News Windows 8 to use less RAM than Windows 7

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 10 Oct 2011.

  1. arcticstoat

    arcticstoat New Member

    Joined:
    19 May 2004
    Posts:
    916
    Likes Received:
    13
  2. 3lusive

    3lusive New Member

    Joined:
    5 Feb 2011
    Posts:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    45
    Only a good thing I suppose, not that it will affect me that much when ill be sitting on 16gb ram when 8 arrives.
     
  3. TWeaK

    TWeaK New Member

    Joined:
    28 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    521
    Likes Received:
    7
    A new Windows version that's less bloated than the last? I'll believe that when I see it, Microsoft.
     
  4. Jack_Pepsi

    Jack_Pepsi Clan BeeR Founder

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    646
    Likes Received:
    11
    Hopefully I'll get an evaluation copy from work once it's ready for release.
     
  5. MajorTom

    MajorTom New Member

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    113
    Likes Received:
    1
    Didn't 7 use less RAM than Vista? or was it just less of a hog to run on netbooks?
     
  6. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    even in the screenshot they took i'm not impressed. windows 8 is about equally as memory consuming as xp sp3. a lot of the enhancements MS is advertising are things that i don't understand how are possible. you can't just simply prioritize memory for 1 program over the other without stopping the process. thats like being required to carry a box full of items to a car and you decide you don't want to carry some silverware. the silverware then gets forgotten and if you wait long enough, it will get forgotten, so you go back to get it.

    ms should not have to make these weird optimizations that are likely to hurt performance. if they just cleaned up their code for once the os as a whole would be much smaller and less memory consuming, resulting in faster loading times.

    my linux netbook does everything i would want windows 8 to do but probably runs faster and uses 60MB of ram when fully loaded to desktop.
     
  7. neocleous

    neocleous Member

    Joined:
    12 Feb 2002
    Posts:
    650
    Likes Received:
    1
    When is Windows 8 due roughly?
     
  8. Krikkit

    Krikkit All glory to the hypnotoad! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    23,411
    Likes Received:
    363
    I don't understand why everyone gets such a massive boner on about idle RAM usage - it should be using MORE RAM at idle so when I'm ready to start programs and services they're ready and waiting for snappy responses.

    What matters to me is when the RAM is full, how does it work then? If it's efficient at freeing up space for programs when the chips are down then that's the best route.
     
    3lusive likes this.
  9. leexgx

    leexgx CPC hang out zone (i Fix pcs i do )

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2006
    Posts:
    1,310
    Likes Received:
    8
    superfetch (that runs in the background filling the cache up) and RAM use is not the same thing
     
  10. Hakuren

    Hakuren New Member

    Joined:
    17 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seriously, RAM issue is mostly important for people running 32-bit systems or old laptops. Today RAM is dirt cheap. With X79 as a standard we will see 16GB systems, maybe even 32.

    MS can easily solve performance problems with Windows. Just remove IE from interface and allow user to setup it own GUI view (95% of stuff is completely useless for me but it is loaded every time you open any window). It is the main culprit of everything what is wrong in Windows since XP (at least for older Windows there was LitePC).

    W8 is NOT less bloated than W7. In fact it is quite the opposite. It contain even more useless "improvements" & "optimizations". RAM usage is lower because OS loading process is much different.

    My message to MS over Windows 8: [censored]!
     
  11. GoodBytes

    GoodBytes How many wifi's does it have?

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    12,300
    Likes Received:
    709
    More memory Windows use, the more manufacture will add into their Tablet device memory chips. And the more memory chips you add, the more power consumption the device takes.
    RAM is always powered fully.

    Sure larger memory chip could be used.. but PC manufactures, as we can see right now, is all about making mass profit, and don't care about anything else, destroying their brand name, annoying the consumer with poor cooling design, cheap quality, junk madness, heck even CD's are too expensive. But who cares.. everyone does it, right? (And people are wondering why Apple sales are up), but that is just my opinion on the current market of today (and a little rant, sorry). Probably because of the recession. Hopefully it will change.

    Anyway, here is Microsoft comment:
    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/07/reducing-runtime-memory-in-windows-8.aspx

    The articles explains the different things they have done, so that Windows 8 consumes less memory.
     
    Last edited: 10 Oct 2011
  12. GoodBytes

    GoodBytes How many wifi's does it have?

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    12,300
    Likes Received:
    709
    So why I see Windows 7 tablet with 512MB and 1GB of RAM? Apparently manufactures think otherwise.

    Already done since Vista.


    I don't even think a Linux distribution has something to fit your needs.

    Windows 7/Vista, and even more so 8 (the whole Start Screen in fact) GUI is GPU rendered in any case, it doesn't affect anything. All you are seeing as animation in Win8, can't even push my laptop Quadro NVS 160M with 256MB of memory (equivalent: Geforce 9300M, but with 256MB of memory), above 10% usage. I see no problem. The GPU is not even clocking faster to do the job, so battery life consumption is the same.

    You sir, are funny. You are complaining on stuff you have no idea what you are talking about.
    Stop trolling please. Do your research.


    How so? Does it load the process on the left? on the right? Ahh at the bottom! That's the key!
    Seriously though, no it not. And if you cared to read the Windows 8 blog article (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/07/reducing-runtime-memory-in-windows-8.aspx) on the topic, you can see that both environment is the same, the only difference is that Windows 8 has an A/V and malware pre-installed (updated Windows Defender aka: Security Essential), while Windows 7 has just the basic Windows Defender. Both condition and both are at the desktop level.

    Yes yes yes... and able will declare bankruptcy, and that the previous version of Windows will be the last. I know the speech perfectly well. You said that on Windows 95, 98, 98SE, 2000, XP, Vista, and Windows 7. So far your reputation says that you are often wrong on this particular mater.

    People want change, but don't like change. This is the problem. Anything that is changed, is a downside. Even complaints on Vista instant search feature. "Bring XP search back" was said a lot. People people thought that the HDD will be in heavy consent usage 100% of the time.. and in reality it showed no sign of anything. And in XP days... "I don't care about the stupid dog, I want Windows 2000 search back", Yet people like the XP search now, and now based on comments on Win8 dev preview and the lack of the start menu, people freaked out, and that they want Windows Vista/7 search back in the normal traditional start menu.

    I also remember how Windows 7 will NEVER be purchased because of the new task bar. Hey look everyone is enjoying it now.

    My point is, don't complain until you tried SERIOUSLY the product for several month, with an open mind.

    Beside, back in the old days, people said that the mouse was a gimmick, and just a fad gadget for computer illiterates, and that they will never use a GUI based OS, as it consumes too much computer resources and actually makes it slower to use, and harder too. Ahh how wrong they were.

    Ok now I know I am sounding like Windows ultra fanboy... it's just to balance things out. My point is, always keep an open mind. When you'll use it seriously and pass over the learning curve , and see how properly it works. NOOOOWWW your can start complaining, if you have anything to complain about by then.
     
    Last edited: 10 Oct 2011
  13. GoodBytes

    GoodBytes How many wifi's does it have?

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    12,300
    Likes Received:
    709
    XP memory management involved moving EVERYTHING, no mater what, to your HDD. This is not optimization, this is crap. But needed crap (Microosft admitted this in Vista blog), because at the time, gamers had 256MB of RAM, as RAM was super expensive. And those with money trees, or waiting a year and half or 2 years after XP was released, they could get 512MB at "affordable" (read: computer enthusiasts can afford), quantity in their system. Heck even motherboards where limited to 512MB of RAM for a while. Microosft had no choice (and this was the system since Windows 95, and possibly even before that, but I am not aure at 100% so I am not going to say it)

    Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8, all provided memory optimization improvements.
    Keyword here: OPTIMIZATION, not minimizing.
    Vista was ahead of it's time, as manufacture still provided crappy quantity of memory with their system, and abysmal Intel GPU's. But any "Gamer PC" of 2005 and up, could perfectly enjoy Vista, and experience a nice, large, visible, speed and system responsiveness improvements.

    Microosft explains on the article here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/07/reducing-runtime-memory-in-windows-8.aspx
    What they did to optimize memory, and there is nothing of what you are saying.


    I am sure their code is clean. It has nothing to do with this. Beside compilers do the clean up, and deep optimizations. Not saying that code wise optimization can be skipped. Of course not, the compiler isn't THAT smart, and won't do the work for you. But it does simplify your code to best performance and lowest memory consumption.

    Basic example, if you have a for loop that repeats 5 times to get values on an array. The compiler will break apart the for loop in 5 separate code lines to do get the 5 values, as it is less resource intensive this way.


    You know that you can never measure memory usage correctly?
    -> Do you include Cache on memory?
    -> Do you include Superfetch?
    -> Do you include Heap and Stack area of every process (running programs), that is not being used, but reserved?
    -> Do you include the consumption of the onboard sound chip and other hardware that uses the system RAM as being memory consumed, or just reduce the total usable amount?

    And they are many more to this (especially on the GPU area, as it's blasted with technologies like superfetch, but for textures, and duplicated objects created, that is why GPU memory usage measurement are totally wrong).

    My guess is that your Linux distribution, decided to to exclude A LOT of stuff from the memory consumption, to show fancy low values. Windows includes Superfetch, Heap and Stack area, and any caching space used.
     
  14. GoodBytes

    GoodBytes How many wifi's does it have?

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    12,300
    Likes Received:
    709
    Both, actually.
     
  15. B1GBUD

    B1GBUD More Biddy Bang Bang than Sean Paul

    Joined:
    29 May 2008
    Posts:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    289
    Wake me up when they can run it on just 640k.....

    /sarcasm
     
  16. Nexxo

    Nexxo Bargaining chip

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    32,065
    Likes Received:
    950
    GoodBytes is on the money. This is all about Microsoft's long term strategy to make Windows the de facto OS on all mobile, as well as desktop devices. On tablets, a lean OS footprint makes a difference.
     
  17. willyolio

    willyolio New Member

    Joined:
    17 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    205
    Likes Received:
    11
    it's called windows 7.
     
  18. ssj12

    ssj12 New Member

    Joined:
    12 Sep 2007
    Posts:
    683
    Likes Received:
    1
    The main reason for this is they are using a phone OS... Windows 8 doesnt even have ap proper desktop. It is an freaking app like Nvidia Tegra Zone.
     
  19. Yslen

    Yslen Lord of the Twenty-Seventh Circle

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,954
    Likes Received:
    47
    Did you miss the whole Vista --> 7 thing?
     
  20. Aracos

    Aracos New Member

    Joined:
    11 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,338
    Likes Received:
    47
    You do realise that you can switch between the tablet interface and the Win 7 interface?
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page