Mike Chaney's Tech Corner
September 21, 2020, 12:32:25 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Feb 2013: Qimage Ultimate Challenges... have fun and explore features!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Professional ICC Profiling Software for Windows
Create custom ICC profiles with
Profile Prism for accurate color!
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: What's Qimage Ultimate máx. image size?  (Read 18674 times)
carloschegado
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2011, 02:44:23 PM »

The numbers I am currently getting on this machine are:

Start:816MB
Addl: 328MB
Now: 145MB
Logged
admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3132



View Profile Email
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2011, 03:11:56 PM »

The numbers I am currently getting on this machine are:

Start:816MB
Addl: 328MB
Now: 145MB

Holy gasping for memory Batman!  Those are the lowest numbers I've ever seen!  Most well configured XP machines show 1200 to 1600 MB (1.2 to 1.6 GB) for the start and now numbers.  The lowest "now" number I've seen is about 450MB on really old machines running low memory.  What this means is that Windows only has 145 MB available for Qimage  Ultimate to work with.  Do you have oodles of other big programs running or is there anything you can think of that would be eating memory?  Obviously Qimage Ultimate isn't using 671MB of RAM when it starts either so it sounds like the machine is starting other processes or loading other things in the background when you start a program.  I'd start by looking at the config of that machine to get the initial 816MB number up and that may also take care of the "missing" 671MB between "start" and "now" as well.  If you have 4 GB of RAM on that machine and only 816MB are available to any given program (before you even start QU), that's where the problem lies.

Mike
Logged
rayw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 440


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2011, 10:13:29 PM »

fwiw, I upgraded my venerable xp pc a year or two ago to 4 GB ram. I've just done a quick check, I get 1221 MB for start and now. Running ps and other stuff does not seem to effect that value, and I've a fair number of background tasks running. I can't now remember the details of the manipulations I did to get the pc to see more memory, but there are plenty of answers on the web. iirc ps can utilise the extra memory, but normally the pc can only see the 3GB. Also, Irfanview, unless you set it otherwise, will open embedded jpegs, and not the actual file (at least with canon raws). (I'm not running Ultimate, however, but I guess the overheads are similar to Studio).

Just confirming what Mike said, you need to somehow get that extra memory functioning for QI.

Best wishes,

Ray
Logged
rayw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 440


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 23, 2011, 10:13:49 PM »

somehow my post was duplicated - it wasn't that great  Cheesy
« Last Edit: May 23, 2011, 10:16:01 PM by rayw » Logged
Ken
Newbie
*
Posts: 36


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 24, 2011, 12:21:22 AM »

Mike,

My numbers are even worse:

Start:482MB
Addl: 448MB
Now: 482MB

I am also running XP Pro with 4GB Ram & additional 1024MB (on 2nd HD). When I check Task Manager/Performance, the PC never uses even 2GB of RAM. It has been this way for over a year now and my system never crashes.
AMD Phenom II X2 550 3.11 GHz processor.

What puzzles me though, I have tried to crash it by opening:
QIU (loaded with images)
PS
LR
ProShow Producer
Infanview
and several other smaller programs at once to see how far it will go.

With all of those open, I can still print photos from QIU...However, they are not the extremely large prints that some of your clients print. My current limit is 13x19 (Canon Pro9000 Mark II).

I have changed my boot (experimenting) to the 3GB switch which gives me an additional 400MB..Start:883 Approx if I remember. Point is, I cannot get the QI memory number to increase. Not a current problem since it does not affect my work, but if anyone has a recommendation, short of going to Windows 7, I would welcome the advice.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2011, 01:02:34 AM by Ken » Logged
rayw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 440


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 24, 2011, 02:13:13 AM »

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg487503.aspx  refers to XP and other os ram limits.
Below is my boot.ini file

boot loader]
timeout=5
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /3GB /fastdetect /noguiboot

Afaik, they dropped the PAE after sp2 (or maybe it was sp1 - I'm on sp3). noexecute implies it any way.

Other things, set the swap/page file to a disk other than the the OS, if possible. You can get there by: - my computer, system properties, advanced, performance settings, advanced, virtual memory, change . I've actually allocated an 8GB partition to the paging file, with an initial size of 4000MB as a custom size. Others may argue about letting the system manage the size - I'm just saying what works for me. Also set the memory usage and processor scheduling to 'programs' (on the last 'advanced' window).

You may also need to change your bios settings. If you still have less memory than you think you should have available, then I would suggest you do the three fingered salute, and check what processes you have running. Some software does not close properly, and still leaves memory allocated. Some devices may also use shared memory, but hopefully not many these days.

hth.

Best wishes,

Ray

Logged
Ken
Newbie
*
Posts: 36


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: May 24, 2011, 02:48:41 AM »

Ray,

Thank you!

I used your boot.ini 3GB switch and immediately increased my numbers:

Start:1073MB
Addl: 482MB
Now: 1073MB

Obviously the 3GB switch that I found on the net some time ago had a flaw.

I already have my swap file 1024MB going to my 2nd drive. My system never uses all of the RAM as it is. At least as far as I know, checking the Windows stats. Don't see the need to increase that. RAM is much faster anyway.

I sure do appreciate you sharing your setting with me. That is the best memory number I have ever had using the QI memory checker.

Thank you again Ray! I am always willing to learn!

Ken

Logged
admin
Administrator
Forum Superhero
*****
Posts: 3132



View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: May 24, 2011, 01:37:46 PM »

My numbers are even worse:

Start:482MB
Addl: 448MB
Now: 482MB

Actually, those numbers are much better than Carlos' numbers because he only had 145MB available to QU and you had 482.  I've seen values in the mid to high 400's before so while that was (I see you improved it) pretty bad, it's not horrible.  Notice though that you had 448 additional.  That means that you've got decent memory: it was just fragmented.  The three numbers in the report show the largest contiguous chunk of memory available.  That's because Windows will refuse to allocate memory unless it's in one contiguous chunk so if you try to allocate memory for a 500MB image, Windows will simply return an error if the largest contiguous chunk is only 482MB.  I know... not very nice of Mr. Gates but that's what we have to work with. 

So your report above indicated that the largest contiguous chunk of memory was 482MB but that the next largest (after that) was 448MB.  Fortunately the 64 bit operating systems like Vista x64 and Win7 x64 are much better about this.  If you have more than about 3 GB of RAM installed on those x64 OS's and you do this check in QU, you get 2000MB for the start/now every time.  That's because 2GB is the largest chunk of memory that is "allocatable" to a 32 bit process and those OS's are smarter and will allow the max every time due to better memory management.

Mike
Logged
Ken
Newbie
*
Posts: 36


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 24, 2011, 08:10:39 PM »

Thank you for the information Mike.

I have been holding out purchasing Windows 7. Especially after your great review some time back Smiley. Maybe it's time to take the plunge. I don't know.."If it ain't broke...."

It still puzzles me how even the little I have in the way of available system memory according to QI (obviously not as much as most others), my programs still worked well after loading everything but the kitchen sink. I value your expertise, so, if you have the time you have a student...or just point me somewhere you trust.

I'm glad my numbers are now up, but I did not have a problem before, other than the low numbers I got from the memory check.
Logged
carloschegado
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 25, 2011, 04:26:50 PM »

Mike,

Turns out this machine only had 2GB of RAM  Embarrassed

Just installed 4GB RAM and now my numbers are:

Start: 816MB
Addl: 328MB
Now: 816MB
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!