Windows 10, paging file, and SSD vs. HDD

[paulri]

I have a desktop with a nearly full 100 gb ssd C drive (Windows & programs), and a 1 tb hdd that has about 200 gigs of free space (data).

Windows 10, 12 gigs RAM.

I see that the paging file is 4.6 gigs. In the dialog that manages this file, it is set to let Windows manage automatically. It also recommends something like 2.4 gigs.

I suppose the easiest thing is to create a couple of gigs of space by keeping Windows from managing it, and then limiting it to 2 gigs.

I also recall that you can move the file itself to another partition or drive. I have plenty of space on my hdd, where I could allow Windows to manage the file itself, and keep all 4.6 gigs.

I have two questions:

(1) Which would be faster on this computer: keeping the paging file on the SSD, but limiting it to 2 gigs? Or moving the file to the separate HDD, but allowing it to stay at 4.6 gigs?

(2) Would any difference in performance speed for these two options be noticeable for a casual user (no video editing, not being used as a server, etc.)?

 

[Pew]

Leave the pagefile on the SSD so it'll stay fast and as Window managed. If anything, move the less used programs and data over to the HDD or buy a larger SSD.

 

[wwillson]

If you have 4.6GB in use now and you limit the page file to 2GB, you may run into the OOM (out of memory) killer. With a page file that size your PC is probably RAM constrained. Before you consider moving the page file to D:, I would suggest you add RAM. With more RAM, there is no need to page so much of the working set to disk.

 

[JavierH19]

12gb is not enough to not have to page file? I'd get more ram if you have a free slot on your board. If it's dual slot you have a 4 and 8gb module. Upgrade the 4gb one to a 8 or better yet a 16gb one. I've mixed ram on my hp laptop as a cheap upgrade and everything was fine. I just matched the speed but it should still work if it's more or less anyway. But I'm seeing that the prices have gone down and a single 32gb stick isn't too much anymore. But i believe there's a limit on how much ram your computer can use and that i don't know so maybe check.

 

[Pew]

12gb is not enough to not have to page file?

Windows will still create and use a page file. I'm currently using 13 out of 32GB of RAM on my work computer and there's still a 4.8GB pagefile. Same with my home PC that has 64GB. It's just easier to leave it on windows managed because of the out-of-memory errors that will eventually pop up like @wwillson stated.

 

[wwillson]

12gb is not enough to not have to page file?

You can try it, but your results may be less than satisfactory. My PC has 64GB RAM, my current RAM usage is 15GB, and the pagefile useage is 165MB. The kernel will almost always page some of the working set out to the pagefile. The algorithms in the memory manager are highly complex and tend to be a collection of compromises. Even though I have about 50GB RAM free, the MMU is still paging some of the working set out, probably in anticipation of memory pressure in the future. IF you turn off the pagefile and run out of RAM, it's not going to be a fun experience. The kernel OOM will start killing apps to preserve the health of the OS.

 

[paulri]

OK crucial says I can go up to 32 gigs, which must mean I have an 8 and a 4 gig stick. $70 sounds like a good deal for 32 gigs. Or I can just ad a single 16 gig stick for $35, and then keep the 8 gig stick that is already there, for 24 gigs. OK let's just assume the cheap plan--24 gigs of RAM.

OK, so if I do that, then which of the other options would be best: to move the file to my D hdd, and keep it at 4.6 gigs? Or to keep it on the SSD but lower it to 2 gigs?

 

[wwillson]

OK, so if I do that, then which of the other options would be best: to move the file to my D hdd, and keep it at 4.6 gigs? Or to keep it on the SSD but lower it to 2 gigs?

Leave it on the SSD and constrain the pagefile to 2GB

 

[MRC01]

RAM is cheap and a modern PC should have at least 16 GB, if not more.

The OS will often use the page file long before RAM is entirely used. In Linux this is user controllable with system settings like "swappiness". Not in Windows, that I know of. So just because the system is using the pagefile, doesn't necessarily mean it's out of RAM.

I prefer to have enough RAM for all my memory usage - in Windows you can check total memory usage in Task manager, and install at least that much RAM. Task manager will also show you which apps are using RAM so if it's higher than you expect you can see why. When you have enough RAM you can use a small pagefile, because the OS shouldn't need it in the first place, and a bigger pagefile is just a waste of disk space.

SSDs can suffer from slower performance when they are nearly full. You should keep it at 75% or less.

 

[JavierH19]

You can try it, but your results may be less than satisfactory. My PC has 64GB RAM, my current RAM usage is 15GB, and the pagefile useage is 165MB. The kernel will almost always page some of the working set out to the pagefile. The algorithms in the memory manager are highly complex and tend to be a collection of compromises. Even though I have about 50GB RAM free, the MMU is still paging some of the working set out, probably in anticipation of memory pressure in the future. IF you turn off the pagefile and run out of RAM, it's not going to be a fun experience. The kernel OOM will start killing apps to preserve the health of the OS.

True but 4.6gb of paging is a lot. I just checked mine and it's set to a gig and I've never had an issue. But then again i have 16gb in this new laptop and I'm not a heavy user so that probably helps. I usually have a dozen or less tabs and a sometimes a spreadsheet and word open.

 

[JavierH19]

OK crucial says I can go up to 32 gigs, which must mean I have an 8 and a 4 gig stick. $70 sounds like a good deal for 32 gigs. Or I can just ad a single 16 gig stick for $35, and then keep the 8 gig stick that is already there, for 24 gigs. OK let's just assume the cheap plan--24 gigs of RAM.

OK, so if I do that, then which of the other options would be best: to move the file to my D hdd, and keep it at 4.6 gigs? Or to keep it on the SSD but lower it to 2 gigs?

Yes I've mixed ram and it was fine, just try to match or exceed the speed so it doesn't get reduced. But I've heard of some systems getting upset and not wanting to boot but those are pretty rare. I'd shove the 4gb stick out with a 16gb one.

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

Option 3: Replace your small C drive with a larger, faster, now-cheaper SSD and forget about adding more RAM or messing with the pagefile.

https://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-SA510-Internal-Solid/dp/B09ZYQ84CM

 

[paulri]

That's actually more doable than I was thinking earlier. I just checked and this is only 4 years old. Its not recent, but it can still go for a while.

I was thinking that buying a new ssd for an old computer would mean in a year or two I might have to buy an entirely new desktop again, but it can probably go for several more years. Of course, I'd have to install windows, it would probably pick up the OEM license, I don't know. As long as there were no licensing issues, this wouldn't be much more time than installing a new stick of ram (lately windows installs have been fairly smooth and don't require me to do a lot at the keyboard), and I'd have a lot more extra space available.

You know, I just checked crucial's site and I can go from 100 gigs (now) to 500 gig SSD for $38; and to 1 Tb for $58. That's not much more than increasing RAM, and it would certainly solve much more of the storage problem for me.

Option 3: Replace your small C drive with a larger, faster, now-cheaper SSD and forget about adding more RAM or messing with the pagefile.

 

[wwillson]

Option 3: Replace your small C drive with a larger, faster, now-cheaper SSD and forget about adding more RAM or messing with the pagefile.

https://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-SA510-Internal-Solid/dp/B09ZYQ84CM

That's an option, but paging is orders of magnitude slower than reading/writing directly to RAM.

 

[pantygnome]

Decent SSDs are pretty cheap lately. I got a somewhat OK brand name 2TB for 100.00 from Amazon just over a month ago.

Id go with 256 or 512GB from a good name (Samsung if you can swing it)

RAM can be expensive depending on what your motherboard requires. My PC was old, so I had to suck it up and pay "extra" for older (DDR3) RAM. But overall the SSD and 32GB RAM have helped this 10 year old PC chug along just fine.

10 seconds from pressing the power button to interacting with the Windows desktop. I cant see it getting much faster than that.

 

[barryh]

It's generally accepted that running an SSD nearly full is a bad idea and will affect both it's performance and ultimate life. I think you need to free up a lot more space than just the page file on the SSD such that it's only 70 -80% full at most. If that's not going top be possible I think the best option is leave the ram alone and buy a bigger SSD.

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

That's an option, but paging is orders of magnitude slower than reading/writing directly to RAM.

True, but the problem he's running into here is available space, not speed.

12GB of memory is fine for a daily-use computer doing normal tasks, especially if the OS is on an SSD. Sure, install more RAM if it's cheap and available, but that still won't fix his storage space issue.

 

[dubber09]

While it was good practice to use 1.5x RAM for page file size before Win10, Win10 manages RAM and page file really well.
Leave page file as is, upgrade to larger SSD if you need to.

 

[paulri]

Not the answer I was looking for, but it ended up being the answer I needed. I'm going from 100 gigs to 1 Tb, and the new SSD will be arriving shortly. I will leave ram as is until I see an issue with slowness.

Leave the pagefile on the SSD so it'll stay fast and as Window managed. If anything, move the less used programs and data over to the HDD or buy a larger SSD.

 

[wwillson]

In Linux this is user controllable with system settings like "swappiness".

I have played with the kernel swappiness setting and find that either the kernel ignores the value or it has little effect on how much working set the kernel swaps out to the pagefile.

For instance, the BITOG server was set to swappiness=60. With a value of 60, the kernel swapped out about 2.5GB working set to the pagefile. I ran swapoff/swapon to clear the pagefile, then changed the setting progressively to zero. Even with swappiness=0 the kernel still pages about 2GB - Swap: 8076.0 total, 6080.9 free, 1995.1 used. For high uptime highly utilized servers, it appears that setting swappiness has almost no effect.