|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.50.216.5
In Reply to: RE: How about with laptop cMP with more ram and no bios posted by riboge on December 04, 2011 at 14:16:53
but I am not certain how I tell if it is really being implemented in my system with none of the advanced bios adjustments. Is this boot.ini setting necessarily effective in any installation with whatever bios?
Follow Ups:
enough. It tells window to see only amount specified. There is another interesting switch. It does to windows memory almost the same, but not absolutely. It should be even better, but I haven't tried it yet. /burnmemory=mb You have to calculate how much memory to HIDE from windows, Just the opposite of the /maxmem. Try, if you wish and please report. Feedback, even negativeб is precious to us all. Example, if you have 512 mb stick put /burnmemory=256, if 1gb, put /burnmemory=755
Serge.
The minimal amount of memory is 215-216-217 mb. This row is such, because I hope, that You have tried my bios/memory settings from tweaks part 21corrected. The shorter are the memory timings, the more memory (217) you will need. The sound is EXTREMELY good with Extreme settings. Try, be careful and patient. (give real 24 hours burn-in time.)
Also try to put ALL THE BOOT.INI LINE, including /nopae and /onecpu
The difference is substantional. I,ve been playing my music with this bios line for a month.
Edits: 12/05/11 12/05/11
The BURNMEMORY switch works fine. The effect is not obviously different from maxmem but my system is sounding so big and full and balanced at this stage that it is hard to pick up further improvement...maybe with time. I do notice that my cpu usage has gone up from a typical 1-3% to more like 11-13%. As I said I am using a Lenovo laptop which does not provide for the bios/memory adjustments of your step 21 but I am using the full boot.ini line with nopae and onecpu.
I am glad you are so much better with computers than with arithmetic. :) 1000-256 does not come to 755.
You say cpu is working harder. Is it with /maxmemory or /burnmemory?
I reverted to maxmem as suggested. This time the cpu ran in the teens rather than low single digits I can't explain the change. Now maxmem runs just a few percent less cpu usage than burnmemory, and perhaps the latter sounds a bit better since now with our new math I am burning more memory to get a truer 256 remainder (3072-2716).
Please, if you have time and leasure, keep the record of these settings reverting from one to another and try to record the cpu usage. I wonder if both commands allow to bite off a different part of the physical memory every time, and it is important to catch the least possible, if it is possible at all.
Serge
(Certainly, if You have time to do it)
ALSO, Did You try yhe full line with /nopae and/onecpu settings?
What do you think of the sonic change?
Edits: 12/05/11 12/05/11
I have gone back and forth between maxmem and burnmemory three more times. I complicated it a bit by reducing the resulting memory used progressively. Still I never reproduced the very low cpu usage I saw at first. It must have been an anomaly or mistake of some kind. In all cases usage varied mostly in the range of 15-20% with spikes into the 20's. I have now gotten down to using 226MB with maxmem. It is hard to say there was any significant improvement in sq beyond the initial benefit of reducing to maxmem=256. If any it is refinement of ultra-refinement. I repeat that I have been using the full boot.ini line with /nopae and /onecpu all along with this.
It is puzzling to me given the overall goal of reducing cpu stress that this memory limitation improves things though increasing cpu usage--though it is now usage of one core instead of two. Contradicts our premise, doesn't it?
And it is something to think about.
Serge.
It is working harder with burnmemory by a factor of 5: 1-3% for maxmem vs up to 15%. These memory limitations should increase it some, yes? That is one reason I was questioning whether maxmem was really having an effect. Clearly burnmemory is re cpu work.
Decisively, /maxmemory should be used. And, btw. I am already hearing the roar of distant laughter at our common math. 1 Gb is 1024 mb (512+512)
Serge.
Obviously, we both have our minds on a higher plane...and what's a few dozen MBs one way or the other anyway.:) I am heading back to maxmem on the double.
with my own mind. I have prepared everything to rebuild my cmp again and can't make myself begin. As for the math, yeah, it is funny, because another thing was on my mind absolutely. Certainly, 1000 - 256 makes 778 and not 744 anyway.
Serge.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: