NONMEM Users Network Archive

Hosted by Cognigen

Re: NONMEM memory vs. run time

From: Leonid Gibiansky <LGibiansky>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:26:25 -0400

Memory is exactly what I was worrying about. I have 2 GB RAM. If I have
6 or 7 of jobs running (4 CPU system) and try to add one more, the
system complains that there is not enough virtual memory and refuses to
run the next job. Thus, the system is working on the limit of physical
capabilities. I think the OS manages to put active problems to RAM and
non-active ones to swap space so that overall performance is not
affected, but I am not sure, hence the question.

Leonid Gibiansky, Ph.D.
President, QuantPharm LLC
e-mail: LGibiansky at
tel: (301) 767 5566

Darin Perusich wrote:
> The increase in memory consumption doesn't impact runtime positively or
> negatively, unless of course your system doesn't have enough physical
> memory to accommodate the increase. NONMEM's memory footprint is
> directly related to the buffer values in the SIZES file, as you increase
> the values the memory footprint increases to accommodate.
> In the end processor speed is really the only thing that positively or
> negatively effects NONMEM runtime.
> Leonid Gibiansky wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> I noticed that the Nonmem installed with NMQUAL "big nm6" defaults
>> instead of the standard ones results in approximately 10-times increase
>> in the memory required to run Nonmem (on my recent problem, from 12 MB
>> to 140 MB). I am wondering whether anybody checked how this influences
>> the run time. Is it better (in terms of the run time) to use standard
>> sizes, or "big" is OK if you have enough RAM?
>> Thanks!
>> Leonid
Received on Mon Sep 08 2008 - 10:26:25 EDT

The NONMEM Users Network is maintained by ICON plc. Requests to subscribe to the network should be sent to:

Once subscribed, you may contribute to the discussion by emailing: