete, it is very expensive new. However, there are many software memory testers that you can download: most work very well. Also, providing you ensure that you get the correct type, buying used memory from eBay is a good way to stretch more life out of your computer.
As for Windows managing the Swapfile: I don't see this as a problem, but I would still suggest you keep a minimum setting set to the same size as the installed memory and let Windows take care of the maximum size. The reason for this is that Windows does take a small amount of time to create a Swapfile, so if it already has a small amount assigned, it can save time. But, keeping a large Swapfile set permanently will ensure that Windows is using a contiguous area on the disk avoiding fragmentation of the swapfile.
Terry
<remik500@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1190221396.244241.60320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fascinating, its the first time I see this sort of opinion regarding
the swap file. Small correction to myself,
I do not delete the tempfiles every boot but every week (scheduled
task).
I would like very much to upgrade the RAM (after a typical working
day, if I go to task manager, Performance, Commit Charge - the 'Peak'
is sometimes 3 times my physical RAM!) but RDRAM is so terribly
expensive, 1GB is about one third of the cost of a new PC with Core 2
duo and 2 Gigs RAM and all that, and our PC is so intricately
configured that I get numb just thinking about reinstalling
everything. I saw some cheap RDRAMs floating around on Ebay and in
second hand places but I'm wary of getting second hand memory, what if
it starts crashing after a few weeks, can I trust the RAM diagnostic
burn in test freewares to test its condition?
I don't think the configuration itself is the problem, as it was the
same when we had FAT32 for years on this machine and then we never had
these problems. Perhaps its not meek to says so but I'm suspicious of
the suitability of NTFS/Win2k to a mixed FAT32/NTFS home workgroup
setup and regret trying it, especially as I don't use many of its
added benefits.
I shall certainly try letting windows manage the swap file, though it
sounds scary. (Never did it, since windows 3.1!)
.
- References:
- Word 2000 /2003
- From: remik500
- Re: Word 2000 /2003
- From: Tom Ferguson
- Re: Word 2000 /2003
- From: remik500
- Word 2000 /2003
- Prev by Date: Re: Equation Editor error
- Next by Date: Re: Mouse click makes the screen jump to previous point before scr
- Previous by thread: Re: Word 2000 /2003
- Next by thread: Re: .docx becomes .zip
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|