View Full Version : Matrox NLE optimization page....

18th January 1997, 19:09
I saw that they suggest disabling write-behind caching. Will this have an effect (detremental) on any other programs? I understand the intention for video capture, but that isn't all that I use my computer for. I have a 13G WD on my first IDE (MB) and a Fasttrak 66 with 2 13G WD, 256M Ram, celeron 450a, Marvel g400. With the Fasttrak, I have never had any real problems with dropped frames, especially with MJPEG. Should I see a performance increase in editing (MSP 6), since there shouldn't be any waiting for large amounts of data to be dumped on the HD or would I see it just in capturing?

18th January 1997, 19:36
The write-behind caching is just one of the useless "features" in Windows, the sad thing is that you won't be able to shut it down in NT4 and W2K.

It will not slow down, or have any other detrimental effects on your other programs.

(btw. UP http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif)

24th May 2000, 15:58
Good hints one and all....


Dr. Mordrid

24th May 2000, 16:15

Thanks Doc, theres a few things there i didn't know about http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif


25th May 2000, 20:02
I was reading on another site about Windows optimization.. apparantly.. you want to set the VCache to 25% of your system memory..

I havent done any capturing yet.. awaiting my two HDs for striping.. but.. it might be worth a shot to others..

25th May 2000, 21:12
The amount of VCACHE needed is highly variable according to the capture card you're using.

With the Rainbow Runner, Rainbow Runner-G and the Marvel a minimum of 2 megs and a maximum of 8-12 megs is plenty. With high performance cards like the RT-2000 you need more like 40-48 megs.

In either case it's still better than having VCVACHE grab 90% of your physical RAM and keeping it.

BTW: for the squeemish who don't want to manually edit their system.ini to put a leash on the VCACHE there is a shareware program called CacheMan that does it with a GUI interface.

Dr. Mordrid

25th May 2000, 21:51
Thanks Dr.
The info was helpful. I set my virtual memory to 3 times the amount of ram I have(128mb = 384 min and max) and typical role to "network server" and I notice speed increase. I will play with vcache and write-caching.


Fred H
26th May 2000, 00:32
Here is a little hint about the swapfile (virtual memory on HD).
Often the swapfile is more or less fragmented. To make a continuous one, if you have 2 HD (if only one HD, stop read this), do so:
1. Move the virtual memory from C:\ to D:\ (Controllpanel/System/Performance/Virtual memory)
2. Restart.
3. Defrag C:\
4. Move back the virtual memory setups to C:\, with the min/max settings as needed.
5. Restart.
Now you've squized a little bit mor from your system.
Good luck http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Fred H (edited 26 May 2000).]

26th May 2000, 08:44
I just put my swaps file on a seperate disk.

I have a 6gig HD that I use mainly for ALL my swap files, like Windows, Adobe, etc. Stuff was chugging when I had it all on one HD. Put it all on that one and, VOILA!

I also try and fix the size of all my swap files.. I dunno who thought itd be a great idea to have a continuously variable swap file. Maybe back in the day of 200meg HDs but they need to stop that now!

daniele greco
26th May 2000, 13:40
Another useful tip: put the swap file at the beginning of the disk. This can be accomplished by using some utility like Norton defrag, selecting the option "optimize swap file". The reason is that access and transfer times at the outer part of a disk are shorter ('cause of the higher peripheric rotation speed). Unfortunatly I do not know any manual trick to put the swap file at beginning, i.e. without using third part sw, and Windows Defrag utility does not make it.
One more thing: I didn't observed any improvement from setting vcache manually, since Windows 98 performs well automatically.
Different story with Windows 95, where to se vcache to a fixed amount improved performance.
A good site where to find useful info is: http://epsilon.silicon.net.my/adrian/
, but lat time I could not access to it (server error).
Bye, bye, matroxists

28th May 2000, 08:58
I totally agree about the fixed swapfile on a separate disk. I've used this before and it works great.

Dr. Mordrid

31st May 2000, 01:54

Date problem with the forum again.

PS You can shut it off in Win2k, just browse through the device manager. And it can make quite a difference in performance on older HD's.

[This message has been edited by Hunsow (edited 31 May 2000).]

31st May 2000, 08:16
I have been reading this thread with interest and even printed out the tech support page for future reference. I do have one question though. Which of the modifications in the matrox tech support article should be carried out on a system without a separate HD utilized just for video. I have only one 20gb HD which is used for everything. I don't have many problems with video editing.....I did just make a 12 minute video last night and exported to VCR where the audio got slightly out of sync. Otherwise I have not had many problems people say having one drive for everything would cause. What happens if you set the swap file to a permanent size on a system with only one drive used for the system and video. Right now purchasing a second HD is not an option financially. My system is

20gb - 7200rpm drive (benchmarked at +12mg/sec
128meg RAM

I look forward to trying some of these "tricks" but don't want to proceed if harm wil be done.

31st May 2000, 10:07
Apart from setting ReadAhead to none, all of them are pretty standard rules for taking the control (and speeding up) of whatever Windows.

In general MicroS**t is not interested in having users systems allowing them to actually DO something with their computers, and their default configuration is the best proof of the policy http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif
The tips at Matrox will get you started in the right direction http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif