1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Most Windows 7 PCs Max Out Memory

Discussion in 'General Software' started by Eric_Cartman, Feb 24, 2010.

  1. Eric_Cartman

    Eric_Cartman

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    587 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    45
    http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9158258/Most_Windows_7_PCs_max_out_memory
    Very interesting!

    Microsoft is so full of it if they think anyone would use this piece of crap!

    WTF?!?!

    Is 8GB now required to get acceptable bottleneck free performance from Windows?

    WTF is Microsoft thinking?

    Screw this, I'm sticking with XP!
     
  2. Thrackan

    Thrackan

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,482 (1.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    656
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2010
    AphexDreamer, 95Viper and digibucc say thanks.
  3. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,714 (2.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,454
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    I haven't messed with 7 yet, but I'm interested for someone who's running it to post on mem usage/footprint. There's a possibility that win 7 needs some memory leak fixes.

    Right now, I'm in XP, have TWO instances of AutoCAD running, outlook & ie... I'm only using up 1.7GB of physical memory.
     
  4. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    This is user related not a problem with windows. I've seen a few pc's running win7 with hundreds of programs running in the background. Running steam firefox msn etc win7 on my pc uses up 1.5gb of ram.

    Also this is the same kind of FUD that came with win vista and I'm sick of it by now. There were no problems with vista and 7 and it's time people let xp die.
     
  5. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    18,674 (9.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,152
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    Windows 7 X64 bit Ultimate

    [​IMG]
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  6. slyfox2151

    slyfox2151

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,606 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    524
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    im calling absolute bull shit.
     
    El_Mayo and digibucc say thanks.
  7. KieX

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,408 (1.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,461
    Location:
    London, UK
    I fail to see what's wrong with Windows7 making better use of the RAM available. Those high memory use percentages for Windows7 quite likely don't take into account most of that is SuperFetch which actually speeds up your computer.
     
  8. DonInKansas

    DonInKansas

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,096 (1.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Location:
    Kansas
    Um, fail? I did everything short of starting a game. I must only have 1.3GB of RAM. :roll:
    [​IMG]
     
  9. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,027 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,091
    http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/02/behind-the-windows-7-memory-usage-scaremongering.ars

    In defence of the study; It was accurate, however the data was/is just misinterpreted.

    If I look at my main rig right now, with 8GB of RAM, I have 0MB Free. That is the number that the study focuses on. And part of this goes back to ignorance of the way Windows handles memory. It used to be completely acceptable to take the amount of free RAM, and assume anything that wasn't free was being used. However, that changed with Vista, and of course Windows 7 is the same. This was a major issue for why Vista got a bad rap as being a memory hog. So for my main rig, the study would have included me in that groupd of people with maxed out memory. When the proper way to look at memory useage is to look at how much memory is actually inuse, this excludes the memory being used for superfetching.
     
    angelkiller, Kei and KieX say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  10. KieX

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,408 (1.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,461
    Location:
    London, UK
    Look at the "free" memory. Says it's only 104MB. That's because the "Available" is used for SuperFetch but becomes free as soon as it is needed, so Windows 7 doesn't show it as being used on the graph.

    The program used to get the results posted in the OP, clearly sums cahced and non-cached (available) to get that high memory use percentage.
     
  11. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,027 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,091
    Correct, and while the article in the OP says that the low amount of free memory would cause hard drive swapping to start to occure, the exact opposite is ture. Superfetching is designed to help eliminate the wait caused by needing to access the hard drive to load a program, and the cached memory space can instantly be dumped without the need to swap it to the hard drive first.
     
    95Viper says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  12. francis511

    francis511

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    271
    Location:
    N.Ireland
    Yeah I nearly s&*t myself when I noticed a similar reading in task manager. I use 4 gigs and I had NO programs running whatsoever. Task manager said I had about 40 mb free and for a moment i thought it was some kind of epic fail. Of course there was something like three gigabytes under "cached" , but still....
     
  13. 95Viper

    95Viper

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,414 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,613
    Location:
    στο άλφα έως ωμέγα
    Did you happen to notice this at the top of the story?:shadedshu

    "Computerworld - Editor's note: The person quoted in this story as "Craig Barth" is actually Randall C. Kennedy, an InfoWorld contributor. Kennedy, who presented himself as the CTO of Devil Mountain Software, no longer works at InfoWorld. Given that he disguised his identity to Computerworld and a number of other publications, the credibility of Kennedy's statements is called into question. Rather than simply remove stories in which he is quoted, we have left them online so readers can weigh his data and conclusions for themselves."

    More info, here.
     
    KieX says thanks.
  14. KieX

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    2,408 (1.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,461
    Location:
    London, UK
    From the article:
    If he can make wild claims like those without even the most basic study of how Windows7 manages memory, it doesn't suprise me he no longer works there. :slap:

    EDIT: lol, got beaten to that post by 95viper
     
  15. [I.R.A]_FBi

    [I.R.A]_FBi New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,664 (2.83/day)
    Thanks Received:
    540
    Location:
    c:\programs\kitteh.exe
    dunce ...
     
  16. 95Viper

    95Viper

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,414 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,613
    Location:
    στο άλφα έως ωμέγα
    Sorry there, KieX.:)
    ______________________________________________________________________________________


    I just get P.O.ed at all the Windows bashing, everytime a da*n new one comes out. I think considering all the lines of code, all the multitude of hardware and software, MS does a pretty good job of what they do and have to work with. And they have done a decent job with memory management and usage. It ain't perfect, but it is better than it was and will be better in the next iteration.

    If you (in general) prefer XP, Vista or whatever, use it.

    My rant, my opinion.
    Gotta let the dog out, she has to sh*t.
     
  17. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,762 (3.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,324
    Meh, I have "only" 2GB, and it works perfectly.
     
  18. tigger

    tigger I'm the only one

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Messages:
    10,183 (3.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,399
    Like ive always said,why put 4gb of ram in your pc if you dont want windows to use it.May as well just put a 512mb stick in it if it bothers you.
     
    DrPepper says thanks.
  19. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,360 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,216
    I use 4Gb of RAM and a 8GB flash drive for readyboost to get the best performance, moved my swap file to a seperate drive I have never ran out of memory even when editing my HD movies. actually the programs refuse to use the memory as they are still stuck at 32 bit.

    So their study is shit, Windows 7 has great memory handling considering the plethoura of pinatas the average pedro runs on a PC. Plus superfetch makes applications launch uber fast even after a month of continuous uptime.
     
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  20. DrPepper

    DrPepper The Doctor is in the house

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,483 (3.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    Location:
    Scotland (It rains alot)
    I'm beginning to think this is a troll thread.
     
  21. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,027 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,091
    I don't know, it is easy for the less informed to read that article and it be totally believable(with the exception of the warning at the beginning about the person hiding his identity). Though the software/study does exist, so his identity doesn't really matter to the contents of the article. This is especially true if you have already believe most of the hype about Vista's poor performance and resource usage.

    I think this is more of an issue of believing and freaking out about everything you read on the internet...
     
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  22. InnocentCriminal

    InnocentCriminal Resident Grammar Amender

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,484 (1.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    @ Eric - I'd definitely stay with XP until you've got a better specification to handle Windows 7 in the way you want. You could run 7 now but you might as well wait until you get a new machine.

    The article isn't very good as the other comments have basically stated.
     
  23. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,134 (2.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    Wow I thought this was an old outdated argument. Everyone Knows since windows vista that an OS should be designed to use all your RAM to have a more elegant experience while using your computer but then generously gives it back if an application needs it.

    I currently have 68MB Free and I'm mad that its not 0MB. I can only imagine how much smoother things got with 8GM RAM or more. Makes the RAM upgrade worth while don't you think.
     
  24. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,718 (6.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,621
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I thought bull until I checked:
    [​IMG]

    6 GiB installed, Call of Pripyat is running minimized (1.3 GiB) and WMP 12 is playing music (~40 MiB). Only 30 MiB is "free." Almost 3.5 GiB is claimed by Windows but not put to use.

    Should Windows be a greedy bastard taking all the memory it can lay its hands on? No. for that reason, the article has some merit. "Maxes out memory" stretches the truth a bit, however, for the sake of headlines.


    SuperFetch is most likely somewhere between the 2.6 GiB used and the 3.5 GiB cached (approximately 1 GiB RAM used for SuperFetch). That still doesn't explain the 3.5 GiB "available."
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2010
    Crunching for Team TPU
  25. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,027 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,091
    Anyone that knows how the newer versions of Windows handles memory, would know the correct answer to that question is actually Yes. Superfetch filling up every last bit of unused memory is a good thing, and has nothing but a positive effect on performance.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page