Memory (RAM) REAL Compression (like ZIP) Utility.


Recommended Posts

Do you know about an utility for compress (like ZIP, RAR) the memory RAM? I think with a good CPU and that utility, you can easily convert 256MB of RAM on 512MB or more; because I am totally sure the .exe and .dll are the best for compression, and RAM is allways FULL of EXEs and DLLs :happy: For example, WinZip in "Super Fast" option compress very fast most EXE files up to 50% of original size.

can't do that...

RAM is hardware.....it physically cannot be done right now with current day technology

when RAR compresses a program(something ZIP sucks at), its changing the program coding somewhat(or something like such), to make it smaller/compact....

its not a physical thing really....its virtual...

It's possible, but it would have to be done in the OS, probably in the kernel... But you'd run into a multitude of problems. First, assuming you can get it to work without programs breaking, it would be incredibly slow because the OS would have to compress/decompress every single read and write operation. Today's CPUs are pretty powerful, but that's asking for a LOT of processing power... A page file is a much better solution :yes:

SoftRAM, MagnaRAM, RAM Doubler ... this was some OLD sotware that DO it. But are very old now for Windows XP :wacko:

Obviously it's possible, but not necesary "incredibly slow" :whistle:

If somebody do an intelligent RAM compression software, I think for example with 256MB of memory, this software could take 128MB for compress and 128MB for normal use, and make a extra memory of 100MB or more, without slow the system more than 10%; This IS faster than virtual memory (pagefile) :yes:

  NeHoMaR said:
SoftRAM, MagnaRAM, RAM Doubler ... this was some OLD sotware that DO it. But are very old now for Windows XP :wacko:

None of those really do anything other than disabling certain things, moving things into high-memory, etc. None of which will work with XP because it's not based on 9x, so...

  gameguy said:
None of those really do anything other than disabling certain things, moving things into high-memory, etc. None of which will work with XP because it's not based on 9x, so...

YES. I tried SoftRAM and MagnaRAM myself (on Windows 3.1, MANY years ago) and TRULY compress memory, and you can load many more applications or load double images megabytes in any image software, double or triple the physical memory compressing it. I remember loading 7MB of RAM (no virtual memory used) with 2MB of physical RAM :yes:

  kennyout said:
can't do that...

RAM is hardware.....it physically cannot be done right now with current day technology

when RAR compresses a program(something ZIP sucks at), its changing the program coding somewhat(or something like such), to make it smaller/compact....

its not a physical thing really....its virtual...

well a hard drive is hardware too but you can compress data on it :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

im using a program called ram optimizer, i think it scans your ram and removes anything which is not currently in use, apparently over time certain segmants stay within the ram and "clog" it up using this utility you can delete those files...

who knows, may be a load of total bull****, seen as mine tells me that 512 or my 1024 SDRAM is been taken up :s

Know how much data gets swapt in and out of the memory ever minut? allot. Know how long it takes to compress and decompress 100mb of data? a long time in terms of CPU usage. It woulnt even be feasible that you could compress the memory. In order to have compresion, you cant move stuff around in the series, and if you do you have to recompress the whole thing. Now if we would compress a small portion it woulnt free up much space because there woulnt be many redundancys, and likewise if we compress a large portion of data it would take longer to compress each and every time we moved soemthing around in the memory.

Hey i have an idea why dont we compress the CPU!!!!! :o

Why don you just go and spend the money on more ram if you need it? What will it run a while 70$ for a massive preformance hike?

Oh man! I have a lot of RAM (1024MB) I don't need buy RAM. I am simply speaking about memory compression software, please don't tell me again about buy more memory :pinch:

Compress the CPU? Good! But in some scenarios, like using CorelDraw or Word, compressing memory should be faster than virtual memory (pagefile) :D

  NeHoMaR said:
Compress the CPU? Good! But in some scenarios, like using CorelDraw or Word, compressing memory should be faster than virtual memory (pagefile) :D

*hits head on desk many times* compressing stuff is actually slower then using a hard disk for pageing... the higher the compression (better algorithms) generally the more time it will take to compress..

well, i won't join the debate of faster or slower and better or worse but I think that there is no 32-bit edition of such software available. I had SoftRam on my Windows 3.11 machine and it worked nicely. Since Windows 95, I think it is not possible to use the technique which these programs used in Win 3.11.

  nikhil500 said:
well, i won't join the debate of faster or slower and better or worse but I think that there is no 32-bit edition of such software available. I had SoftRam on my Windows 3.11 machine and it worked nicely. Since Windows 95, I think it is not possible to use the technique which these programs used in Win 3.11.

they did have programs for windows 95, but most of them did not do as claimed, and were very buggy and slow

  NeHoMaR said:
I insist, maybe one good programmer (with enough free time) could do it (freeware even) :D A good challenge and/or pastime ;)

See the problem with what you're talking about is files compressed and stored on a disk can't be compared to RAM. The file is compressed in memory and written to the disk. Memory compressed in memory would have to be decompressed in memory, taking up more memory.

I'm going to agree with many others. Just buy more RAM.

  Trajik 2600 said:
See the problem with what you're talking about is files compressed and stored on a disk can't be compared to RAM. The file is compressed in memory and written to the disk. Memory compressed in memory would have to be decompressed in memory, taking up more memory.

I'm going to agree with many others. Just buy more RAM.

that's exactly what I stated previously, at least someone has some common sense :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Good afternoon, I have a customer who purchased a Dell laptop last year. One of the latest Inspirons. they are older so it can be a bit hard to see things on the screen. They are using Windows 11 Home 23H2, I have not upgraded them yet to 24H2. What I did was changed the scaling to 150% and that automatically made all the icons on desktop bigger and using in Chrome webpage elements are bigger etc. The thing is I overlooked the Taskbar and the icons most notably hidden within the arrow pointing up. I though by changing to 150% the scaling even the taskbar would get bigger. Again I don't know how I missed seeing that. Is this something that can be fixed? One other thing is I notice in File Explorer things are also small and not larger after the change. Can this be fixed as well?   Thank You.
    • Apple still has two unannounced features for iOS 26 by Hamid Ganji Apple held its WWDC25 event this month to unveil a slew of AI features and its new design for operating systems, known as Liquid Glass. While iOS 26 currently has no shortage of features, the iPhone maker might still have some features under wraps that didn’t make a debut at this month’s WWDC. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman writes in his weekly Power On newsletter that Apple didn’t announce two iOS 26 features at the WWDC event. The first feature is a live translation of conversations via AirPods, and the latter is the ability to sync your wireless network login information across devices at a hotel or gym. Even though these features were already tipped to arrive in iOS 26, Apple held them from the event, presumably because they’re still not ready to ship. Apple appears to have learned from its experience with Apple Intelligence and aims to break the habit of unveiling new features before they are ready for release. The Live Translation on iOS 26 is currently integrated with popular apps like Messages, FaceTime, and Phone to help users break language barriers and communicate in different languages. The feature is now under development for AirPods, allowing users to hear real-time speech translations. Moreover, the WiFi syncing feature allows you to sync your sign-in information across your entire Apple ecosystem, enabling you to connect to a public WiFi network with ease. This would eliminate the need to sign into a WiFi network separately on each device. While these features haven’t arrived in iOS 26 yet, they’re more likely to be released later this year, in October or December.
    • Intel Level L4 cache has been around for a long time, so AMD Zen 3D Cache is a copy of Intel L4 cache that was introduced with Broadwell i7-5775c, which had 128mb of Level L4 cache. Secondly, Zen 6 is not faster in single-threaded performance than 13900k/14900k. 285k is something new Intel is trying, basically showing us that chiplet design does not work for gaming, just like AMD design does not work for gaming. Throwing more cores at it and having L4 cache won't fix the issue, and that is frame dip and stuttering caused by a very stupid design decision to keep the memory controller outside the compute tile. Might as well put a memory controller by bringing back a south bridge chip. lol
    • Just like AMD Zen, it is not going to work for gaming despite 3D Cache. Frame dip and stuttering are giving, which renders 14900KS the greatest gaming CPU ever released.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Community Regular
      Primey_ went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • Reacting Well
      Gromvar earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Dedicated
      BreakingBenjamin earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Hartej earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      TsunadeMama earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +FloatingFatMan
      182
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      166
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      99
    5. 5
      Som
      96
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!