I have a 2600K @ 4.2, a gtx570 and 8gb of memory and using windows 7 64bit on my system. No add ons for FSX yetWhen I am in "idle" (so not using any programs) my memory usage in taskmanager is around 1.5 - 1.8. When flying in FSX this memory usage only raises up to arond 2.5 - 2.6 so a memory usage of around 1.0 - 1.1. Can't FSX use more memory from my system? After all I have 8GB installed... How do I get FSX to use more of my memory, for example 2 GB or more?

That's about the same memory use as my machine which is a 32 bit OS and 4 Gb. It seems to me that your FSX has utilised only the amount of memory it needs, and it doesn't need any more.Sorry, I'm a bit confused about your concern, my machine is often running at 70% of resources, so why are you worried when you are using less than 20% of your available memory? Concerned about Page File and 'thrashing' perhaps?

I have a 2600K @ 4.2, a gtx570 and 8gb of memory and using windows 7 64bit on my system. No add ons for FSX yetWhen I am in "idle" (so not using any programs) my memory usage in taskmanager is around 1.5 - 1.8. When flying in FSX this memory usage only raises up to arond 2.5 - 2.6 so a memory usage of around 1.0 - 1.1. Can't FSX use more memory from my system? After all I have 8GB installed... How do I get FSX to use more of my memory, for example 2 GB or more?

Please do a search on OOM and VAS here. There are tons of threads explaining how FSX uses memory. You can't measure FSX's memory usage with task manager...And btw... you can turn off paging file with 8GB of RAM.

And btw... you can turn off paging file with 8GB of RAM.

True but surely there's no point in doing it unless are really short of HDD space. It won't affect performance - Windows uses RAM if it's available - it always has.

I have a 2600K @ 4.2, a gtx570 and 8gb of memory and using windows 7 64bit on my system. No add ons for FSX yetWhen I am in "idle" (so not using any programs) my memory usage in taskmanager is around 1.5 - 1.8. When flying in FSX this memory usage only raises up to arond 2.5 - 2.6 so a memory usage of around 1.0 - 1.1. Can't FSX use more memory from my system? After all I have 8GB installed... How do I get FSX to use more of my memory, for example 2 GB or more?

Don't worry, this is fine.As you install more add-ons, you will see memory usage increase, but likely not above 3-4GB..

True but surely there's no point in doing it unless are really short of HDD space. It won't affect performance - Windows uses RAM if it's available - it always has.

Why give a Windows a chance to use swap file if you are 100% sure it will never need it? I never ran into any troubles by switching swapping off, and only saw performance benefit.

Why give a Windows a chance to use swap file if you are 100% sure it will never need it? I never ran into any troubles by switching swapping off, and only saw performance benefit.

Because without a page file, in the event of a page fault I can only think of to posibilities: a) the app crashes or b.) it gets the page from disk, which in turn is a) much worse or b.) an access to disk anywayWhat kind of performance benefit did you see?

Why give a Windows a chance to use swap file if you are 100% sure it will never need it? I never ran into any troubles by switching swapping off, and only saw performance benefit.

The only cost of having a page file is that the OS builds a page table during the startup process and if you can find a difference in boot times from having a page file specified and not then you are a better man than I Gunga Din. :(

I have a 2600K @ 4.2, a gtx570 and 8gb of memory and using windows 7 64bit on my system. No add ons for FSX yetWhen I am in "idle" (so not using any programs) my memory usage in taskmanager is around 1.5 - 1.8. When flying in FSX this memory usage only raises up to arond 2.5 - 2.6 so a memory usage of around 1.0 - 1.1. Can't FSX use more memory from my system? After all I have 8GB installed... How do I get FSX to use more of my memory, for example 2 GB or more?

No matter how much memory you have in your system, FSX is still a 32 bit program and will be limited in usage to slightly less than 4 GB on a 64 bit system. The OS will allocate memory according to the program's need up to that point.DJ

And if you want to increase memory usage you can set your LOD to 6.5 or 7.5. Don't abuse it or you'll run out of (virtual) memory

Why give a Windows a chance to use swap file if you are 100% sure it will never need it? I never ran into any troubles by switching swapping off, and only saw performance benefit.

Because ayou can't be 100% sure. it isn't just Windows that use virtual memory. Applications can call for large amounts of it as well - for example graphic processing ones. In addition to code and data , files can be mapped into virtual memory to speed upacess. Some application won't even run if there is no virtual memory. Also some Windows debugging facilities are inhibited if there isn't a paging file.Also, if there isn't a paging file an an applicatiobn will crash once it runs out of virtual memory. There can be a catch-22 situation - because there's no memory it can't even display an errot message and degrade gracefully. As others have pointed out there's no performance disadvantage in having a page file so why risk problems.? Finally"No matter how much RAM your sustem boasts Windows still creates and uses a page file for virtual memory."Source: Page 255 of Insider Power Techniques for Microsoft Windows XP. Published by Microsoft Press 2003

Because without a page file, in the event of a page fault I can only think of to posibilities: a) the app crashes or b.) it gets the page from disk, which in turn is a) much worse or b.) an access to disk anywayWhat kind of performance benefit did you see?

Way higher fluidity in windows. And no crashes at all. Running without swapping past 5-6 years, since I have 4GB+ RAM.I would never again think of running with swapping enabled...

Because ayou can't be 100% sure. it isn't just Windows that use virtual memory. Applications can call for large amounts of it as well - for example graphic processing ones. In addition to code and data , files can be mapped into virtual memory to speed upacess. Some application won't even run if there is no virtual memory. Also some Windows debugging facilities are inhibited if there isn't a paging file.Also, if there isn't a paging file an an applicatiobn will crash once it runs out of virtual memory. There can be a catch-22 situation - because there's no memory it can't even display an errot message and degrade gracefully. As others have pointed out there's no performance disadvantage in having a page file so why risk problems.? Finally"No matter how much RAM your sustem boasts Windows still creates and uses a page file for virtual memory."Source: Page 255 of Insider Power Techniques for Microsoft Windows XP. Published by Microsoft Press 2003

OK, then I shall (correct) myself and say:For my purpose, I've never run across the app that needed swapping, I never ran out of memory (1-2 times when I was running 4GB still).I'm doing some audio stuff on my computer, samples and such, and still have no problems without swapping.Still, you might present me with all the technical data, but I still stand by my opinion that my windows is snappier with it disabled, and since "I" never ran into any problems, I will continue running without it.And simply, if you are persuaded it's no benefit, you "should" keep on running with it on.

Way higher fluidity in windows. And no crashes at all. Running without swapping past 5-6 years, since I have 4GB+ RAM.I would never again think of running with swapping enabled...OK, then I shall (correct) myself and say:For my purpose, I've never run across the app that needed swapping, I never ran out of memory (1-2 times when I was running 4GB still).I'm doing some audio stuff on my computer, samples and such, and still have no problems without swapping.Still, you might present me with all the technical data, but I still stand by my opinion that my windows is snappier with it disabled, and since "I" never ran into any problems, I will continue running without it.And simply, if you are persuaded it's no benefit, you "should" keep on running with it on.

5 - 6 years is a lot, did you have XP back then and have you compared in Win 7 with and w/o page file? Memory management is much better in W7

Way higher fluidity in windows. And no crashes at all. Running without swapping past 5-6 years, since I have 4GB+ RAM.I would never again think of running with swapping enabled...

Sorry Word Not Allowed but you need reference one of the few people that you will ever encounter that truly knows what he is talking about when it comes to Windows. His name is Dr. Mark Russinovich Technical Fellow at Microsoft. No Page file is ridiculous and causes more trouble than anything else. I think Dazz said it also causes more page faults than it would if it just wrote to even a small 200Mb page file.I would never run my system without some amount of Pagefile. http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx

5 - 6 years is a lot, did you have XP back then and have you compared in Win 7 with and w/o page file? Memory management is much better in W7

Yeah, both XP and W7 without. Works a charm.Concerning Pagefaults - how would those show? I had no app crashes, no blue screens, here and there a FSX crash (but that's quite normal, since it's usually due to very high VAS usage) - so I don't see a >reason< to have pagefile activated. And if it's that important, why would MS build in a feature to turn it off?