Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 22

Thread: Crucial disses Vista memory footprint

  1. #1
    HEXUS webmaster Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    14,276
    Thanks
    292
    Thanked
    837 times in 473 posts

    Crucial disses Vista memory footprint

    Here's a bit of an advertising 'ha-ha' for you. It appears that Crucial's suggesting you buy more RAM because Vista likes to use it all up.
    http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=8000
    PHP Code:
    $s = new signature();
    $s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display(); 

  2. #2
    Thundercats Ho! starbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Portsmouth
    Posts
    1,330
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked
    29 times in 19 posts
    • starbuck's system
      • Motherboard:
      • P5K Deluxe Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • E6600
      • Memory:
      • 4gb
      • Storage:
      • 2x500gb Samsung spinpoint in raid 0, 320gb diamondmax SATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GT240
      • PSU:
      • Enermax Galaxy 850watt
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ05
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Home Premium
      • Monitor(s):
      • 20" Dell(rebadged sony) trinitron CRT
      • Internet:
      • 20mb cable internet connection
    every os that has come out in the past few years has always been slated initally as memory hungry and we've always managed to get by somehow with less than the "recommended".

    Problem is, general users will believe the advert and even though some may already have 1-2gig they will think they need more.

    I was running the test versions of vista on my current rig(see left) that has what some would consider as an old processor and slow ram. Bearing in mind that the beta versions wouldn't have fully optimised code. Ran fine for me(and I didn't turn all the pretty bits off either).
    I do know everything, just not all at once. It's a virtual memory problem.

  3. #3
    Network|Geek kidzer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Aberdeenshire
    Posts
    1,732
    Thanks
    91
    Thanked
    47 times in 42 posts
    • kidzer's system
      • Motherboard:
      • $motherboard
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6600
      • Memory:
      • 4GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TiB Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • BFG 8800GTS OC
      • PSU:
      • Antec Truepower
      • Case:
      • Antec P160
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7
      • Monitor(s):
      • 20" Viewsonic
      • Internet:
      • ~3Mbps ADSL (TalkTalk Business)
    Is there really a problem though, is it not the case (as I read somewhere, if I remember where I shall add the link) that Vista uses all the memory it can, but if another app (say, a game) needs the memory - a fair bit of what Vista uses can be freed because its stuff that can be restarted - like indexing services etc?

    Or am I speaking rubbish?

    Just read the article infact as I typed this, "it'll use a lot of memory for caching, but only if it's not needed for other stuff." is similar to what I read, in which case Vista being memory hungry seems a bit of a non-issue tbh.

    I ran Vista RC2 on a similar system to starbuck, and again it seemed responsive enough.
    "If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much room!"
    - me, 2005

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Stafford, West Midlands
    Posts
    642
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    A company that sells ram is hardly going to say "Vista is incredibly efficient with memory, so if you were thinking of buying some more ram from us... dont bother!"

    That would just never happen - they are taking advantage of the situation like any company would, and are trying to sell their product.

  5. #5
    One Great Ordeal!
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,764
    Thanks
    201
    Thanked
    56 times in 49 posts
    Its false advertising though to be honest. They are lying to enable the sale of more of there product. I'm surprised MS haven't taken notice of quite a popular memory producer talking rubbish about its latest OS. 1 gig works fine in most cases, for general usage. Perhaps if the advert had been targetted at gamers I'd not take issue with it.
    Last edited by digit; 05-03-2007 at 01:30 PM.

  6. #6
    DR
    DR is online now
    on ye old ship HEXUS DR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HEXUS HQ, Elstree
    Posts
    13,411
    Thanks
    1,058
    Thanked
    831 times in 372 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by digit View Post
    Its false advertising though to be honest. They are lying to enable the sale of more of there product. I'm surprised MS haven't taken notice of quite a popular memory producer talking rubbish about its latest OS. 1 gig works fine in most cases, for general usage. Perhaps if the advert had been targetted at gamers I'd not take issue with it.
    It was on a tech site though - so not exactly targeted at non tech savvy people - more so targeted at Power users

  7. #7
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    25
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    I did a fresh install of vista ultimate last night on a box I'm putting together for a family member.

    Once I'm logged in its using 733mb out of 2GB (GeIL 2GB (2x1GB) PC6400C5 800MHz )

    I havent installed or tweaked anything yet but vista itself does seem quite responsive and slick.

  8. #8
    Lovely chap dangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    8,398
    Thanks
    412
    Thanked
    459 times in 334 posts
    • dangel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • See My Sig
      • CPU:
      • See My Sig
      • Memory:
      • See My Sig
      • Storage:
      • See My Sig
      • Graphics card(s):
      • See My Sig
      • PSU:
      • See My Sig
      • Case:
      • See My Sig
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • See My Sig
      • Internet:
      • 60mbit Sky LLU
    kidzer has the right idea - Vista sees memory as a resource, if if that resource isn't in use (i.e. by programs) it uses it for caching to speed things up. Vista has heuristic memory management which tries to predict what you're likely to do next - this is called Superfetch. It runs in the background and tries to page into memory stuff off disk it thinks you might want next - so the more memory you have the more likely it can respond from local memory rather than the (slow) hard drive. Vista sits and watches you - it learns what you like and tries to serve it up to you quicker..

    As Jeff Atwood puts it "The question shouldn't be "Why does Vista use all my memory?", but "Why the heck did previous versions of Windows use my memory so ineffectively?""

    So in summary: yes it probably uses a bit more memory than XP (more features = more memory) but not half as much as some people think because it just doesn't work like XP did..
    Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719


  9. #9
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    72
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post
    I don't understand why this is described as a diss by some people, I believe Corsair are stating fact: Vista requires more memory than XP and by implication more than a PC currently has installed (in most cases), they're just trying to make some money out of this gift from MS. Vista appears to be the killer app to get people to ditch perfectly good systems for something much more powerful, as long as it brings down the price of the more powerful components I don't mind.

  10. #10
    Theoretical Element Spud1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    7,494
    Thanks
    335
    Thanked
    313 times in 249 posts
    • Spud1's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Aorus Master
      • CPU:
      • 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 16GB GSkill Trident Z
      • Storage:
      • Lots.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • RTX3090
      • PSU:
      • 750w
      • Case:
      • BeQuiet Dark Base Pro rev.2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PG35VQ
      • Internet:
      • 910/100mb Fibre
    Well to be honest - after running vista RTM daily since its release to RTM, without re-installing, I think crucial are partly right.

    At the end of january I upgraded from 1gig of DDR2 to 2.5gig of DDR2 - and the difference in Vista was amazing.

    Previously the start menu was slow to expand large folders inside of it, or I'd get constant paging while running a few memory hungry apps like visual studio along with the windows sidebar - but now I barely hear the hard disk going at all.

    I really do think that 2gig is a realistic minimum for power users with Vista, AFTER the initial (for want of a better phrase) honeymoon period has expired and you actually have everything working as you want. Combine that with readyboost and your sorted

  11. #11
    Thundercats Ho! starbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Portsmouth
    Posts
    1,330
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked
    29 times in 19 posts
    • starbuck's system
      • Motherboard:
      • P5K Deluxe Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • E6600
      • Memory:
      • 4gb
      • Storage:
      • 2x500gb Samsung spinpoint in raid 0, 320gb diamondmax SATA
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GT240
      • PSU:
      • Enermax Galaxy 850watt
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ05
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Home Premium
      • Monitor(s):
      • 20" Dell(rebadged sony) trinitron CRT
      • Internet:
      • 20mb cable internet connection
    Quote Originally Posted by Spud1 View Post
    Combine that with readyboost and your sorted
    so do you find readyboost actually works for you then? The recent review in custom pc said they couldn't find any real difference.
    I do know everything, just not all at once. It's a virtual memory problem.

  12. #12
    Theoretical Element Spud1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    7,494
    Thanks
    335
    Thanked
    313 times in 249 posts
    • Spud1's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Aorus Master
      • CPU:
      • 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 16GB GSkill Trident Z
      • Storage:
      • Lots.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • RTX3090
      • PSU:
      • 750w
      • Case:
      • BeQuiet Dark Base Pro rev.2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PG35VQ
      • Internet:
      • 910/100mb Fibre
    Well I actually don't know..i've not run any tests to say either way, and the benefits are not going to be as noticable as say adding another 1.5gig of ram I have it enabled and configured anyway as I don't use all the memory on my USB stick, and have it plugged in all the time anyway..so even if its a 1% performance boost its still worth it..every little helps.

  13. #13
    Comfortably Numb directhex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    /dev/urandom
    Posts
    17,074
    Thanks
    228
    Thanked
    1,027 times in 678 posts
    • directhex's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus ROG Strix B550-I Gaming
      • CPU:
      • Ryzen 5900x
      • Memory:
      • 64GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Seagate Firecuda 520
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 XC3 Ultra
      • PSU:
      • EVGA SuperNOVA 850W G3
      • Case:
      • NZXT H210i
      • Operating System:
      • Ubuntu 20.04, Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 34GN850
      • Internet:
      • FIOS
    Quote Originally Posted by kidzer View Post
    Is there really a problem though, is it not the case (as I read somewhere, if I remember where I shall add the link) that Vista uses all the memory it can, but if another app (say, a game) needs the memory - a fair bit of what Vista uses can be freed because its stuff that can be restarted - like indexing services etc?

    Or am I speaking rubbish?

    Just read the article infact as I typed this, "it'll use a lot of memory for caching, but only if it's not needed for other stuff." is similar to what I read, in which case Vista being memory hungry seems a bit of a non-issue tbh.

    I ran Vista RC2 on a similar system to starbuck, and again it seemed responsive enough.
    you're not wrong. that's how linux has done it for years. unused ram is wasted ram

  14. #14
    Lovely chap dangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    8,398
    Thanks
    412
    Thanked
    459 times in 334 posts
    • dangel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • See My Sig
      • CPU:
      • See My Sig
      • Memory:
      • See My Sig
      • Storage:
      • See My Sig
      • Graphics card(s):
      • See My Sig
      • PSU:
      • See My Sig
      • Case:
      • See My Sig
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • See My Sig
      • Internet:
      • 60mbit Sky LLU
    Quote Originally Posted by starbuck View Post
    so do you find readyboost actually works for you then? The recent review in custom pc said they couldn't find any real difference.
    Readyboost is more aimed at situations where adding more system RAM isn't viable - e.g. a laptop - and if you have enough RAM then you'll see no visible difference.
    Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719


  15. #15
    Anthropomorphic Personification shaithis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Last Aerie
    Posts
    10,857
    Thanks
    645
    Thanked
    872 times in 736 posts
    • shaithis's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77 WS
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32GB HyperX 1866
      • Storage:
      • Lots!
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Fury X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850
      • Case:
      • Corsair 600T (White)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell 3007
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb Fibre
    When I installed vista, I noticed that the USB stick I have had for a while was readyboost ready...(Sandisk Cruzer), even though I have 4GB of RAM I thought I'd give it a whirl anyway and set 400MB of the stick as RB.

    Perhaps its a placebo effect but I am sure that Windows open and close a bit snappier. Other then that, I couldn't notice any difference at all.

    Still, going to run with it for a while as the USB stick is only used for BIOS flashes and the occasional driver transfer, so its pretty much doing nothing most of the time.
    Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
    HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
    HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
    Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
    NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
    Laptop: Dell Precision 5510 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: Huawei P30 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM14 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Stafford, West Midlands
    Posts
    642
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Readyboost on my laptop really slowed it down - its got 2 gigs of ram already so I wasn't expecting anything spectacular in terms of performance speed ups. When I plugged in the usb stick I set it up to use almost 2 gigs for readyboost, but instead of making things snappier, it made things really jerky. Every second or so when it was being accessed the mouse froze on the screen which became extremely tiresome.

    I don't use readyboost anymore for that reason, it may be something to do with a bottleneck on my laptop... no idea really.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Microsoft Confirms 6 versions of Vista
    By BlackDwarf in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 27-02-2006, 10:59 PM
  2. Overpriced Memory Not Worth It!
    By Allen in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 28-01-2004, 08:59 PM
  3. Crucial Memory
    By shamus21 in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 29-12-2003, 05:11 AM
  4. Crucial Memory: really top blokes
    By Zak33 in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 14-11-2003, 05:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •