Computer performance issues

Ok, serious question guys. Im having performance issues, be it with Half-Life 2, Hammer (for HL2) UT2k4, etc.

Hardware:

Athlon XP 2500
512mb RAM PC2700
NF7-S mobo
Seagate 80gb 8mb cache SATA

You know the specs lol

Software:
Aston Windows Shell replacement
AVG anti-virus
MSN 7.0 BETA
Limewire
winAMP
gmail notifer
VHE for HL2

Should I get a component upgrade (I was thinking adding 512RAM) or should I scrap some software, notably having limewire in background when I dont need it and the Aston Shell.

Keep in my my budget is VERY tight. I have 100$ in my account, I get 250$ every 2-weeks, and I have to fly once a month (150$)

Video Card?

My specifications are very similar and I have no performance issues...

when you say performance issues, what exactly is happening?

slugish performance. Alot of disk activity. Oh, and ATI 9800pro :biggrin: forgot to mention.

And VHE crashes everytime I try to clip a sphere in half... :sad: With lots of disk activity

Wild Card said:
slugish performance. Alot of disk activity. Oh, and ATI 9800pro :biggrin: forgot to mention.

And VHE crashes everytime I try to clip a sphere in half... :sad: With lots of disk activity

Try checking to see which program is slowing you down by checking the CPU and Memory usage.

[EDIT]
Forgot, check VMM size too. It might be oddly sized.

Sounds like low RAM, but 512 should be enough for general use. HL2 hammer however Ive heard is very demanding... but chances are youve got something clogging the system. Do what Crono said, until youve got enough for more ram (its quite possible you wont need it tho).

wil5on said:
Sounds like low RAM, but 512 should be enough for general use. HL2 hammer however Ive heard is very demanding... but chances are youve got something clogging the system. Do what Crono said, until youve got enough for more ram (its quite possible you wont need it tho).

My system is fairly similar, except my ram is slightly faster, my CPU, HDD, and chipset (probably) are slower. I run HL2 and Hammer 4 at the same time with absolutely no trouble. It's so convenient too.

hammer.exe -- 22 660K
msnmsgr.exe -- 18 840K
Steam.exe -- 50+% CPU 17 712K

Processes: 31
CPU Usage: 100%
Commit Charge: 310M / 1250M (whatever that means)

[edit] Now hammer.exe is CPU 99%

[edit2] Now CPU Usage 0% [/edit]

That's mostly the same system as I have. So the problem lies somewhere
else. Which drivers are you using for your card and did you install the
proper motherboard drivers when you first installed Windows? I'd
generally not have LimeWire just running in the background, when I'm
mapping or what-not I usually have MSN, WinAMP, Steam, Avast! AV, and
Webroot Spysweeper running. 512 should be enough memory for general
mapping...but the new Hammer is somewhat laggy, try lowering your undo
levels as well as scroll the 2D views in a bit as maps get laggy the
larger they are and the more 2D view you can see.

hmmm, I have similar specs [athlon 2500, 512 pc2700, asus a7v8x-x and a 9600 pro]. I'm currently running hammer and real one player, and there seems to be no slow down. Might be a prog hogging some of your power.

my gaming PC never seems more/less sluggish from day to day because,

1) i run spybot either daily, or every other day.
2) i run msconfig daily to make sure only systray is on.
3) i have nothing on but the game/editor. i want nothing running in the back ground. no music s**t, no icq, no msn.. NOTHIN. machines may get bigger, but resources are still from 0-100%, you only have so many before s**t happens.
4) i scandisk and defrag weekly.
5) i run regclean daily.

i also learned a trick i did not know before i read that XP article. page files/swap files wont defrag, they are non-movable files.. turn off, or turn them to zero, defrag, then turn them back on to the previous setting.. all your hard drives will be nice and well defragged. :biggrin:

I have the latest (I think?) ATI drivers for my card as well as my mobo. Catalyst drivers, not the omega stuff.

I also run evert few days:
Ad-aware SE
Spybot S&D
Registry Mechanic
Disk Keeper
Security Task Manager
BPS Spyware remover (although it tends to remove all my good cookies too lol)

I'll try killing my pagefile and defraging like you said Orph. If I had the Windows XP pro CD, I would reformat, but I dont anymore so Im kind of screwed..

Don't say the "F" word nick, you'll have crono's panties all in a knot again.

just make sure you have all nonessential things turned off via "msconfig"

you should be fine if you have.

i had 2000pro available, you scorned it, took me hours to do so, i'm not about to do my XP corp.. its even larger. :razz:

Sorry Orph buddy. I just. Never really looked into 2000pro.

Here's what I have in MSCONFIG:

GENERAL
Normal startup

STARTUP
atiptaxx
gnotify
avgcc
avgemc
qttask
ctfmon
msnmsgr

Orph where'd you learn so much about computers? Is it just through experience.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Wild Card</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Sorry Orph buddy. I just. Never really looked into 2000pro.

Here's what I have in MSCONFIG:

GENERAL
Normal startup

STARTUP
atiptaxx
gnotify
avgcc
avgemc
qttask
ctfmon
msnmsgr

</DIV></DIV>

bet you money, its your AVG, i have not seen a virus scanner that is not a hog on resources..

turn off all that crap.. somes video crap, somes msn crap, all is not worth having running full time.
turn it all off and let me know how the machine runs then.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Spartan 34</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Orph where'd you learn so much about computers? Is it just through experience.</DIV></DIV>

trial and error, and friends like crono helping out.

and i read articles people post just like the one i posted :biggrin:

i found that article, when i was researching how to make my doom III run better on my mid level comp.
i can post that link too if you like, it had some great stuff, really smoothed out the play.

I've removed atiptaxx, qttask, and ctfmon. We'll see how it goes now.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Wild Card</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>I've removed atiptaxx, qttask, and ctfmon. We'll see how it goes now. </DIV></DIV>

sighs

what part of "ALL" slipped by you nick :sad:

you don't need a virus scan running full time, just #1 don't visit places you need one and #2 don't open things without scanning them 1st.

shut all that crap off.. you know my downloading habits, i rarely get a virus (1 confirmed in 5 years) and never do i get anything that doesn't clear up with "trend"

but seriously, shut it all off for a few hours, see how it runs. AVG tore me a new one when i had it running full time :/
if nothing changes, turn it back on.

lol Ait, I'll turn "almost everything off" :razz: Everything. AVG included

Tis obvious you didn't read that article i posted, it clearly states that you can turn off everything in startup.. WinXP can cope without it.

the issue IMO, is establishing what, if anything to leave on. I always heard, you must leave systray on, so i do, but i always wonder if i am slitting my own thoat by no leaving something else on.

anywho's, all of my PC only run systray, no more.

use your own judgement.. but for right now, you are experimenting with a proformance issue. shut it all off, see how it goes, then gradually turn the crap on if you must.

i run vhe 4 and hl2 fine on my geforce 4 with lesser system specs than you,

Kill limewire! limewire is dodgy AND resource hog, NEVER use it.

I'll try killing my pagefile

shakes head
Are you talking about your VMM page files? Because if you are, you're in for a BIG surprise.

Everything under the STARTUP area of MSCONFIG you can shut off. Windows utlilites are not listed there, only 3rd part programs (besides system tray, which is handy, but not needed).

WC, just try starting by turning everything off though MSCONFIG, restart, if it isn't sluggish anymore, turn ONE OR TWO things back on and continue to find what's really slowing you down (WinAmp and Limewire by the way).

Follow the link Orph gave in the other thread. On pages 7-9, follow the instructions (but heed their warnings). You'll probably notice some performance increases.

Keep at least a minimum of a 128MB page file. You'll be creating extra stress on your system if you reduce it too much.

Actually, I believe if you increase the total memory (physical and virtual) to a total of about 4 GB, you should be good. Since, your CPU and such thinks there's always 4GB of ram. But I'm not sure as I haven't tried it to see if it makes things run faster.

System Stress isn't really the issue, it would more or less be system functionality. It basically wont run if you make your swap 0. (Not to mention, I think windows specifically wont allow you to make it 0, but I may be wrong).

Actually, I believe if you increase the total memory (physical
and virtual) to a total of about 4 GB, you should be good. Since, your
CPU and such thinks there's always 4GB of ram. But I'm not sure as I
haven't tried it to see if it makes things run faster.

System
Stress isn't really the issue, it would more or less be system
functionality. It basically wont run if you make your swap 0. (Not to
mention, I think windows specifically wont allow you to make it 0, but
I may be wrong).

That's the problem, if you set it too low it'll automatically keep
incrementing it as needed, and that requires more trouble than just
allocating space, instead of having to push a bit more onto a swap file
while you're in game. I can't remember the exact calculation but I
believe HDD swapfiling is 1000x slower than physical RAM. The optimal
amount for a swap is usually your system RAM x1.5. So if you have 512,
put a 768MB swap file in.

i am hoping no one misread my posting again.. when i said set it to zero, i meant for only the duration of the defrag, not permanently. :rolleyes:

i set mine for 512 minimum and 2,500 maximum on all my machines. the other day when i had issues, it never occurred to me that that was the solution, and since i had only just reformatted it, it never occurred to me to set it thus.

anywho's never run it at zero, it will cause issues.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>i am hoping no one misread my posting again.. when i said set it to zero, i meant for only the duration of the defrag, not permanently. :rolleyes: </DIV></DIV>
Yup :biggrin:

Gorbachev said:
? quote:Actually, I believe if you increase the total memory (physical
and virtual) to a total of about 4 GB, you should be good. Since, your
CPU and such thinks there's always 4GB of ram. But I'm not sure as I
haven't tried it to see if it makes things run faster.System
Stress isn't really the issue, it would more or less be system
functionality. It basically wont run if you make your swap 0. (Not to
mention, I think windows specifically wont allow you to make it 0, but
I may be wrong).

That's the problem, if you set it too low it'll automatically keep
incrementing it as needed, and that requires more trouble than just
allocating space, instead of having to push a bit more onto a swap file
while you're in game. I can't remember the exact calculation but I
believe HDD swapfiling is 1000x slower than physical RAM. The optimal
amount for a swap is usually your system RAM x1.5. So if you have 512,
put a 768MB swap file in.

Yes, I know. :smile:

I was talking about another aspect, but I'm not sure how Windows manages it's VMM consumption, since at any given point you're not using all of physical or virtual ram.

As long as you set your swap file min and max values to the same number, you should be ok. It doesn't do any harm to put your swap file at a gigabyte or whatever, but Crono... the CPU doesn't see your swap file as more RAM...

scary_jeff said:
As long as you set your swap file min and max values to the same number, you should be ok. It doesn't do any harm to put your swap file at a gigabyte or whatever, but Crono... the CPU doesn't see your swap file as more RAM...

You misunderstood I think. The CPU thinks 4 GB (might be more now) of ram is in the system (achieved through VMM), right? So, I was thinking it might be more efficient to set the swap as the rest of 4GB, but I doubt it because of the way Windows (and other OSs) use VMM. I never said anything about the CPU knowing how big the swap is or even seeing it. The only thing the CPU "knows" is there are the caches, bus, chipset, and system memory.

Where did I even say "The CPU will know the swap file makes up 4GB, so it will run better" ? Or did you do a little deducing on your own?

Keep calm.

"4 GB, you should be good. Since, your CPU and such thinks there's always 4GB of ram"

The CPU has no idea that the swap file even exists, it's all done by windows.

scary_jeff said:
Keep calm.

"4 GB, you should be good. Since, your CPU and such thinks there's always 4GB of ram"

The CPU has no idea that the swap file even exists, it's all done by windows.

I am calm.

See, you did misunderstand though. I didn't say the CPU knows or manages the swap file. I didn't even mention the swap file. The CPU thinks there's 4GB of ram in the system. As in physical. However, we know that isn't true, it is simulated with VMM (Yes, managed by the OS) ... this is the entire idea of VMM (Having more ram available by simulating storage on the HDD)

So, I don't know what's misleading or confusing about what I said there ...

So ... what's the deal? :\

While what Crono says is true, I'd recommend 2GB, 4GB is really just if you have a huge harddrive and you feel like having more VM. The odds of your system actually digging into 2GB+ of VM is very, very slim.

Gorbachev said:
While what Crono says is true, I'd recommend 2GB, 4GB is really just if you have a huge harddrive and you feel like having more VM. The odds of your system actually digging into 2GB+ of VM is very, very slim.

That's what I was thinking, since not all of physical ram is used at any point (and if all of VMM gets even close to being used it will be auto-adjusted.)

Therefore, I figured it wouldn't do much of anything but take more space.

so with all that said, if my 512mb is never all used up, would that mean its useless to have a total of 1024mbs?

You are talking as if the CPU is addressing into the swap file. If I didn't know anything about it, and then read your post, I would think that after 512 megs has been used, the CPU can allocate the next address up, with the data being stored in the swap file.

Okay, well that's not what I was saying though. I think you're filling in some holes between things I said ...
I honestly don't understand how you translated what I was saying to the CPU doing these processes, Jeff.

WC, no. It is very helpful. The reason why physical ram is never used is because it is main memory. The things in VM are things that aren't being used at this (or any) moment, however, the programs that need that information are still running.

You have a swap so when physical memory is close to running out of available, usable memory, (This doesn't mean you're using all the physical ram, that would cause the system to crash because it wouldn't be able to do anything else), the information that hasn't been used the longest gets copied into VM with an address in ram telling the chipset that the information is now in Virtual Memory. When that information is called upon it is copied back over, blah blah blah, you get the idea, right?

It's needed. No matter how much physical ram you have.

I like that explanation better.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Wild Card</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Sorry Orph buddy. I just. Never really looked into 2000pro.

Here's what I have in MSCONFIG:

GENERAL
Normal startup

STARTUP
atiptaxx
gnotify
avgcc
avgemc
qttask
ctfmon
msnmsgr

</DIV></DIV>

You can uncheck ALL of those boxes. none of them are necessary. qttask is quicktime and is not required. Atiptaxx is not required its just the icon on the side for ATI. Also if you want to speed up even more go to the "services" (XP only) tab on msconfig and check the "hide all microsoft services" box and see what services you have there. There should be ATI hotkey poller in the list and that one can go too. Along with anything else related to ATI or AVG. you can uncheck anything in the "non-MS" services list as well, unless you want to keep it running.
Another good little tool you can use is DXDIAG. Enter that in the run dialog and make sure that DXDIAG doesnt find any problems with your drivers.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Orpheus</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Tis obvious you didn't read that article i posted, it clearly states that you can turn off everything in startup.. WinXP can cope without it.

the issue IMO, is establishing what, if anything to leave on. I always heard, you must leave systray on, so i do, but i always wonder if i am slitting my own thoat by no leaving something else on.

anywho's, all of my PC only run systray, no more.

use your own judgement.. but for right now, you are experimenting with a proformance issue. shut it all off, see how it goes, then gradually turn the crap on if you must.

</DIV></DIV>

actually, You don't need to run systray either! I don't run it on any of my 98 machines and they are just fine. systray is the little task scheduler I beleive, and unless you use that thing (who the freak uses that?!?) then you really dont even need systray. The only thing that should be running when you hit CTRL+ALT+DEL should be "Explorer."
AND if you have an XP machine and there is something called "systray" it's actaully some sort of adware crap.

So would it be better if I got a second stick of 512mb RAM and removed the page file from my computer? Im already getting close to the rim of my 80gb hard drive, and I just bought it about 6 months ago or so.

scary_jeff said:
I like that explanation better.

WC, put all the ram you want in your computer, just DO NOT REMOVE THE PAGE FILES. You need them. Your computer will cease to function properly without them.

How large did you make VMM? Nevermind. Set it to 1024 beginning and 1024 ending and you'll be fine.

Right now its 768. Between it and my hybernation file, Its a lot of dead space. Well, not really dead but you know. Unusable to me.

You will not be able to set your page file to off. It will still make
one when it needs it, and playing HL2 with a Gig of RAM and a pagefile
of 128MB still made Windows complain.

Gorbachev said:
You will not be able to set your page file to off. It will still make
one when it needs it, and playing HL2 with a Gig of RAM and a pagefile
of 128MB still made Windows complain.

Yes, because normally running all those applications (that your computer runs) takes up about 400Mb (generally on gamers computers), all of that needs to be stored elsewear while something more important is running. (ever wonder why it takes awhile to alt + tab out of a game?)

But yes, you can't kill the page file (which I said in the beginning). However, you have the ability to not create that partition in Linux (which you already experiences, WC).

Windows has whined a couple times while I was playing HL2 about VM size. Mine was set to about a gig.

i cannot believe that just one comment about temporarily turning off your virtual memory could spark so much debate :sad:

i also found out that if you have more than one drive, its best to put all your virtual memory onto your least used drive.

i have two drives, one is partitioned, so it looks like 3 drives.. i have my virtual memory one the second drive on the 1st partition. seems to be working AOK.

Your original description of the problem made me think you probably have a worm?

I had a similar problem about 6 months ago, after downloading like 6 different virus scanners it ended up with Sophos (provided by my University) finding a worm.

Once that was taken care of I was good to go.

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Wild Card</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>So would it be better if I got a second stick of 512mb RAM and removed the page file from my computer? Im already getting close to the rim of my 80gb hard drive, and I just bought it about 6 months ago or so. </DIV></DIV>
Virtual Memory is a great thing. Always keep at least 3GB of it on your machine. Or put in an old 4.3 as a secondary drive and use the whole damn thing!

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting Thylacine</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>Your original description of the problem made me think you probably have a worm?

I had a similar problem about 6 months ago, after downloading like 6 different virus scanners it ended up with Sophos (provided by my University) finding a worm.

Once that was taken care of I was good to go.

</DIV></DIV>
I have AVG on my box, and it never picks up anything. I though perhaps its because it didnt see anything, so I took the drive for a NAV2k4 scan, nothing got picked up either.

That's a very good plan, Orph. You can't do better than to have the swap file on a different drive.