Vista and Memory Usage

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Osaban, May 22, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I was wondering what other people experience in terms of memory usage and processes under Vista.

    With Vista Ultimate at this very moment I'm writing, with only Firefox running I'm using 635 MB (31% of the total physical memory), 77 processes, CPU fluctuates with values of 0%,1%,2%.

    It seems a lot compared to XP, but then Vista is more complex.
     
  2. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    ive got 59processes running,with firefox,itunes,windows live messenger,superantispyware running scan. 1.66gb of ram used out of 2gb 84percent aprox
    how did you manage 77 processes with just firefox running?
    what secuirty software do you use?
     
  3. RAD

    RAD Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Posts:
    332
    I guess that on the surface, I don't consider high memory useage a "bad" thing. As one "computer guru" expressed it: "What ! You want an operating system that DOESN'T use all your available memory ?!?!" :D
     
  4. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    true but 77 processes when the OP is only using firefox is dam right crazy.
     
  5. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    On my vista home premium with nothing running 50%/2gb is already taken up. I have no idea what garbage HP included but the highest usage in the process list is dwm which is always less than 30k.
    Which means some service is stealing my mem.
     
  6. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    Hi there,

    This is the reason I'd like some explanations about these figures: My Vista system runs fairly light in terms of layered defense: DeepFreeze, Windows Defender on, Windows firewall, UAC on, ShadowProtect, SpywareBlaster.

    I've had another look at the task manager, and it shows by default 'processes from all users' as being 77. When I maximize the window it shows the processes for the administrator which are 34 - a reasonable figure-. My question is, are these figures within the normality of Vista? With XP there is only one reading about the number of processes, why two readings with Vista? I'm the only user hence can I do something to cut down some of these 77 processes?

    Memory usage seems to be the lowest of all the posters so far 635 MB of RAM, and I know Vista to run needs a minimum of 500 MB.

    Any Vista expert?
     
  7. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    I have 75 processes running on the desktop with two instances of IE7 and a Java installer running using 38% of 4GB RAM (setting up my new Vista 64).

    While I did used to tweak the services in XP, I will not in Vista. I have seen problems arise turning off services while at the time not needed, a future program may. In the OneCare forums I have seen people having problems because OC expects certain services to be running which have been turned off because of "tweaking". Since Vista uses a ram cache anyway I don't see any point in it.
     
  8. gerardwil

    gerardwil Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Posts:
    4,748
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    To start with: sorry for breaking in, I am not a Vista user.
    However i wonder if these figures using Vista are normal?
    Using XP SP3 myself I have only 24 processes running which includes Firewall/HIPS etc. and also SAS Pro and MBAM in realtime. Mem: 260 Mb.

    Gerard
     
  9. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    Glancing over at my laptop, it has 60 processes going using 40% of 2GB (OneCare is tuning it up at the moment). These kind of numbers are about what I see others post in Vista forums.
     
  10. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I agree, I'd prefer not to tweak anything in Vista, but if I'm the only user perhaps there's a way to cut down on some of these processes. I still find 38% of 4GB memory a lot, but then again you've got 4GB available.

    Running Photoshop and my table scanner, my system uses around 1 GB of memory (out of 2 GB max).
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2008
  11. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I have roughly the same figures with XP. You can't compare XP and Vista in terms of memory usage and processes: Vista needs more resources, but what I'm trying to establish is what are average figures for a given set up under normal browsing conditions.
     
  12. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    That's odd. I just checked the desktop TM again and now it is showing 63 processes. I now only have one IE7 running, Windows Live Mail, and Minefield (Firefox 3.0Pre 64Bit) running.

    Another thing is that it takes a couple of days for Vista to "settle down" after an install which might explain this (indexing, etc).
     
  13. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Posts:
    989
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    Vista Home Premium with SP1 with no applications open other than network connectivity started and running, Vista Services, and what is in the startup list.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: May 22, 2008
  14. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    Where are your 47 processes?
     
  15. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Clean installation:

    ~23 processes; 200MB used

    With programs:

    ~33 processes; 400MB used
     
  16. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    Up until yesterday only around 3.25GB was being used because of the 32bit limitation. Now with 64 installed it uses the full 4GB :)
     
  17. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    On this computer there 2gb of ram. My other comp has 4gb, will check it later.

    EDIT: I forgot there is a virusscan running an on demand with NIS 2008 with the 31% ram usage.
     
    Last edited: May 24, 2008
  18. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Posts:
    989
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    I edited them out of the jpg. Do you have some reason you feel you need to know what they specifically are?
     
  19. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    No, not really. I didn't think at first about the privacy issue. I thought it might be a new feature of task manager. I'm beginning to suspect that the high number of processes on my computer might have something to do with the ultimate version and media center.
     
  20. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    That's very low indeed, almost as with XP. I'm a bit confused now, is 33 what task manager gives you on the bottom left corner of the window or have you been counting?
     
  21. InfinityAz

    InfinityAz Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Posts:
    828
    Location:
    Arizona
    One thing to remember is that Vista uses memory very differently, and more efficiently, than XP. When I first switched to Vista it took a while to get rid of my XP-mentality.

    Here's a good article on Vista's memory use from coding horror.
     
  22. King Grub

    King Grub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Posts:
    814
    Indeed; trying to reduce memory usage does not necessairly mean a smoother running computer.

    If you have 2-4 GB of RAM, what's the point of trying to minimize the usage of that memory, as long as the applications using it are well-written? You paid for the memory, why not use it?
     
  23. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    I have 57 processes running and hovering around 39% physical memory (I have 3 GB) while CPU stays either 0-4%. I have Windows Sidebar running (checks weather/monitors CPU usage), NOD32, SAS Pro, MailWasher Free (checks email every 10 minutes), Ad Muncher, 4 instances of IE7 open (right now about 20 windows). I use the Vista firewall for now.

    If I do a reboot my physical memory will read about 27-29%. Once I start opening IE7 or watching videos, listening to music, etc the physical memory goes closer to 40% and stays there even if I go back to just the programs/services that open/run with starting Vista. Eventually the physical memory will go up to the 50-55% range and I will reboot. I usually have to reboot every other day with normal use and once a day with heavy usage.

    Maybe one of my Sidebar gadgets has a memory leak? I use the weather channel's gadget and the the CPU meter that came with Vista.
     
  24. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    Its the number that Process Explorer gives me.
     
  25. Franklin

    Franklin Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,517
    Location:
    West Aussie
    VLited Vista Ultimate install 6 gig ram with only 3.25 utilized as 32 bit.

    You'll notice in the screeny below that the highest mem using "svchost.exe" is directly related to the Superfetch service.

    If I go into services and stop the Superfetch service it disappears.

    I think there was a higher mem usage feature relating to "Aero" and Desktop Window Manager Session Manager but I stopped that ages ago.Not really sure on that though?

    With a lot of ram I really don't have to disable anything, just like tinkering I guess.o_O
    Capture.JPG
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.