
At PDC a netbook (Asus Eee PC) with 1GB of RAM was showcased running Windows 7 just fine. 1GB of RAM isn't much these days, but still I kept wondering how much RAM does Windows 7 really need?
Tore Lervik from Mindre.net created a virtual machine and gave it 700MB of RAM. It booted just fine and windows idle with no apps were using 360-400MB of ram. (That is just 50% of the total!) Then he decided to open 10 explorer windows just to see what usage it would go up to. With the 10 windows the ram usage went from 400MB to 425MB.
He didn't want to stop there, he wanted to find out when the prefetch-applications stopped and try to find the "static" amount of RAM that Windows 7 needs. He shut the system down and set the RAM to 500MB and booted back up. Now the system used 290MB with 210MB to spare. Then he rebooted it with 300MB available RAM. The boot wasn't happy about just getting 300MB to work with and the boot slowed down for quite some time. But when it finally got into the system it went to 250MB of RAM at idle.
So it seems around 250MB is Windows 7's "static" memory usage. This is pretty good, but you would still want to have atleast 1GB of RAM so Superfetch and the indexer can do it's thing.
But a Windows 7 netbook with 512MB RAM and superfetch disabled should work for normal stuff and surfing.
What I ended up wondering was, can Vista do this?
#1
Posted 02 November 2008 - 09:09 AM
|
|
|
#3
Posted 02 November 2008 - 11:34 AM
Plus this whole analysis is wrong, look at the page file usage.
Also Vista and 7 have superfetch which preload most used apps in memory.
If i got the ram, why not use it for something, that is the whole idea of superfetch.
Edited by sevenalive, 02 November 2008 - 11:35 AM.
#5
Posted 02 November 2008 - 12:56 PM
How do you not notice any slowness with only 1gb of ram? I have the same and PS definitely does not start in 3 seconds. Hell, Firefox takes some long time too.I run vista completely fine with 1gb of ram. It's not slow at all. I run Adobe CS4 great, PS starts and ready in 2-3 seconds, so does dreamweaver
Plus this whole analysis is wrong, look at the page file usage.
Also Vista and 7 have superfetch which preload most used apps in memory.
If i got the ram, why not use it for something, that is the whole idea of superfetch.
#7
Posted 02 November 2008 - 08:17 PM
r u joking or 2-3 seconds is a long duration nowdays ?I run vista completely fine with 1gb of ram. It's not slow at all. I run Adobe CS4 great, PS starts and ready in 2-3 seconds, so does dreamweaver
Plus this whole analysis is wrong, look at the page file usage.
Also Vista and 7 have superfetch which preload most used apps in memory.
If i got the ram, why not use it for something, that is the whole idea of superfetch.
#8
Posted 02 November 2008 - 08:23 PM
r u joking or 2-3 seconds is a long duration nowdays ?I run vista completely fine with 1gb of ram. It's not slow at all. I run Adobe CS4 great, PS starts and ready in 2-3 seconds, so does dreamweaver
Plus this whole analysis is wrong, look at the page file usage.
Also Vista and 7 have superfetch which preload most used apps in memory.
If i got the ram, why not use it for something, that is the whole idea of superfetch.
I don't think you've ever used a photo editing app have you?
All photo editing applications take forever to fully load.
#9
Posted 02 November 2008 - 09:08 PM
I seriously think he may be drunk when using Photoshop, and I mean every single time he uses it. I have no idea how it could only take 2-3 seconds to load. Unless your body's response time slowed down dramatically.
r u joking or 2-3 seconds is a long duration nowdays ?I run vista completely fine with 1gb of ram. It's not slow at all. I run Adobe CS4 great, PS starts and ready in 2-3 seconds, so does dreamweaver
Plus this whole analysis is wrong, look at the page file usage.
Also Vista and 7 have superfetch which preload most used apps in memory.
If i got the ram, why not use it for something, that is the whole idea of superfetch.
I don't think you've ever used a photo editing app have you?
All photo editing applications take forever to fully load.
#17
Posted 03 November 2008 - 08:34 PM
Woh! Wtf mate?wow, that's a improvement all right!! vista's 'static' RAM usage is 600MB!
Me too. If only I could get my hands on a copy. It would probably run better than Vista on my computer because of the low static memory usage.Im so tempted to just install Windows 7 as a main OS.
#19
Posted 03 November 2008 - 08:55 PM
Woh! Wtf mate?
wow, that's a improvement all right!! vista's 'static' RAM usage is 600MB!That's why you need more than 1gb
Me too. If only I could get my hands on a copy. It would probably run better than Vista on my computer because of the low static memory usage.Im so tempted to just install Windows 7 as a main OS.
Just pirate it........
Don't enter a serial when installing and it says Evaluational Version when installed but says you can use it till Feb 2010, this will work for every Beta and Pre Beta until RC1 is released then you need a invite key.
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: windows 7, ram
Microsoft Operating Systems →
Windows 8 →
Windows 7 is six times more likely to get infected than Windows 8Started by Gragier_521, 16 Jun 2013 |
|
|
||
Microsoft Operating Systems →
Windows 8 →
Windows 8 64-bit is the third most popular OS for PC gamers!Started by Ultimate John, 02 May 2013 |
|
|
||
Microsoft Operating Systems →
Windows 7 →
Safe Windows 7 Download & InstallStarted by kobu, 19 Apr 2013 |
|
|
||
Microsoft Operating Systems →
Windows 7 →
Microsoft recommends Windows 7 users to uninstall KB2823324 updateStarted by Liskiller, 12 Apr 2013 |
|
|
||
Microsoft Operating Systems →
Windows XP →
Windows XP more popular than Windows 7 in Unity web gamersStarted by Secured Tim, 12 Apr 2013 |
|
|







