I'd locate it on the FSX SSD. If a fixed size what would you suggest?

 

What would be the rationale for that Ray? From the article you linked:

 

 

The answer to both problems, is to simply create a fixed, “custom” size, and the chance of OOM's happening will be minimized. To make this a “Custom” size, enter the “My Computer”->”Properties”- >”Advanced System Settings”->”Advanced”->Performance->”Settings”->”Advanced”->”Change”, and then, assuming three or more drives in the PC and using these pics as a guide – set a “Custom size” for the C:-drive to 100 (MB) in each box, and then press “Set”. Select the next drive – not the FSX drive, and make its Custom size 3072 (MB) in each box, and press “Set”. If you have only one drive, or one extra used for FSX - then just set 3072 in each box for the C:-drive. This will give one a fixed Page File size of 3 GB, will be more than adequate for Windows 7 and FSX, and will not be subject to defragmentation in the way which it is when managed by Windows. Reboot

 

This rationale says use the Custom Size of 3Gb to avoid fragmentation but as a matter of fact for FS alone I have verified there is NO page file write activity occurring during use of FSX in my configuration.  I think unless you are running other programs you could reduce the size of the page file quite dramatically and you will still never require more than you've set up.  I opted for 1Gb on a data drive this way my SSD is never used for paging.

Noel,

 

I'll go with those then thanks. My question was more about the issue of a section of a SSD being hit more than other parts and possibly causing premature 'wear'. But if it's rarely accessed that's probably not an issue.

Noel,

 

I'll go with those then thanks. My question was more about the issue of a section of a SSD being hit more than other parts and possibly causing premature 'wear'. But if it's rarely accessed that's probably not an issue.

SSDs have internal wear levelling algorithms specifically to avoid this. Unlike with a traditional hard drive, with an SSD where a file is actually written is invisible to the OS. Some SSD models also use over provisioning. In other words they come with some of the flash set aside that isn't used immediately. As the flash modules in use wear out, the drive will start swapping data to the unused areas. This is part of why you see some drives marketed as a 240 or 250GB drive instead of 256GB, for example.

 

I just use a small fixed page file on the OS SSD. It doesn't get used much, but is there for any programs that do need it.

That's very helpful goates, thanks. As you can probably tell my forthcoming PC will be the first with SSDs. Interesting times. :smile:

Depending on how much detail you want to read about SSDs, Anandtech has some very thorough articles. The one below is a little old as far as the actual drive controllers and models in it, but it still covers the underlying technology quite well. They have plenty of other good articles covering current SSDs too.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2829

I would upgrade from home premium otherwise you will be limited to 16gb memory, also I would upgrade p/s to atleast 850w gold minimum. Otherwise this will be a killer rig.

goates,

 

I found that document a bit heavy going. An alternative search found this which I found a lot easier to understand. http://lifehacker.com/5586733/how-to-take-full-advantage-of-your-solid+state-drive

 

Removing indexing is one I hadn't considered.

I would upgrade from home premium otherwise you will be limited to 16gb memory, also I would upgrade p/s to atleast 850w gold minimum. Otherwise this will be a killer rig.

 

I only recently decided to move from 8 to 16Gb so the chances of going to 32 are extremely unlikely. The Pro version doesn't really give me any desirable features either.

 

With a single graphics card and 2 SSDs is 850w really justified? Scan offer 600, 650 and 850 and I was going for a 650 then thought about 750. What would be eating all that extra power? I don't mind a reasonable overhead but 850 seems a big jump.

 

 

But if it's rarely accessed that's probably not an issue.

 

I'm saying there is no page file write activity coming from fsx.exe being engineered to write to the page file by design, nor from it hitting up against the VAS limit for the 32bit app in the 64bit OS.  There is however page file write activity coming from other processes Windows uses as an OS.  I'm writing this activity to the small fixed page file on my data HDD.  You could have a point re page file writes to a fixed location on an SSD.  I guess it would really depend on exactly the difference between System Managed versus Fixed and how they address physical memory in a flash memory array.  Just don't really know about what matters there.  Regarding the write activity on the data drive I think the impact is not measurable since the OS/FSX SSD is not being written to as it were--they are just being read from.

 

 

With a single graphics card and 2 SSDs is 850w really justified? Scan offer 600, 650 and 850 and I was going for a 650 then thought about 750. What would be eating all that extra power? I don't mind a reasonable overhead but 850 seems a big jump.

 

No it's not really justified.

 

Take for example my PC. It's in my profile but it's (4770K @ 4.5Ghz, 16GB RAM, 2x GTX 780, 4x SSD and a bunch of USB items connected). I'm running on a Corsair AX860 Platinum 860W power supply and it's more than enough for what I'm running.

 

Unless you planned on adding a second GPU in the long run you would be absolutely fine with a 650W unit, just make sure it's a good one (i.e. preferably Gold or Platinum rated and from a reputable manufacturer).

 

 

You could have a point re page file writes to a fixed location on an SSD.  I guess it would really depend on exactly the difference between System Managed versus Fixed and how they address physical memory in a flash memory array.

 

As I was saying above, this is not an issue. With SSDs the OS doesn't actually know where the data is being written to as this is handled internally by the drive. In other words, with a traditional hard drive, the OS will know that the page file is on the outer or inner tracks of the drive, for example. However, with SSDs, the data is spread across all internal channels (think something like a RAID0 array) as determined by the drive's controller and firmware. This is done both for speed as well as to even out the write operations across the flash modules (wear levelling). Most also have some level of over provisioning whereby they hold storage space in reserve to replace blocks of flash modules as they wear out. Basically you aren't going to wear out one specific part of the SSD with the page file.

Yes, I had reservations about that too given I have a 750 in my current PC. I think 750 would be wise - thanks. :smile:

Ray, have you used the PSU Calculator at http://www.extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp?

There are others out there as well, very detailed and you can enter every component, overclocking anticipated, everything.  It's always much lower than most folks in here believe they require, myself included.  The minimum rating was 565W, recommended rating was 605W for my machine, and I went to 850W with a hefty 12v rail.   I have a fairly power hungry machine though w/ Titan & SB-E overclocked.  There is a remote chance I would pick up a 2nd Titan, and 850W would give me 45W over the recommended rating, but that's a little close.  As I say, remote.  750W sounds like you have ample overhead w/ your lower energy consuming machine.

No it's not really justified....Unless you planned on adding a second GPU in the long run you would be absolutely fine with a 650W unit, just make sure it's a good one (i.e. preferably Gold or Platinum rated and from a reputable manufacturer).

 

Thanks ant. There will only be a single GPU. I'm looking at 650W Corsair Enthusiast Series, Modular, 80PLUS Bronze which Scan say is fine for a single GPU but I will enquire about a Gold or Platinum option.

 

 

Basically you aren't going to wear out one specific part of the SSD with the page file.

Thanks goates. That's the purpose of the software controlling the SSD. Otherwise it acts as a HDD would.

 

 

Ray, have you used the PSU Calculator at http://www.extreme.o...ulatorlite.jsp?

 

.... 750W sounds like you have ample overhead w/ your lower energy consuming machine.

I haven't Noel and will take a look. 750w to me sounds plenty but after I check that link I'd be surprised if 650 wasn't either. After all, that's what Scan recommend and they are responsible for the warranty.

http://lifehacker.com/5426041/understanding-the-windows-pagefile-and-why-you-shouldnt-disable-it

 

and

 

http://www.howtogeek.com/95915/heres-why-disabling-the-windows-pagefile-is-pointless/

 

I did not read all the replays in this thread, so you may have been given the answers you wanted, but from a non-FSX-perpective, disabling pagefile is a big no-no...

Noel,

 

Using that calculator suggests a minimum of 486watts so I think a 650 is more than enough.

 

Tom,

 

I take your point but if I dispense with the pagefile and the system starts crashing it's a simple enough job to create one. I will rarely use the PC for anything other than FSX as I have another desktop and this laptop.

I visited Scan in Bolton on Tuesday and had a good chat with one of the staff before finalising my order.

 

So here was my original spec...

• Corsair Carbide Series 500R Black Mid Tower Case
• Asus Z87-K, Intel Z87 motherboard
• Intel Core i7 4770K, Haswell, 3.5GHz, Quad Core with HT, 8MB Cache overclocked up to 4.4GHz
• Corsair H100i Hydro - High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
• 16GB RAM (2x8GB) Corsair Vengeance Pro Silver, 2133MHz
• 3GB EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX, 967MHz GPU, 2304 Cores, 6008MHz GPU
• 650W Corsair Enthusiast Series, Modular, 80PLUS Bronze power supply.
• 2 x 256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD.
• LiteOn IHAS124 24x DVD Reader and Writer
• Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit - OEM
• 3 Year Warranty - 1st Year on site, 2nd & 3rd Year Return to Base (Parts & Labour).

And this is the system I decided on. Changes in red.

• Corsair Obsidian 350D Micro-ATX case
• Asus Maximus VI Gene motherboard
• Intel Core i7 4770K, Haswell, 3.5GHz, Quad Core with HT, 8MB Cache overclocked up to 4.4GHz
• Corsair H100i Hydro - High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
• 8GB RAM (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance Pro Silver, 1866MHz
• 3GB EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX, 967MHz GPU, 2304 Cores, 6008MHz GPU
• 650W Corsair RM650 Gold power supply.
• 2 x 256GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD.
• 1 x 1Tb Western Digital HDD.
• LiteOn IHAS124 24x DVD Reader and Writer
• Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit - OEM

• 3 Year Warranty - 1st Year on site, 2nd & 3rd Year Return to Base (Parts & Labour).

The width of the original case was a concern so the engineer suggested a micro-ATX alternative. I asked whether cooling would be compromised but he allayed my fears.

 

He felt 16Gb of the faster RAM would provide no real benefit so I opted for 8Gb of the 1866 instead. I wanted a more efficient power supply so opted for the Gold version at minimal extra cost.

 

And as a 1Tb HDD was only forty quid and would be useful for additional FSX expansion and a pagefile it was an easy choice.

 

Collection is around 2 weeks. Hoping the research was all worthwhile. :smile: