Why is FM using only 80MB RAM but 320MB Virtual Memory

Hi, I was beginning to wonder why my game was running so slowly sometimes, even with only one country and a good spec PC. Now that there is a new task manager with Windows XP that lets you see everything including virtual memory I am able to see that FM is using about 80MB of RAM and 320MB of virtual memory and so far there have been 900,000 page faults. This is obviously why it is running so slowly.

But why is it only using 80MB of the 2GB of RAM that I have installed? Is there anything that can be changed in Windows that controls the memory allocation to a program, so that I can tell FM to use less VM and more RAM?

My game runs slow too and i have 1GB ram

Yeah, I have the same problem too, I mean it doesn't grind to a halt but runs very slow sometimes, while still having plenty of CPU and RAM to spare.

Very weird its doing that, it should only move to virtual memory if its run out of ram to use.

Is the RAM a recent upgrade you put in?

My game runs slow too and i have 1GB ram

Keep in mind that your computer's processor also plays a very big role in running FM smooth with minimal slowdowns. In fact, it's heavily dependent on your processor. A single core processor will be much slower to process where as a dual core processor will be quicker, obviously.

Think of RAM as the space on your office desk or your work area. The more RAM you have, the more space desk you have to work with (ie. more windows open, more tasks, etc). One application will not necessarily use all the RAM you have available.

Basically my problem is that when I press continue, say to go on to pick my team for a game, then the processor runs at 100% even though it appears that the game is not processing. This makes picking a team very annoying because there is a lag between clicking and something actually happening (like it is sometimes on Network games). Eventually the game stops processing and everything is smooth again. So not sure what is being processed at this time when nothing is actually going on in the game.

In terms of the virtual memory and RAM, according to an artical I read on Microsoft website, everything is put in the virtual memory, then whatever is being used is brought into the RAM. If you run out of RAM then something has to be deleted (just from RAM since it is still in the virtual memory) so that the new data can be moved to RAM for processing. Assuming you have enough RAM nothing should ever be deleted, and therefore everything should run directly from the RAM without having to access the virtual memory.

On my machine I get a lot of page faults (i.e. going to virtual memory to fetch data to be put into RAM) even though I have plenty of spare RAM and I think this is what is slowing the game down, because accessing the hard drive is obviously much slower than accessing the RAM.

It is very possible that this has nothing to do with FM, but if anyone has any ideas as to why my PC has so many page faults during FM it might help me to get the game running smoother.

At that point, it's probably background processing the other matches that are happening on that day, which is why it stops eventually. No idea on your virtual memory problem though.

Is your virus checker auto-protect slowing things down? Set it to exclude FM stuff.

Also, page faults are not necessarily a bad thing. Ignore them.

Is your virus checker auto-protect slowing things down? Set it to exclude FM stuff.

Also, page faults are not necessarily a bad thing. Ignore them.

It sounds like another process is getting called up and is looping badly. Anti-virus would defo be a good thing to check.

Just turned off auto protect so I'll test and see if there is a difference.

Basically my problem is that when I press continue, say to go on to pick my team for a game, then the processor runs at 100% even though it appears that the game is not processing. This makes picking a team very annoying because there is a lag between clicking and something actually happening (like it is sometimes on Network games). Eventually the game stops processing and everything is smooth again. So not sure what is being processed at this time when nothing is actually going on in the game.

Are you saying fm.exe runs at 100% CPU in the processes list? If so that doesn't sound right. When I click continue the only time it shoots up high and stays high is when it's processing results. When I click on continue to get to match it shoots up and drops down again at each press of the continue button.

Have you ticked use skin cache? As far as I know that is supposed to speed up loading of windows (but it could be the other way around).

In terms of the virtual memory and RAM, according to an artical I read on Microsoft website, everything is put in the virtual memory, then whatever is being used is brought into the RAM. If you run out of RAM then something has to be deleted (just from RAM since it is still in the virtual memory) so that the new data can be moved to RAM for processing. Assuming you have enough RAM nothing should ever be deleted, and therefore everything should run directly from the RAM without having to access the virtual memory.

On my machine I get a lot of page faults (i.e. going to virtual memory to fetch data to be put into RAM) even though I have plenty of spare RAM and I think this is what is slowing the game down, because accessing the hard drive is obviously much slower than accessing the RAM.

It is very possible that this has nothing to do with FM, but if anyone has any ideas as to why my PC has so many page faults during FM it might help me to get the game running smoother.

The page faults in Task Manager aren't always caused by that. Task manager records both hard and soft faults so a high level does not necessarily indicate thrashing. You want to look at reads and writes as a better indicator but bear in mind that FM uses cached files on the hard disk when it is running. Occasional read/writes alongside blip flashing of the hard drive status indicator is fairly normal, but persistent ones during normal processing is an issue (refresh dates I believe will always cause thrashing due to what I wrote in the next paragraph).

My theory on it is it has to do with optimising usage. When you load an FM save game think of all the information that gets loaded that you probably never access and that the game rarely accesses under the hood. So whatever way it works (don't know if it's Windows or FM or both) as you play it decides what is likely to be needed immediately and what isn't. In doing so it then puts x amount in physical memory and x amount into virtual memory.

Maybe someone who codes applications can shed some light on this as there's a hell of a lot more to it which is beyond anything I've ever learned.

Incidentally Windows loves it's VM. If you google it I have recollections of various tweaks you can do to force it to do certain things (off the top of my head I can't remember) but in forums where I've seen this Microsoft blokes usually say it is best to leave Windows to do what it does. Although, gamers swear that doing these tweaks speeds up their game yet Microsoft people say they are seeing something that isn't there. It's up to you to decide where you want to go.

Keep in mind that your computer's processor also plays a very big role in running FM smooth with minimal slowdowns. In fact, it's heavily dependent on your processor. A single core processor will be much slower to process where as a dual core processor will be quicker, obviously.

Think of RAM as the space on your office desk or your work area. The more RAM you have, the more space desk you have to work with (ie. more windows open, more tasks, etc). One application will not necessarily use all the RAM you have available.

My processor is only 1.7Ghz! I can't afford a new one:D

My processor is only 1.7Ghz! I can't afford a new one:D

What kind of processor though? A single core, dual core or what? The clocked speed doesn't really describe the type of processor it is. For example a 1.6Ghz of a Dual Core is going to be faster than a 3Ghz Pentium 4 processor.

A dual core processor is not necessarily quicker than a single core processor. Assuming you have no other processes or applications working then FM will only run faster on the dual core if its been coded for multi threading and this option has been switched on by the user.

We really need SI to confirm what elements have been written and run in parallel threads. With Quad core CPU's getting faster and l;ikely have the greater take up going forwards it will be interesting to find out from SI some test statistics using single, dual and quad core CPU's.

You may also need to consider the spin speeds of your hard-drives due to the number of reads / writes in addition to the RAM you have installed, the OS and OS version you have running.

Quite a lot to think about here

A dual core processor is not necessarily quicker than a single core processor. Assuming you have no other processes or applications working then FM will only run faster on the dual core if its been coded for multi threading and this option has been switched on by the user.

My statements were made in regards to running FM only. However, a dual core is made to be able to handle a bigger load of applications than a single, this is why they have been made; computer processing is becoming more intense, especially in the work place. Even with a few applications running and hyper threading switched on, FM would still work faster on a dual core. Looking at a few benchmark tables, the differences in speed can be seen clearly.

A single core is slower in terms of processing. Other factors do come into play (including the speed of the hard drive, other applications running, amount of RAM, Processor stats including cache, system bus, etc) however the processing speed is integral. If you think that a Intel Celeron (single core) can be faster in some ways (including the factors of the speed of the HDD and OS installed as well as the amount of RAM and its speed, etc) than a dual core, than I would completely disagree. If you run two boxes side by side, one of them being a single and the other a dual core, the difference is clearly visible.

xp > vista

Basically my problem is that when I press continue, say to go on to pick my team for a game, then the processor runs at 100% even though it appears that the game is not processing. This makes picking a team very annoying because there is a lag between clicking and something actually happening (like it is sometimes on Network games). Eventually the game stops processing and everything is smooth again. So not sure what is being processed at this time when nothing is actually going on in the game.

In terms of the virtual memory and RAM, according to an artical I read on Microsoft website, everything is put in the virtual memory, then whatever is being used is brought into the RAM. If you run out of RAM then something has to be deleted (just from RAM since it is still in the virtual memory) so that the new data can be moved to RAM for processing. Assuming you have enough RAM nothing should ever be deleted, and therefore everything should run directly from the RAM without having to access the virtual memory.

On my machine I get a lot of page faults (i.e. going to virtual memory to fetch data to be put into RAM) even though I have plenty of spare RAM and I think this is what is slowing the game down, because accessing the hard drive is obviously much slower than accessing the RAM.

It is very possible that this has nothing to do with FM, but if anyone has any ideas as to why my PC has so many page faults during FM it might help me to get the game running smoother.

My statements were made in regards to running FM only. However, a dual core is made to be able to handle a bigger load of applications than a single, this is why they have been made; computer processing is becoming more intense, especially in the work place. Even with a few applications running and hyper threading switched on, FM would still work faster on a dual core. Looking at a few benchmark tables, the differences in speed can be seen clearly.

A single core is slower in terms of processing. Other factors do come into play (including the speed of the hard drive, other applications running, amount of RAM, Processor stats including cache, system bus, etc) however the processing speed is integral. If you think that a Intel Celeron (single core) can be faster in some ways (including the factors of the speed of the HDD and OS installed as well as the amount of RAM and its speed, etc) than a dual core, than I would completely disagree. If you run two boxes side by side, one of them being a single and the other a dual core, the difference is clearly visible.

I think you miss the point. I'm well aware of why multi core CPU's are required in certain environments

If you are playing FM only with no other Apps runningt then unless FM is using multi threading it cant make use of dual cores unless multi threading has been coded in to the applications. I believe it actually has and there is an option for use on some occasions for a dual cored cpu. It is quite easy to see when running the game as you'll be able to see CPU2, 3, 4 usage %ages

I'm not aware of FM being used for any benchmark testing, if you have stats I'd be very interested. I think you may be refering to other games being used for benchmarks across single, dual and quad core CPU's. There are very few games that make use of dual cores let alone quad cores. In this repect technology has out accelerated software.

An intel celeron is just one type of single core, celerons being one of the slowest and cheapest. You may want to do a bit more reasearch I think

The jury is currently out on what

I think you miss the point. I'm well aware of why multi core CPU's are required in certain environments

If you are playing FM only with no other Apps runningt then unless FM is using multi threading it cant make use of dual cores unless multi threading has been coded in to the applications. I believe it actually has and there is an option for use on some occasions for a dual cored cpu. It is quite easy to see when running the game as you'll be able to see CPU2, 3, 4 usage %ages

I'm not aware of FM being used for any benchmark testing, if you have stats I'd be very interested. I think you may be refering to other games being used for benchmarks across single, dual and quad core CPU's. There are very few games that make use of dual cores let alone quad cores. In this repect technology has out accelerated software.

An intel celeron is just one type of single core, celerons being one of the slowest and cheapest. You may want to do a bit more reasearch I think

The jury is currently out on what

When referring to FM and benchmark testing, I wasn't refering to specific FM benchmark results, and indeed I was refering to other games and their results on single, dual and quad core processors (assuming the hyper threading option has been turned on and any other configurations are set for the game to use the processors maximum potential). The point I was making was general, not specific, although it can be specific since a game of FM's genre is actually even lighter than the average graphics-intense game like Crysis for example and the results would be obvious to a user of even basic computer hardware knowledge.

The point I made with the Celeron is I was trying to show you that your statement of "a dual core processor is not necessarily faster then a single core" is false, in very aspect of hardware and software testing.

Maybe we've misunderstood each other.

If you have 2GB of RAM, disable the pagefile in Windows XP.

xp > vista

That is imho rubbish. Vista is actually extremely good once you turn off all the unnecessary bells and whistles. Far more stable than XP, and any performance decrease from XP is now unnoticeable on a decent PC since the SP1 updates.

Plus it's harder to break. It was very easy to screw XP up while optimising it.

@OP

hmm.. why dont you allocate more virtual memory and do a quick check ?

I would check my settings of virtual memory; most people allow windows to manage it. I have mine customised...min 1.5XRAM and max 3xRAM...you could also go here and do some of the tweaks recommended.http://www.petri.co.il/pagefile_optimization.htm

The point I was making was general, not specific, although it can be specific since a game of FM's genre is actually even lighter than the average graphics-intense game like Crysis for example and the results would be obvious to a user of even basic computer hardware knowledge.

Interestingly, I'd haphazard the guess that FM can be configured to be quite a lot heavier on the CPU than Crysis, which is actually a game extremely demanding on your video card.

The point I made with the Celeron is I was trying to show you that your statement of "a dual core processor is not necessarily faster then a single core" is false, in very aspect of hardware and software testing.

Sure, you could put it like that. Depening on your applications and processor that doesn't necessarily mean you'd gain much benefit from anything though. Applications that utilize but a single core (of which there are many) don't benefit from additional cores in the slightest. There are dual core CPUs that fall behind better single core systems in those applications. And to take that one step further, there's a reason why many a man and woman would recommend you a fast dual core system instead of a quad core if the most hardware intense thingamabob you get to do on your rig is gaming. That's what people were talking about. Doesn't mean I'd personally build a new rig around but a single core, but with many a dual core CPU being as cheap as they are, and more and more apps finally being coded for two and more cores, that goes without saying.

Then there are operating systems that don't even support multiple cores let alone threads. But that's another story for another day. Probably.

A dual core processor is not necessarily quicker than a single core processor. Assuming you have no other processes or applications working then FM will only run faster on the dual core if its been coded for multi threading and this option has been switched on by the user.

We really need SI to confirm what elements have been written and run in parallel threads. With Quad core CPU's getting faster and l;ikely have the greater take up going forwards it will be interesting to find out from SI some test statistics using single, dual and quad core CPU's.

You may also need to consider the spin speeds of your hard-drives due to the number of reads / writes in addition to the RAM you have installed, the OS and OS version you have running.

Quite a lot to think about here

Would acttuly love to know how FM runs in a quad core cpu

i would like to see how FM runs on a server lol. 8 cores + 8 HT "vitrual" cores coupled with 16GB of ram.

Doubt it'd be able to take advantage of 16GB any more than it would 3GB.

Ok guys with the slowdown, not sure if its the same issue, but something you can check.

When it slows down open up task manager and check your processes, sort them by alphabetical order and scroll down you "System.exe" is this using any CPU power? Usually for me I experience this slow down within the first 5 games I play, its something in the match engine doing it.

If you are having this problem what you want to do is download Process Explorer from Microsoft. Install this and load it up, essentially this is an advanced version of task manager.

Notice the interrupts and DPC's are showing CPU use?

Now go to the system process in process explorer and double click to open it. Look at the threads tab, sort it by CPU (the second column) and the top one is likely the problem, on mine its ACPI.sys, select it and click "suspend" this will free up the CPU and remove the lagginess.

Remember to resume it again before turning off the PC because it wont shut down without it, I also recommend if your afk to resume the process because it should eventually stop causing problems, which can take several hours sometimes.

I would like to point out Ive had the same issue with FM07 and FM08 so nothing exactly new to FML.

I think if acpi.sys appears to be making FM run slow, the underlying cause may be your power management settings. I would consider examining those rather than buggering around with drivers, it is easy for people to **** things up when they don't know what they're doing, so not an instruction I would recommend.