That is a myth PC eye. A well known myth as a matter of fact. If you had done a quick search on Google before posting that you would have found that out. Windows XP has very effective memory management. The companies that tell you otherwise are trying to sell you something you don't need. I am well aware that memory holes exist, but they have absolutely no effect on performance like you falsely asserted, and that is what I was trying to get at when I said that. In fact, if you optimize your RAM you will degrade performance significantly. You need to do more research before you start flinging links around and unrelated concepts to the OP.
For example, here is just one result at Google:
http://www.4peeps.com/ivb/lofiversio...hp/t20862.html
Quote:
|
Reality - "RAM Optimizers have no effect, and at worst, they seriously degrade performance. Although gaining more available memory might seem beneficial, it isn't. As RAM Optimizers force the available-memory counter up, they force other processes' data and code out of memory. Say that you're running Word, for example. As the optimizer forces the available-memory counter up, the text of open documents and the program code that was part of Word's working set before the optimization (and was therefore present in physical memory) must be reread from disk as you continue to edit your document. The act of allocating, then freeing a large amount of virtual memory might, as a conceivable side effect, lead to blocks of contiguous available memory. However, because virtual memory masks the layout of physical memory from processes, processes can't directly benefit from having virtual memory backed by contiguous physical memory. As processes execute and undergo working-set trimming and growth, their virtual-memory-to-physical-memory mappings will become fragmented despite the availability of contiguous memory." - Source
|
http://www.overclock.net/faqs/88781-...lable-ram.html
Quote:
|
RAM Optimizers don't have any effect on performance, at worst, they can and do cause performance to degrade seriously. It seems like gaining more available RAM is beneficial, it's not. How RAM optimizers get you more available ram is by dumping important and often used processes out. Lets say that you are running a word processor, as an example. When the optimizer dumps the physical memory, the open document's text and the program code that was part of the word processor's working set(in RAM) before the dump. It must be read again from the relatively slow hard disk as you continue to type up your document.
|
http://www.techenclave.com/forums/wi...work-6519.html
Quote:
Memory Optimizers
They claim "Increasing the amount of available RAM improves performance". However, the only thing that these programs can do is harm real system performance.
Although gaining more available memory might seem beneficial, it isn't. As RAM Optimizers force the available-memory counter up, they force other processes' data and code out of memory. However, because virtual memory masks the layout of physical memory from processes, processes can't directly benefit from having virtual memory backed by contiguous physical memory. As processes execute and undergo working-set trimming and growth, their virtual-memory-to-physical-memory mappings will become fragmented despite the availability of contiguous memory.
|
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/driver...nel.mspx#ECLAC
Quote:
Memory Management
Windows XP provides improved memory management. The memory manager provides the system services to allocate and free virtual memory, share memory between processes, map files into memory, flush virtual pages to disk, retrieve information about a range of virtual pages, change the protection of virtual pages, and lock the virtual pages into memory. The memory manager also provides a number of services, such as allocating and de-allocating physical memory and locking pages in physical memory for DMA transfers, to other kernel-mode components inside the executive as well as to device drivers.
Memory management enhancements include the following:
• Logical prefetcher for faster boot and application launch
• Enhanced memory management for better scalability
• Reduced paged pool usage
• Increased number of system Page Table Entries (PTEs)
• Support of giant drivers
|
Memory holes are clearly not an issue here and you should have never confused the issue by even bringing it up in the first place, IMO. You will never see an impact on performance from memory holes. There will be no more or no less memory holes with two sticks verses four. The only improvements you saw were either in your head or as a result of getting rid of a crappy memory controller on the old motherboard.