10 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

There's another method which is not as intuitive - Windows performance monitor

I have tried Perf Mon but I don't know what this is saying, do you?  I just ran this during a short fly:

6 minutes ago, Noel said:

I have tried Perf Mon but I don't know what this is saying, do you?  I just ran this during a short fly:

I agree, there's no values there for page file usage. Just checked and it's the same here - no numbers. Whereas with HWiNFO it reports page file usage of 1.2% as I'm writing this. 

Thanks I just DL HWiNFO and have this.  So we can see physical mem load is 41.7%, and PF usage 0.8%.  What do believe the best way to compare 32 v 64Gb?  This screen looks useful?

Just for fun installed RAMDisk software to see if I could put paging to that but not possible in Windows 11 23H2 but was w/ Win 10 I read.

Edited October 10, 20241 yr by Noel

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

Thanks I just DL HWiNFO and have this.  So we can see physical mem load is 41.7%, and PF usage 0.8%.  What do believe the best way to compare 32 v 64Gb?  This screen looks useful?

Yeah I think the page file usage in HWiNFO is useful. In addition to that, average FPS, 1% and 0.1% low FPS and FTV. Those are the values I'll be looking at when I make my comparison. 

Cool, well my purchase was from Amazon, it got stuck in transit very close to where I live so cancelled and reordered.  When it arrives I will give it a serious challenge for conditions this was just an easy one w/ the Citation Longitude flying KBJC KTEX.  We were just at KTEX in real life and that place is just gorgeous with the fall aspens.

45 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Yeah I think the page file usage in HWiNFO is useful. In addition to that, average FPS, 1% and 0.1% low FPS and FTV. Those are the values I'll be looking at when I make my comparison. 

This was tested in a video someone posted in this thread, and the 1% lows were indeed improved with 64 GB in various scenarios.

Edited October 10, 20241 yr by RNAVV19R

13 minutes ago, RNAVV19R said:

This was tested in a video someone posted in this thread, and the 1% lows were indeed improved with 64 GB in various scenarios.

That's promising! Improved 1% lows should result in less stutters. Hopefully. 

1 minute ago, Cpt_Piett said:

That's promising! Improved 1% lows should result in less stutters. Hopefully. 

Indeed. The frame time graph showed fewer stutters with 64 GB. Completely eliminated those nasty stutters that many complain about on approach and landing.

2 hours ago, Noel said:

Just for fun installed RAMDisk software to see if I could put paging to that but not possible in Windows 11 23H2 but was w/ Win 10 I read.

 

I've been putting my page file on a ram disk for years now. I use Primo Ramdisk, but this is paid software that had a 30 day trial period last time I checked.

45 minutes ago, JSmith2112 said:

I've been putting my page file on a ram disk for years now. I use Primo Ramdisk, but this is paid software that had a 30 day trial period last time I checked.

I've done this in the past, so I'm interested in how you have it set up.  Do you run Win11?   Is your page file a fixed size or system-determined size?

17 hours ago, Noel said:

Shoot!  It's always possible there is another source for micro-stutters outside of paging activity, or some other esoteric component of Windows Memory Management that a larger sandbox might impact.  Did you do any pre and post tests for RAM in use, and reduction in frame time variance extremes?  Those seemed to be the main more objective evidence there was a difference.

Up in the FBW320nx dev version now out of KDEN and just no stuttering whatsoever w/ frames locked at 44, which is rare there for me.   Earlier, out of KEWR significant micro-stuttering here and there.  It's so hard to predict exactly what's causing what since you can have one flight virtually stutter free and the next not quite.

No, I didn't do any tests, the microstutters I have are unusual and so insignificant that I don't think anyone beside myself would notice them, they are only noted on approaches when large 3rd party airports are loaded in, but they are so short and insignificant that I really don't care about them.
I might add that I don't use Scenery Cache.

Edited October 10, 20241 yr by Ixoye

1 hour ago, Mace said:

I've done this in the past, so I'm interested in how you have it set up.  Do you run Win11?   Is your page file a fixed size or system-determined size?

I use Win 11 24H2. The page file is set to system-determined size. Dynamic memory management I've turned on in Primo Ramdisk which means that the amount of RAM used by the ram disk can increase and decrease depending on how much space is used. I've got 32 gig allocated to it but it uses much less in practice.

4 hours ago, JSmith2112 said:

I've been putting my page file on a ram disk for years now. I use Primo Ramdisk, but this is paid software that had a 30 day trial period last time I checked.

Great, I was just using ImDisk and could never get Windows not to create a small page file during initialization so was caught in a catch 22.  Have you determined use of a RamDisk has any net positive effect for MSFS, and if so what if you will?  And...did you use Primo when you had 32Gb installed?  I guess that is the question w/ regard to MSFS, at least for this issue, of 32 v 64.

7 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Yeah I think the page file usage in HWiNFO is useful. In addition to that, average FPS, 1% and 0.1% low FPS and FTV. Those are the values I'll be looking at when I make my comparison. 

Seems like it would be more useful to see read/writes to the page file in events per unit of time, rather than a % of the total available page file.  Mine's at 13,336mb right now that is Window's managed so this current capture at climb/cruise in the A320NX showed 0.5% which is about 67mb in use.  But how many read/write operations per second?

4 hours ago, Ixoye said:

No, I didn't do any tests, the microstutters I have are unusual and so insignificant that I don't think anyone beside myself would notice them, they are only noted on approaches when large 3rd party airports are loaded in, but they are so short and insignificant that I really don't care about them.
I might add that I don't use Scenery Cache.

That is my story as well exactly.  But....I wouldn't mind if those disappear as well 😃