How do current versions compare to Beta 2 in memory usage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kai-Uwe v. d. Ohe
  • Start date Start date
K

Kai-Uwe v. d. Ohe

Those of you who had Beta 2 installed and now are running a
more current version of Vista, can you provide some memory
figures comparing the two versions?
 
When I was running beta 2, I was seeing about 65- 75% in memory usage when
the machine was idle. Now I am seeing about 35-45% memory usage. In the
current build there are lots of stability and memory leak fixes, and my
guess is by the time RC1 is available the memory usage will be down even
lower.
 
Thanks, that sounds good, a huge difference. You're talking
about a machine with 768 MB, I suppose? With Beta 2 I see
~half of my 1 GB allocated after startup. I'm looking forward
to try RC1, as it's supposed to have enormous improvements
in performance also, as far as I read.
 
On my tiny 512mb, it uses 85% of the memory with build 5384 most of the time
according to the CPU/memory meter sidebar gadget.

Of course, that isn't really saying what Vista is using, just overall.

I can't wait to test another build of Vista.
 
I have 2GB of RAM. Running Vista, without having installed anything else, I
see a usage of about 5% on average. Don't know what all you guys have
installed but Vista itself sure isn't using half a gig of RAM just sitting
there. I know it's a resource hog, but sheesh...
 
I have 512MB. Though 5384.4 is old news now, the OS was using the 512mb, plus
100mb paging too. I was running the sucker at idle. I think the Taskman was
messed up in 5384.4, it showed like 5 tasks running, with some blank tasks.
 
I don't know how you were judging it, but Vista does seem to use over 450MB
of memory at idle. I have seen that consistently across x86 and x64 on bare
metal and in virtual machines.
 
Dunno...I'm looking at it right now and, even with running 3 instances of
IE7 and outlook express, (Not to mention TaskMan) it says RAM usage is at
12%...
 
Are you sure you aren't refereing to cpu useage.

Raven Mill said:
Dunno...I'm looking at it right now and, even with running 3 instances of
IE7 and outlook express, (Not to mention TaskMan) it says RAM usage is at
12%...
Click to expand...
 
Nope...I do this stuff for a living. I have the CPU and RAM difference down
pretty well...lol

CPU was at about 3% and 1% ... (cores 0 & 1 respectively)
 
Amazing. In my reply above I said "Vista does seem to use over 450MB
of memory at idle".

Pretty close.

By the way, I thought about your interview with the Intel guy when I came
across this gem from a reseller in the UK. Dual Pentium proc running at
5.3Ghz! Yes, that's 5.3Ghz.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Pentium-Dual-...055QQihZ010QQcategoryZ179QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Now, how is that for nice logical thinking? If you think it is just a typo,
scroll down to the specifications and check under Processor. There it is in
red letters. Since it is dual core, 2.66 Ghz times two cores = 5.3 Ghz!
(sigh)
 
Just FYI. I meant mine was running that NOT while idling, but many factors
play a role. One of them is your system and how IT uses RAM. (Yes, your
hardware and everything else also uses RAM.

As for that 5.3GHz system...did you also notice that not a SINGLE person
mentioned that 2x2.66GHz doesn't equal 5.3GHz? I was looking at that,
literally, with my jaw dropped thinking "People will fall for ANY line of
reasoning if they see it from a 'computer store'!!!!" That is so sad it's
funny... (Funny UhOh, not funny HaHa)

No wonder there's so many Mac users in the UK...They believe ANYTHING there!


;)
 
I have 2x Dual GPU in SLI. To be honest, I used to run windows98 at 96-bit.
You can run whatever you like if you know how to get past the winblows
32-bit lock and yer video card supports it...Have never tried it since I got
up to XP, (I think the location of the registry key is different in XP)
but, ...here:

Text taken from v3 of WinTricks, a great little program for "hackers"...
(And that's the REAL version of the word "hacker", which most people have
forgotten.

-------------------------------
By default Windows only allows 32-bit color on your computer, which works
good for a standard PCI/AGP video card. But of you have a more powerful
video card, you can increase your color depth to a higher value. To do this,
follow these steps:

1. Open Notepad and copy the text below into it
2. Save the file and name it 'BitsPerPixel.reg'
3. Double-click on the newly Created file and select Yes
4. Restart Your computer for the changes to take effect

REGEDIT4

HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG\Display\Settings
"BitsPerPixel"="32"

Note: Change the '32' to the maximum number of pixels allowed by your video
card.
 
LOL. The eye cannot percieve color differences above the 32bit color depth
threshhold anyway, but it sounds like a neat project to do it.
 
Back
Top