Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > RAM

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 12:42 PM
MVP
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 493
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by enaberif View Post
I'm so tired of hearing this argument.

Just because ram is not being used does not mean its being wasted.

The way XP manages memory is PERFECTLY fine.
Yes it does.

What possible reason would there be for not using ram, if it's available?
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 12:46 PM
Mushkin Rep.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oshawa,ON
Posts: 148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by enaberif View Post
I'm so tired of hearing this argument.

Just because ram is not being used does not mean its being wasted.

The way XP manages memory is PERFECTLY fine.
The point is, xp isn't using available the ram, which isn't using it,I don't know what other word works better the waste.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 12:48 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MushkinGreg View Post
The point is, xp isn't using available the ram, which is wasting, microsofts words for why vista has better memory management
Define wasting?

I don't see RAM sitting there not being used as wasted I see it as ready to be used when needed.

If something needs more ram it'll take it.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 12:49 PM
Mushkin Rep.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oshawa,ON
Posts: 148
Default

But vista is no different, it is there and available when you need it, it also is using it all when its not needed

This is what makes memory management different in vista.

Since most recent operating systems do this based on , linux, unix, os x, microsoft implemented similar in vista.
You can disable it easily though if you don't like it.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 12:56 PM
enaberif's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgahree, AB
Posts: 10,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MushkinGreg View Post
But vista is no different, it is there and available when you need it, it also is using it all when its not needed

This is what makes memory management different in vista.

Since most recent operating systems do this based on , linux, unix, os x, microsoft implemented similar in vista.
You can disable it easily though if you don't like it.
I know you can disable.

Either way is doing the same thing; giving memory to that which needs more of it.

So in the end the only thing Superfetch is doing different is allocating all the memory and handing it out like a greedy rich boss.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 01:15 PM
Mushkin Rep.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oshawa,ON
Posts: 148
Default

I think about it like
We have 4096 employees
In xp , 95% of the time, we are only using 355 of em
In vista, they are all hard at work except 2.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 05:58 PM
chrisk's Avatar
Folding Captain
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: GTA, Ontario
Posts: 7,401

My System Specs

Default

I agree. The superfetch feature just makes use of ram that would just sit there otherwise doing nothing. As long as the ram is available to be used when needed and does not result in additional swap file use then its OK.

That being said I would not bother going to 8Gb if you already have 4...a couple of apps MAY open faster (via superfetch) but that would probably be it. If you do go to 8Gb I certainly would not fill up all four ram slots.
__________________
Fold for team #54196
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old August 1, 2008, 06:00 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,221

My System Specs

Default

Or out of the 8GB using 4GB as a RAM disk to render your authored DVD or transcoding, especially if you ahve 1 HDD, that would reduce wear on your HD and you would gain performance as you would avoid the constant back and forth read/writing/update fat cycles. No benefit to games otherwise, only 2GB at once can be accessed by a 32bit app so to be honest you don't need 8GB for gaming.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old August 3, 2008, 08:31 AM
zlojack's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,057

My System Specs

Default

I had 8GB and I found I never got close to using all of it so I sold 4GB.

I run with no paging file but now, every once in a while, I'll get the low memory message (eg. Running Age of Conan, F@H, Firefox, MSN Messenger) but since I very rarely do that...it's not a big deal. And even then, it's still only using 80% of the RAM capacity or so.

So really, as has been mentioned, unless you really see a situation where you need it, 8GB is probably unneccessary.
__________________
[SIZE=3]
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old August 3, 2008, 10:09 AM
Allstar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Terrace, BC
Posts: 558
Default

Okay, Okay, lets get this all sorted out. First of all, the way microSHAFT uses ram is a total waste. This while 64 bit garbage from MS is that. garbage. TRU64?
AIX? those are real 64 bit. Not emulated, or attempted heheh. And the real address space from the begining is called an inode. Try some reading material to brush up on the history, but its better than valuim LoL. The design and implementaiton of the 4.4 BSD operating system. Complete freeBSD. Or even the TRU64 man pages if they are still posted online. THese were actually designed for serving really really large databases. NT code wasnt. NT servers were really designed to support business processing. THats why colleges like SAIT, NAIT and BCIT push NT,coz most business dont use octa processor servers laod balanced with itanuim back end databases. THats why hotmail used to be on freeBSD LoL MS couldnt manage ram on that scale. So, does vista use 8 GB, no, not unless the application does.
( Tazer <--- really old NT admin MCSE NT 4.0 track )
__________________
Acer 5920G ( Stock Air ) no OC:P
At least its DX10!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes