Most Windows 7 PCs max out memory.

[whs]

Unused RAM is wasted RAM.

And that is exactly the point that many people do not seem to understand. They always want to "save" RAM for a rainy day.

 

[stormy13]

Unused RAM is wasted RAM.

And that is exactly the point that many people do not seem to understand. They always want to "save" RAM for a rainy day.

You would have loved the guy I saw on another forum a while ago that complained about the "extra" ram usage in Vista (and now by extension 7), and how the "extra" usage would cause the computer to use more electricity.

 

[Thorsen]

"registering with XPnet and then installing the DMS Clarity Tracker Agent "

I think this might be part of the problem as well

I have a friend with 512mb of ram and when I fixed his comp, I brought the ram used from 600mb(!) to 200mb

This is what i uninstalled or stopped from running at startup
Google Toolbar
Yahoo Toolbar
Msn messenger
Yahoo Messenger
Adobe Updater
Google Updater
Yahoo Updater
Itunes updater
Quicktime updater

... I cant remember the rest... he didn't know most of them were even on the computer.

 

[whs]

Unused RAM is wasted RAM.

And that is exactly the point that many people do not seem to understand. They always want to "save" RAM for a rainy day.

You would have loved the guy I saw on another forum a while ago that complained about the "extra" ram usage in Vista (and now by extension 7), and how the "extra" usage would cause the computer to use more electricity.

 

[Gary]

I am running Windows 7 x64 with 8GB of ram and I never even came close to maxing it out. Even when I had 3GB using X32.

 

[Scotteq]

I have never seen 7 use more than around 30% of my installed memory (8GB, currently).

SuperFetch, by default, caches programs the OS determines the user may use.

The article is pure FUD, and has no place in a responsible publication.

 

[baarod]

What a crock. This paragraph here pretty much sums up just how much,

Barth acknowledged that XPnet's data couldn't determine whether the memory usage was by the operating system itself, or an increased number of applications, but said that Devil Mountain would start working on finding which is the dominant factor in increased memory use.

Sounds like their "software" can't determine the difference between something that is actively using ram and something that is cached.

Agree, smells like FUD. Is Apple planning a new PC ad and astroturfing again?

 

[swdw]

I would rather have more of the memory utilized, as it would mean fewer read/writes on the HDD, making my laptop less likely to freeze when it's bumped or moved.

That's backwards once useage is past a certain point. Opening new programs with high memory utilization already occuring will require more memory INCREASING HDD useage as the system has to resort to the swap files to meet memory requirements.

 

[Scotteq]

Agree, smells like FUD. Is Apple planning a new PC ad and astroturfing again?

Naah - Not Apple. These are the same XPnet guys who have been steadily ripping Vista and 7 all along with a rather long series of "studys" with varying degrees of Dubiousness.

 

[baarod]

Unused RAM is wasted RAM.

And that is exactly the point that many people do not seem to understand. They always want to "save" RAM for a rainy day.

OK, again we have to use the automobile analogy -- I have a car with 480 bhp -- do I use all of it every day? Not if I want to keep my license! Computers are like the except when I want to open the bitch up and let it scream it won't cause me legal trouble...

The moral to the story is: gas in a fast car, money in the mattress, friends on the inside, family who loves you and enough firepower to defend them. Oh, yeah, and a balls-out octocore doesn't hurt!

 

[Scotteq]

I would rather have more of the memory utilized, as it would mean fewer read/writes on the HDD, making my laptop less likely to freeze when it's bumped or moved.

That's backwards once useage is past a certain point. Opening new programs with high memory utilization already occuring will require more memory INCREASING HDD useage as the system has to resort to the swap files to meet memory requirements.

True - What's needed in order to maximize both sides of that particular situation is some intelligence in the OS which can keep track of which programs the user is likely to launch; and at what days/times. From there, it's simple to manage what is cached and when.

I wonder what OS can do that??

 

[whs]

I would rather have more of the memory utilized, as it would mean fewer read/writes on the HDD, making my laptop less likely to freeze when it's bumped or moved.

That's backwards once useage is past a certain point. Opening new programs with high memory utilization already occuring will require more memory INCREASING HDD useage as the system has to resort to the swap files to meet memory requirements.

True - What's needed in order to maximize both sides of that particular situation is some intelligence in the OS which can keep track of which programs the user is likely to launch; and at what days/times. From there, it's simple to manage what is cached and when.

I wonder what OS can do that??

That's what Superfetch does to a certain degree. It's "memory" however does not go back days or weeks.

 

[baarod]

And that is exactly the point that many people do not seem to understand. They always want to "save" RAM for a rainy day.

You would have loved the guy I saw on another forum a while ago that complained about the "extra" ram usage in Vista (and now by extension 7), and how the "extra" usage would cause the computer to use more electricity.

As a University of Illinois grad in the big-D curriculum -- Electrical Engineering AND Computer Science -- I firmly claim, and will post all the proof you need, that an average 80mm case fan burns more watts/hour than any modern RAM you have, no matter what the frequency. All DRAM refreshes, no matter if it's set or not. And the bigger the capacity, the smaller the die. Old 256 BIT DIPs use more power than a 4GB DDR3 now just because of the reduction in trace. Voltage used on those old chips would fry even that fan -- in fact old ferrite cores were current-based using over 400mA to keep them charged. That's enough to fry a gnat...

Ever heard of the first computer BUG?

1941 - 1950

Grace Murray Hopper, who lived from 1906-1992, found the first computer bug while working in a temporary World War I building at Harvard University on the Mark I computer where a moth had been beaten to death in the jaws of a relay. She glued it into the logbook of the computer and thereafter when the machine stops (frequently) they say that they are "debugging" the computer. The very first bug still exists in the National Museum of American History of the Smithsonian Institution. The word bug and the concept of debugging had been used previously, perhaps by Edison, but this was probably the first verification that the concept applied to computers.

Oh, and big-D I meant big drop, ask Marc Andreessen, 70% of his class either went insane or left during my era File:Mosaic browser plaque ncsa.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[QuackPot]

I have an old PC with 1GB of RAM with XP and Win 7 both 32bit installed and Win 7 always crashes due to lack of RAM.

 

[omegatron]

I have an old PC with 1GB of RAM with XP and Win 7 both 32bit installed and Win 7 always crashes due to lack of RAM.

My grandma's Old PC has 1.5. Windows 7 installed with no problems. So if you can add another 512. that might fix your problem.

 

[seekermeister]

I have an old PC with 1GB of RAM with XP and Win 7 both 32bit installed and Win 7 always crashes due to lack of RAM.

Lack of RAM or memory?

 

[whs]

I have an old PC with 1GB of RAM with XP and Win 7 both 32bit installed and Win 7 always crashes due to lack of RAM.

That cannot be. There must be another problem. Increase the size of the pagefile. Maybe that can fix it. Also have a look into Resource Manager and see whether you have an unusually high "modified" - it should only be a few MBs.

 

[Zen00]

Also check how many start up programs you have running, if you have a lot, cut them down to the essentials, that will save RAM as well.

 

[madtownidiot]

That's backwards once useage is past a certain point. Opening new programs with high memory utilization already occuring will require more memory INCREASING HDD useage as the system has to resort to the swap files to meet memory requirements.

True - What's needed in order to maximize both sides of that particular situation is some intelligence in the OS which can keep track of which programs the user is likely to launch; and at what days/times. From there, it's simple to manage what is cached and when.

I wonder what OS can do that??

That's what Superfetch does to a certain degree. It's "memory" however does not go back days or weeks.

One example of what I'm talking about it: It's impossible to use my laptop to watch a movie stored on the HDD while riding a bus, because instead of reading a few minutes ahead, it reads every 1-2 seconds, and if there's a bump in the road, it freezes for 3-4 seconds. It's also impossible to listen to music stored on the HDD for the same reason. Strangely enough, if I move the media to a flash drive, it works without a single pause. Can't wait til SSDs come down in price. I'd love to be able to replace the HDD with an SSD of the same capacity, but I don't have $900 sitting around

 

[whs]

But here the problem is mechanical. When the bus hits a bump, the heads of the disk retract to avoid a head crash. Maybe putting the laptop on a pillow may help (if that does not impede the cooling too much - e.g. if the vents are towards the side). But the flash drive option is a good alternative - even a large SD card (that does not stick out on the side and cannot break).