Something wrong here?
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:56 am
Am I reading this correctly that I only have 33 MB of physical memory left?
Am I reading this correctly that I only have 33 MB of physical memory left?
SG Broadband Community
SG Broadband Community. Everything you'd like to know about Cable Modems, DSL, Satellite, Networking, Security, Wireless, Routers and more.
https://speedguide.net/forums/
Something wrong here?
Page 1 of 1
Am I reading this correctly that I only have 33 MB of physical memory left?
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 10:28 am
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:22 am
yupAm I reading this correctly that I only have 33 MB of physical memory left?
click on Processes and you'll see why!
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:35 am
Too many damn processes then. 
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:01 pm
There is nothing wrong, you are using Vista right? And Sava you are using XP right? Vista is designed to use as much RAM as needed to cache your files and programs to memory so they open and run faster, XP does not do this. People complain about Vista using so much RAM, but that is what it's designed to do. That's why it takes longer to boot, it caches everything into RAM when it boots. Free memory is wasted memory, because memory is the fastest thing in your computer. For example, I have Vista X32 with 4GB of RAM and mine shows 44mb free.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:39 pm
mnosteele52 wrote:There is nothing wrong, you are using Vista right? it caches everything into RAM when it boots. Free memory is wasted memory, because memory is the fastest thing in your computer. For example, I have Vista X32 with 4GB of RAM and mine shows 44mb free.
"Free memory is wasted memory"
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:45 pm
nopemnosteele52 wrote:There is nothing wrong, you are using Vista right? And Sava you are using XP right?
That was a screen shot of Win7 64bit using 8gigs of Ram and ReadyBoost kicking in also
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:36 pm
Yes Vista. I managed to get those 52 processes down to 38.mnosteele52 wrote:There is nothing wrong, you are using Vista right? And Sava you are using XP right? Vista is designed to use as much RAM as needed to cache your files and programs to memory so they open and run faster, XP does not do this. People complain about Vista using so much RAM, but that is what it's designed to do. That's why it takes longer to boot, it caches everything into RAM when it boots. Free memory is wasted memory, because memory is the fastest thing in your computer. For example, I have Vista X32 with 4GB of RAM and mine shows 44mb free.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:47 pm
Yeah, Windows 7 has much improved memory management and much better cpu throttling something they should have done with Vista. Can't wait tell it goes gold.Sava700 wrote:nope
That was a screen shot of Win7 64bit using 8gigs of Ram and ReadyBoost kicking in also
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:59 pm
I have vista 32bit with 2GB of RAM and my physical memory is at 75%.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:30 pm
YeOldeStonecat wrote:
"Free memory is wasted memory"
What about the memory that gets suck into the 32-bit abyss? I want all 4GB.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:12 pm
How many processes you have?24giovanni wrote:I have vista 32bit with 2GB of RAM and my physical memory is at 75%.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:05 pm
Yep..I'll never go back to Vista, sold my copy. Vista was horrible with memory management.mnosteele52 wrote:Yeah, Windows 7 has much improved memory management and much better cpu throttling something they should have done with Vista. Can't wait tell it goes gold.
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:42 pm
48 but now MEM is down to 44%cabledude wrote:how many processes you have?
Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:24 pm
I don't worry about processes...right now my laptop is running 73. That's what adequate CPU and RAM is for.
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:38 am
Disabling unneedede Services will free up more memory that anything else.
Disabling unneeded Processes will free up some RAM, biut not as much as unneeded Services.
However, RAM is FOR USE!
I never use Ready Boost because it seems buggy.
And on my Linux laptop, I have never been able to get it to use more than 300 of my 2 GB of RAM. I can't help but feel that my RAM is being wasted! And the swap file (page file) has never been used either.
Disabling unneeded Processes will free up some RAM, biut not as much as unneeded Services.
However, RAM is FOR USE!
I never use Ready Boost because it seems buggy.
And on my Linux laptop, I have never been able to get it to use more than 300 of my 2 GB of RAM. I can't help but feel that my RAM is being wasted! And the swap file (page file) has never been used either.
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:05 am
Tony, How does one tell what services are unneeded? Could you possible list the ones that are not when you get a chance.TonyT wrote:Disabling unneedede Services will free up more memory that anything else.
Disabling unneeded Processes will free up some RAM, biut not as much as unneeded Services.
However, RAM is FOR USE!
I never use Ready Boost because it seems buggy.
And on my Linux laptop, I have never been able to get it to use more than 300 of my 2 GB of RAM. I can't help but feel that my RAM is being wasted! And the swap file (page file) has never been used either.
thx
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 4:39 pm
http://www.blackviper.com24giovanni wrote:Tony, How does one tell what services are unneeded? Could you possible list the ones that are not when you get a chance.
thx
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:25 pm
some services are obviously not needed like for a desktop if your on ethernet cable..you don't need the wireless services. But like he said BlackViper's site is good for knocking them down...here is a direct link for XP's24giovanni wrote:Tony, How does one tell what services are unneeded? Could you possible list the ones that are not when you get a chance.
thx
http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:12 pm
Thx Tony and Sava for that. Interesting stuff.
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:46 pm
Custom size page file or System managed page file?
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:54 pm
With NT I've never noticed any gain in trying to do a min/max pagefile (yes I've heard all the arguements of why..but NT is really good at memory management)....I let the system manage it.
Best thing you can do for a "tweak" with virtual memory? If you have a 2nd hard drive (spindle)...move it there. (unless it's a server with SQL or Exchange on that spindle)
Best thing you can do for a "tweak" with virtual memory? If you have a 2nd hard drive (spindle)...move it there. (unless it's a server with SQL or Exchange on that spindle)
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 7:59 pm
Ok yosc.
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:02 pm
Pentium 4 dell 2.00GHz, 1.99GHz with 1GB of ram.
Would it be OK for me to install windows7 on this if I get an updated video card that supports DX9?
What card would you recommend on a depression budget? I'm sick of XP and having to tweak everything under the sun, Not to mention if I reformat I have to spend days doing updates-tweaks and that only slows the PC to a crawl compared to the newer PCs.
Would it be OK for me to install windows7 on this if I get an updated video card that supports DX9?
What card would you recommend on a depression budget? I'm sick of XP and having to tweak everything under the sun, Not to mention if I reformat I have to spend days doing updates-tweaks and that only slows the PC to a crawl compared to the newer PCs.
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:58 pm
Win7 will run "OK" on that, I've installed it on an older Pentium 4...running fairly well. It's not high end gaming powerhouse, but it's quite usable. Would be better to at least double the RAM if you intended to run Win7 for a while.
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:32 pm
Ok, Thanks YOSC!!