Vista - Not on the memory kill path

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:31 am

Vista is not the memory eater you migh expected by reading some previews the following articl shows Vista to work on 512MB machine with 237MB foot print.
Windows tailors its memory footprint depending on the resources available.

read more here http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/arch ... ement.html

Post by **Apoptosis** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:54 am

like the last line of the article states no one knows what it will end up like, so kind of a waste of time to read his article as it could be wrong also. Maybe Windows notices how much memory a system has and cuts things back. If a system has 2GB versus 512mb Windows might adjust the memory usage for that computer. i dunno

infinitevalence · Post by **infinitevalence** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:12 am

i dont know about you but i think 237MB is a MASSIVE foot print.

kenc51 · Post by **kenc51** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:33 am

Apoptosis wrote:like the last line of the article states no one knows what it will end up like, so kind of a waste of time to read his article as it could be wrong also. Maybe Windows notices how much memory a system has and cuts things back. If a system has 2GB versus 512mb Windows might adjust the memory usage for that computer. i dunno

That's exactly what should happen....it does in Linux!

If you have say 2GB the OS should use as much ram as it can and then the remaining should go to disk cache!!!

I'm certain that's what Vista will do too.....*nix has been doing this since day one......

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:02 pm

infinitevalence wrote:i dont know about you but i think 237MB is a MASSIVE foot print.

this amount of memory is when using the AeroGalss look and if you disable all i guess the footprint will be smaller.
but still the whole article idea was to show that Vista is not teh memory hog it looked like

and i do agree that a beta OS will not rsemble the final product in all aspect

TheGeekMistress · Post by **TheGeekMistress** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:32 pm

i'm betting the resource cut back from earlier reports are all due to the fact that they gave up on a new filing system and went back to the old NTFS with all it's lovely limitations and the wonderous registy that takes forever to load and gets confused at the drop of a hat.

TGM

Kerii · Post by **Kerii** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:03 pm

infinitevalence wrote:i dont know about you but i think 237MB is a MASSIVE foot print.

That's about the same as XP, even less maybe.
Unless I'm confusing that with something else...

kenc51 wrote:That's exactly what should happen....it does in Linux!

If you have say 2GB the OS should use as much ram as it can and then the remaining should go to disk cache!!!

I'm certain that's what Vista will do too.....*nix has been doing this since day one......

Yeah, XP already does this. Anything that goes unused is paged to disk. I forget if any earlier versions like 2000 did the same thing, can't remember.

Well, either way, a quick run through the Services MMC takes care of most of those. They'll never even be loaded into memory much less need paging.

pointreyes · Post by **pointreyes** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:36 pm

kenc51 wrote:That's exactly what should happen....it does in Linux!

If you have say 2GB the OS should use as much ram as it can and then the remaining should go to disk cache!!!

I'm certain that's what Vista will do too.....*nix has been doing this since day one......

Does it drive you nuts like it does me when a Linux newbie debases Linux for doing this when they are comparing it to Windows?

TheGeekMistress · Post by **TheGeekMistress** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 4:15 pm

pointreyes wrote:
kenc51 wrote:That's exactly what should happen....it does in Linux!

If you have say 2GB the OS should use as much ram as it can and then the remaining should go to disk cache!!!

I'm certain that's what Vista will do too.....*nix has been doing this since day one......
Does it drive you nuts like it does me when a Linux newbie debases Linux for doing this when they are comparing it to Windows?

i second that thought

TGM

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:14 pm

somtimes Linux lovers espcially newbies are talking aout Linux as it is the holy grail but it isnt - it is another OS no more no less

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:41 pm

here is an articl on Vista beeing run on sub 400$ PC with AeroGlass
http://www.sellsbrothers.com/news/showT ... Topic=1972

Sovereign · Post by **Sovereign** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:11 am

My Vista installation chews up 500MB+ on 1GB of RAM, and a 600MB pagefile to boot...weird.

liqnit · Post by **liqnit** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:39 pm

can you diable the page file?
or make a fixed size ?
like win2k\xp

-mogwai · Post by **-mogwai** » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:10 pm

all i know is that i'm still anxious to get vista. i think it's going to be nice for those who can run it and i think it's an absolutely beautiful and multi-functional os

BADASSSHADY · Post by **BADASSSHADY** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:58 pm

The"no one knows what it will end up like, so kind of a waste of time to read his article" is kinda off. The non-commitance actually flows from Microsoft down to folks like Rodney. Microsoft won't commit to perf numbers earlier in a beta because they don't want companies buying hardware ahead of time that isn't strong enough and then being angry later... it is understandable, but unfortunate that they must have been burned before by it. I'm sure internally they could tell you what kind of expectations are actually realistic for the released product, but for the rest of us--we'll just have to wait.

phillipjos · Post by **phillipjos** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:42 am

i installed vista i have am2 4200 2x512 dual channel corsair xms ddr2 800 it says i didnt have enough memory 1 gig should be plenty any thoughts my rating was a 4

Sporg · Post by **Sporg** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:07 pm

If Vista is chewing up half of your available RAM, then it sounds like that (at least for now) it's still using the flat memory model (OS/2).

[Edit: I posted this before reading up on it a bit more, ignore my crazy talk]

Tim Burton · Post by **Tim Burton** » Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:53 pm

It eats up about a Gig with a ton of windows opened up on my machine...not that I would have the Retail release right now.... :ohsnap:

Legit Reviews

Vista - Not on the memory kill path

Vista - Not on the memory kill path

vista mem usage