Why does Vista use so much memory
- Thread starter Born_2_Kill_83
- Start date
Xp x64 usually used about 30-35% after a few hours of normal windows use (browsing multiple windows, listening to music, utorrent, chatting, watching videos)
Vista 32-bit ultimate uses about 40% ....small difference so far and it feels just as snappy as xp.
I have 2gb of ddr running at 247mhz btw
Vista 32-bit ultimate uses about 40% ....small difference so far and it feels just as snappy as xp.
I have 2gb of ddr running at 247mhz btw
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 107
Shoseki said:
As opposed to all those "but its a better OS" arguments M$ fanbois use...
As everyone else has already pointed out, Vista is designed to make maximum use of the available memory which is why it uses all of it. Anything that is being used for cache (i.e. the majority of it in the above examples) can be instantly overwritten at any time by a program that needs it. The rest of the time it's there to boost performance.
And before I get accused of being an "M$ fanboi", I have machines running OSX and linux as well. They behave in exactly the same way. This isn't a case of Microsoft wasting your ram, it's a case of them catching up with what everyone else has been doing for years.
That, my friend, is a reasoned argument.
I've been very careful not to say Vista is outright better than any other OS, because it isn't. Like all systems, it is better than alternatives for some things and worse than alternatives for others.
OzyOly said:Becuase people like Vista you think they are fanboys?
No, I wouldn't say that. But, just like McDonalds and other brands, you don't have to be actively in love with something to just auto-accept "the next version".
If I were paying a large amount of money for a new operating system, I'd be damn sure I was getting something amazing to justify the expense, and not because the current operating (XP) will cease to be supported in about five years time.
Associate
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 181
huh, opened my tast manager while reading this,, and when you scoll up and down quickly with mousewheel my cpu usage goes to 70% lol.
Last edited:
When I've used OSX it hasn't behaved like Vista. It doesn't display 4 meg of RAM free out of a gig, when there are no programs running. Nor does it have Vista's excessive HDD activity. So what do you mean exactly?meglamaniac said:
Obviously then OSX doesn't have as good a memory manager as Vista...dirtydog said:
Vista has I/O prioritisation so you need not worry about the search indexing going on in the background as it doesn't affect I/O performance of applications that need it at all.
I just have to worry about the bashing my ears are getting, and about my HDD wearing itself out prematurely.NathanE said:
I don't know how good OSX's memory manager is. What I do know is that once it boots to the desktop (quicker than Vista as well, on this machine) the HDD shuts up straight away. Yet apps still load in a flash.
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 107
dirtydog said:
That's because OSX displays the amount of RAM in use by programs, and that value only. In effect it only shows the little green bar seen in the screenshots on the first page. Believe me, being based on Unix, OSX does use any spare RAM for cache. Unix is all about efficiency, and it's daft to have RAM sat there doing nothing.
As to harddrive activity, I can't really say.
Possibly your machine is reindexing or running other background tasks such as a Windows Defender scan?
How is it so different from telling Windows XP to use a large system cache (via the registry) and setting it to memory usage for "best performance of system cache" which is also the default Windows 2003 setting IIRC.meglamaniac said: