Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Windows7 Minimalist RAM question.

18 Oct 2009   #1
omeganuepsilon

Vista
 
 
Windows7 Minimalist RAM question.

I don't want this to turn into an argument over used ram.

I've got specific needs based on the apps that I run that will use up all available memory(3d rendering).

I'm currently running Vista with 3gig memory.

I want to go to 7, and upgrade to 4 or 8(need to mobo research to see what mine can handle)

My concern however is how much memory can be freed up.
When I run minimally, I can run about 600mb at idle.(I started using the sidebar so I have a network monitor, + a custom theme).

I was wondering if Windows 7, run without super fetch and indexing can approach this. It's a specific question I've been searching all over for. Most reviews are of how good it's features are for normal consumers/users, and this is the first forum where I've seen atleast intelligent looking debates on the topic.

Again, please don't turn this into that debate. I'm looking for RAM usage while idle(right after the dust for startup settles). The only apps I'm running are AVG, Sidebar, Audio / Mouse drivers/adjustors + a theme now, and I'm running around 900mb used.

Thank you in advance for your input.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
18 Oct 2009   #2
sup3rsprt

XP, Seven, 2008R2
 
 

If you have 4 or 8 GB of RAM there's really nothing to be concerned about. Windows 7 will run fine in even 2GB of RAM.

Keep in mind that Windows will cache stuff but free up RAM when needed. Check the resource monitor, Memory tab, and you will see what I mean. The cached memory (or standby) can be free'd at any time.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Oct 2009   #3
omeganuepsilon

Vista
 
 

I know windows 7 runs fine.

Thanks for the assurance. I am, however looking for peak performance of the actual apps that I will be running, and the only way for that to happen is to have as much RAM waiting for them as possible.

I'm not going to debate it. To me, an OS is something on which to run programs. The programs are what is important, and the resources they use(In my case, 100% of available resources, all 4 cores and all of the memory). If those resources are not available, then the program performance suffers.

Your needs may be different, that's fine, but "it works" really doesn't answer my question, nor does it apply to my needs.

I'm using Vista right now, and it has some bugs, but bugs I'll have to deal with if 7 cannot do what I hope it can.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

18 Oct 2009   #4
sup3rsprt

XP, Seven, 2008R2
 
 

What is there about my answer to debate? I am only speaking facts.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
if 7 cannot do what I hope it can.
And what might that be?

Right now I have Win7 running in a VM with 512MB of RAM. And I haven't even done anything to tweak it besides changing theme and disabling Defender, it's a clean install.


Attached Thumbnails
-resmon.png  
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Oct 2009   #5
omeganuepsilon

Vista
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by sup3rsprt View Post
What is there about my answer to debate? I am only speaking facts.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
if 7 cannot do what I hope it can.
And what might that be?

Right now I have Win7 running in a VM with 512MB of RAM. And I haven't even done anything to tweak it besides changing theme and disabling Defender, it's a clean install.
Youre previous post was not an answer. The bolded part approaches what I asked for.

Thank you.

It is, however, a VM(I'm assuming that's virtual machine). Is that what a default(since you said it was a fresh install) load up will do also?
(IE, one logon, one destop, etc). I haven't played with the multiple desktop idea since I was on linux years ago, and have no idea how it functions within Windows 7(and won't be using it, atleast not while rendering)

If so, that's exactly what I was looking for.

Bah, edited and clicked the wrong button.
Edit:
It looks like 1/3. From what I've seen however, it looks like a certain % of your total will be used no matter what.

So in my case, it would use 1g of my 3, with the same settings.

What I'm hoping, now that I've seen it at those numbers, if I could scale back the usage and free up more than the 2/3 that's open.

Meaning, if you can run at 171, I can too, regardless of my total ram.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Oct 2009   #6
sup3rsprt

XP, Seven, 2008R2
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
Youre previous post was not an answer. The bolded part approaches what I asked for.
Actually all my second post was is to illustrate what I said in my first post.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
Thank you.
Glad to help

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
It is, however, a VM(I'm assuming that's virtual machine). Is that what a default(since you said it was a fresh install) load up will do also?
It depends on how much RAM you have. Refer to my first post.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Oct 2009   #7
Victek

Windows 7 x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
I know windows 7 runs fine.

Thanks for the assurance. I am, however looking for peak performance of the actual apps that I will be running, and the only way for that to happen is to have as much RAM waiting for them as possible.

I'm not going to debate it. To me, an OS is something on which to run programs. The programs are what is important, and the resources they use(In my case, 100% of available resources, all 4 cores and all of the memory). If those resources are not available, then the program performance suffers.

Your needs may be different, that's fine, but "it works" really doesn't answer my question, nor does it apply to my needs.

I'm using Vista right now, and it has some bugs, but bugs I'll have to deal with if 7 cannot do what I hope it can.
.
Your question is quite vague in that you don't state which programs you run and why the memory management in Vista does not run them properly. The theory is Windows dumps a lot of the ram into the cache so that it's potentially useful instead of doing nothing, and then frees it on demand as needed. In practice it has always worked for me, and by "worked" I mean I've never received an out of memory error or had the system crash when running applications. That said I don't know of a way to effectively manipulate the memory. So called "ram defraggers" have never demonstrated that they do anything useful in my experience, but that is the only type of third party app that claims to do what you want.

Why not just try Windows 7 RC1?
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Oct 2009   #8
H2SO4

Win7x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
I'm not going to debate it. To me, an OS is something on which to run programs. The programs are what is important, and the resources they use(In my case, 100% of available resources, all 4 cores and all of the memory). If those resources are not available, then the program performance suffers.
You seem to assume that anything other than a very high "free memory" value equates to a suboptimal starting position for your important apps.

That is an incorrect assumption.

If memory pages pertaining to your apps are "cached", those apps will start and run (at the beginning) a lot faster than if they need to be moved in to memory from scratch. Hence, disabling prefetch/superfetch would have the exact opposite effect from what you intended.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Oct 2009   #9
omeganuepsilon

Vista
 
 

Somehow I knew it'd turn into a thread in which people try to convince me that superfetch is a good thing no matter what, I'm sure it is for people that only do very light actual computing(99% of consumer).

Edit:
I don't care about program start or boot up speeds, BTW. That is all that superfetch seems to be good for. I care about my apps being as powerful as possible well AFTER they've started up.

My first post was specific, I'm sorry you couldn't understand, there are remedial english classes which may help your reading comprehension skills.

I asked how much idle RAM could be paired down to in Window's 7, compared to what I can do with Vista(well under 30%, right about 20%, when I give up all bells and whistles[That's 600mb of my 3gig]).

When I run minimally, I can run about 600mb at idle.(I started using the sidebar so I have a network monitor, + a custom theme).

I was wondering if Windows 7, run without super fetch and indexing can approach this.



My objective is to find out how much ram can be freed up in Windows 7 before I even try it. I am not posting because I want people to try to convince me that isn't a good idea, or that cows fly, or to even tell me to "try it myself". Why even haunt a forum if your best answer is, "go find out on your own"?

I asked, in an open manner, if windows 7 can run equivalent to what I can make Vista run at, as far as memory usage goes.

The why's and wherefores (actual used apps for example) are irrelevant to the question. If you can't get by that simple idea, those classes I mentioned probably won't help you.

I want to know X, so you respond with Y, Z, and tell me that I shouldn't even want X, but still don't tell me much about X.

Apparently this is the wrong place to ask a question and even hope for an answer relative to the actual qestion.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Oct 2009   #10
sup3rsprt

XP, Seven, 2008R2
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by omeganuepsilon View Post
When I run minimally, I can run about 600mb at idle.(I started using the sidebar so I have a network monitor, + a custom theme).

I was wondering if Windows 7, run without super fetch and indexing can approach this.
Does anyone else have trouble understanding my screenshot that clearly shows Windows 7 way below 600MB memory usage?
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Windows7 Minimalist RAM question.




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Failed install windows7 home to windows7 enterprise
I have an HP Compaq dx2000mt desktop that has windows7 32bit enterprise installed on it. I tried to install windows7 home 32bit to replace the enterprise OS. As I was installing it stated the old OS would be marked, XXX.old and it went forward, then came to a point where there were booting errors....
Installation & Setup
Browsers: Does minimalist win the race?
Source - Browsers: Does minimalist win the race? | ZDNet
Browsers & Mail
Question About a Custom Windows7 Button
I just got windows 7 3 days ago, made a custom start button and had a question about a transparent "dead zone" or maybe its more like an "active zone" around it when i scroll over the button. Is there a way to fix this do i have to just deal with it. I tried to get a picture of it but its hard to...
Customization
Minimalist RAM Usage?
Hey everyone; this is my first post on these forums, so I'm sorry if I'm beating a dead horse. When I run windows 7 idle, I get somewhere in the neighborhood from 600 MB used (for a second or two after start up) to about 900 MB used. This is from an idle computer running no programs, with...
Performance & Maintenance
Minimalist
With it being out in BETA now and lotsa people testing i was just wondering who here has experimented at installs of 7 on minimum....or less than required specs. This may make for some interesting results. Have at it and post your results.
Performance & Maintenance


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:31.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App