Memory usage is too high.

G

Guest

I just got Vista Ultimate about a month ago. I have 4GB of ram and it seems
to not be enough. It is always running at 1GB to 1.5GB at all times, and if I
play my game BF2142 it will just close it down and say I am using too much
memory, which confuses me cause I have 4GB but it tops out at 2GB. I set my
paging file to 30-40GB so that should not be a problem. Before I had it set
to 8-10GB and still had the same problem. I hear there is some kind of way to
fix this by shutting something off that keeps apps open for fast access... I
don't really want that if it's going to stop me from gaming, or if it is
going to force me to buy another 4Gig kit.

Any input anyone?
 
K

Ken Blake

I just got Vista Ultimate about a month ago. I have 4GB of ram and it seems
to not be enough. It is always running at 1GB to 1.5GB at all times,


Are you saying it is *using* 1-1.5GB of RAM?

Wanting to minimize the amount of memory Windows uses is a counterproductive
desire. Windows is designed to use all, or nearly all, of your memory, all
the time, and that's good not bad. Free memory is wasted memory. You paid
for it all and shouldn't want to see any of it wasted.



Windows works hard to find a use for all the memory you have all the time.
For example if your apps don't need some of it, it will use that part for
caching, then give it back when your apps later need it. In this way Windows
keeps all your memory working for you all the time.

and if I
play my game BF2142 it will just close it down and say I am using too much
memory,


Sorry, I can't help with the specifiucs of that. Have you contacted the
games manufacturer, and asked them why?

which confuses me cause I have 4GB but it tops out at 2GB. I set my
paging file to 30-40GB


Ugh! An *enormous* number--way way more than you need. A tenth of that would
probably be too much.

so that should not be a problem. Before I had it set
to 8-10GB


Still an *enormous* number.

and still had the same problem. I hear there is some kind of way to
fix this by shutting something off that keeps apps open for fast access...
I
don't really want that if it's going to stop me from gaming, or if it is
going to force me to buy another 4Gig kit.


Are you running 32bit Vista? If so, buying more RAM would be a waste. It
can't use more than 4GB, and in practice, not more than around 3GB,
depending on what hardware you have installed.
 
M

Mike Glenn

Why dont you give a good example and start using all of your brain instead
of uttering such nonsense!

You have your ram for the apps not the OS, the OS should be out of the way.

Vista loads and unloads too much data... all this creates a problem on
computers that are not state of the art...
 
V

Vista User

Mike Glenn said:
Why dont you give a good example and start using all of your brain instead
of uttering such nonsense!

You have your ram for the apps not the OS, the OS should be out of the
way.

Vista loads and unloads too much data... all this creates a problem on
computers that are not state of the art...

Wrong! you need to do some reading on how the memory management has improved
in Vista.
Ram not in use is wasted!
 
G

Guest

I am using 64bit vista. My paging file was 8-10gb because everyone says your
paging file needs to be atleast 1.5 to 2 times more than your physical ram.
I'm not really worried about making my paging file too big, I have a 500GB
hard drive and use maybe 40GB of it. Yes, I know Windows is trying not to
waste ram, but it would be nice if it didn't try to use more than I had. The
game usually takes up about 800,000kb on the task manager... that leaves
1.2gb left (if it tops out at 2gb) which technicly it should leave 3.2gb left
which is way more than enough. But something is wrong and once it hits 2GB of
memory usage it shuts down the game I am playing. I never had this problem on
Windows XP. I had this comp with 4GB on windows XP 64 bit as well, but just
upgraded to Vista Ultimate a little over a month ago.
 
G

Guest

If this helps at all my computer specs are
AMD 2X 6000+
GeForce 8800GTS 640MB
4GB OCZ PC2-6400 800mhz
500GB 7200RPM hard drive.
 
S

Spirit

The old rule of thumb about windows paging file size does not
apply to Vista as it uses memory differently. Vista will use more
memory than you think is needed and free up some when called
for by programs. Reset your Page File to let windows manage
it and then leave it alone.

http://www.tiler.com/freemeter/
Great free program for tracking system....
 
S

Stephan Rose

Wrong! you need to do some reading on how the memory management has improved
in Vista.
Ram not in use is wasted!

Yes but people want the Ram to be in use by their applications, not their
OS. What Vista does *can* cause problems with applications that do free
memory checks when they falsely see that there isn't any free memory
because Vista is hogging it all. It is not unusual for applications that
use a lot of memory to do free memory checks and make performance
adjustments based on that.

Also the entire argument is like saying "CPU not in use is wasted", "Hard
drive space not in use is wasted", etc. etc.

What's the next version of windows going to do?

Max out CPU at 100% all the time and fill up every last bit of the HD so
that it's not "wasted"?

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
S

Swingman

in message
What's the next version of windows going to do?

Max out CPU at 100% all the time and fill up every last bit of the HD so
that it's not "wasted"?

LOL ... with Vista, we're getting close.

Besides, since the advent of "connectivity", your computer is not really
yours anymore. Viewed from the outside, that connected box you paid for is
simply a device that provides opportunity to further corporate greed ... and
that's the good part.
 
F

Frank

Stephan said:
Yes but people want the Ram to be in use by their applications, not their
OS. What Vista does *can* cause problems with applications that do free
memory checks when they falsely see that there isn't any free memory
because Vista is hogging it all.

That's a very misleading statement. If the app is written to work on
vista then there is no problem.

It is not unusual for applications that
use a lot of memory to do free memory checks and make performance
adjustments based on that.

Also the entire argument is like saying "CPU not in use is wasted",

Nah...come on, that's a totally different issue.


"Hard
drive space not in use is wasted", etc. etc.

What's the next version of windows going to do?

Max out CPU at 100% all the time and fill up every last bit of the HD so
that it's not "wasted"?

Give it up Stephen, you're being totally ridiculous!
Frank
 
S

Stephan Rose

That's a very misleading statement. If the app is written to work on
vista then there is no problem.

Actually no it is not a very misleading problem. Just about *every*
high-end design app I have monitors system free memory and makes choices
based on that. If they would just blindly allocate memory in the hopes the
OS will make it available one way or another, it would chew up memory like
crazy. These apps will scale down geometric detail, etc. as necessary to
avoid using too much memory *when* it is necessary to do so. They can only
do that via getting an accurate figure from the OS how much memory they
have available.

Now the only thing MS would have to do is just split the Usage figure into
two parts and *not* include the cached memory in the free memory reporting.
At that point in time, it'd be just peachy and there wouldn't be any
issues.

Imagine loading a 3D model containing over 1,000 parts. Imagine what would
happen if the Application would just blindly allocate memory for all parts
without taking available system resources into account. See the, at least
potential, problem?

I say potential because maybe they do the above in an API level and
only combine the memory usage when displaying it to the User in the task
manager. That I honestly can't say with any certainty. I'd need to test it
and don't really feel like it. If that is the case though, that is
still misleading to the User and should be changed to something that
properly reflects system memory usage.

Such as something like this:

Total Memory: 2 gig
In Use by programs: 27%
In Use as cache: 72%
Free: 73%

Those are my current memory stats under Ubuntu. The cached memory is no
issue as it can be flushed instantly if an app needs the memory. The key
thing is though is that it does not affect the *free* memory. It does not
say "99% Memory in use". That is what I am trying to get at.
It is not unusual for applications that

Nah...come on, that's a totally different issue.

Is it really? If one says unused RAM is a waste then one can just as
easily say unused CPU time is a waste too. I personally find the statement
that "unused ram is a waste" as ridiculous as "Unused CPU is a waste".
Makes absolutely zero difference to me.

I design my systems to where they meet my performance needs in a
worst-case scenario as good as possible. If the resources are unused at
the other times, that matters little to me. It's far more important that
they are available when I seriously do need them and aren't occupied by
something else that I don't need just so they aren't "wasted". Don't care
if that is RAM or CPU.
"Hard

Give it up Stephen, you're being totally ridiculous!

I wasn't actually serious about that last statement there. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
F

Frank

Stephan said:
Actually no it is not a very misleading problem. Just about *every*
high-end design app I have monitors system free memory and makes choices
based on that. If they would just blindly allocate memory in the hopes the
OS will make it available one way or another, it would chew up memory like
crazy. These apps will scale down geometric detail, etc. as necessary to
avoid using too much memory *when* it is necessary to do so. They can only
do that via getting an accurate figure from the OS how much memory they
have available.

Now the only thing MS would have to do is just split the Usage figure into
two parts and *not* include the cached memory in the free memory reporting.
At that point in time, it'd be just peachy and there wouldn't be any
issues.

Imagine loading a 3D model containing over 1,000 parts. Imagine what would
happen if the Application would just blindly allocate memory for all parts
without taking available system resources into account. See the, at least
potential, problem?

I say potential because maybe they do the above in an API level and
only combine the memory usage when displaying it to the User in the task
manager. That I honestly can't say with any certainty. I'd need to test it
and don't really feel like it. If that is the case though, that is
still misleading to the User and should be changed to something that
properly reflects system memory usage.

Such as something like this:

Total Memory: 2 gig
In Use by programs: 27%
In Use as cache: 72%
Free: 73%

Those are my current memory stats under Ubuntu. The cached memory is no
issue as it can be flushed instantly if an app needs the memory. The key
thing is though is that it does not affect the *free* memory. It does not
say "99% Memory in use". That is what I am trying to get at.




Is it really? If one says unused RAM is a waste then one can just as
easily say unused CPU time is a waste too. I personally find the statement
that "unused ram is a waste" as ridiculous as "Unused CPU is a waste".
Makes absolutely zero difference to me.

I design my systems to where they meet my performance needs in a
worst-case scenario as good as possible. If the resources are unused at
the other times, that matters little to me. It's far more important that
they are available when I seriously do need them and aren't occupied by
something else that I don't need just so they aren't "wasted". Don't care
if that is RAM or CPU.




I wasn't actually serious about that last statement there. =)

Ok stephen, whatever you say...I know you don't use or have Vista
installed and you despise everything from MS so it goes without saying
that all of your opinions must conform to that way of thinking.
Frank
 
S

Stephan Rose

Ok stephen, whatever you say...I know you don't use or have Vista
installed and you despise everything from MS so it goes without saying
that all of your opinions must conform to that way of thinking.

No Frank, that is incorrect. I don't despise everything from MS. I don't
despise anything actually. I actually absolutely LOVE this keyboard I am
writing on right now, and Microsoft made it. It doesn't work 100% correctly
with any version of windows (and it isn't limited to this one, I have
more than one of this identical model on more than one computer), but the
keyboard itself is excellent. Very ergonomic, very good feel, quiet, and
the wrist rest is just perfect. It's a wonderful keyboard, one of the best
purchases I ever made. And believe me, getting electronics shipped from
Japan is difficult and expensive!

So no, I don't despise anything Microsoft.

I just simply don't buy into every single piece of Marketing Hype that
Microsoft releases. I don't only see the good parts, I also see the
problems and don't pretend they aren't there. I've also developed
operating systems myself. On a much smaller scale of course, for embedded
hardware. But the underlying principles essentially remain the same. On
the contrary, some things are more difficult when all you have available is
200MHz, 16 megs Flash and 32 megs of RAM. Every byte memory counts at that
point in time! =)

So most the things that may impress many users, that possibly impresses
you, does usually very little to impress me just because I know how it
actually works and that it isn't nearly as special as the marketing
department likes to advertise. I don't fault Marketing for what they do,
that's their job and they are supposed to be good at it. I wouldn't do
anything different in their place. But hey, that doesn't mean *I* need to
buy into it. =)

At the end of the day, I don't really have a problem with Microsoft. If
anything, I'm disappointed that Microsoft can't do better considering the
resources they have. I'm disappointed at some of the choices Microsoft has
made in how they treat their customers.

I don't even really have a problem with Vista per se. I was fine with the
user interface. Some things about it I actually did like believe it or
not. Performance wise it also did fine, though I'd kind of expect that on
my system that scores 5.3 and higher across the board. Highest score I
got for one thing was a 5.9 I think. Most of the stuff that annoys me I'd
just turn off and I'd be perfectly happy with it.

What I *don't* like, and why I primarily don't use it are the "extras"
that Microsoft forces on their customers.

1. I don't agree with the EULA

2. I don't agree with my hardware being monitored, WGA and what else the
other various acronyms are.

3. I don't agree with DRM and refuse to support it, software that enforces
it and content that contains DRM.

4. It simply lacks a few features that these days I would no longer want to
live without. It's a very very short list, but it's significant enough to
where most items on said list I use on a daily basis.

5. It's beyond overpriced. And that isn't an issue of being able to afford
it, I am currently contemplating a purchase of a new 2007/2008 Yamaha R1
when I move back to the US, and I mean cash not financed. I think I can
afford Vista. But that doesn't mean I actually want to pay that much.

I mean think of it this way. All my life I've been a programmer that
exclusively writes windows software. I started out on MS-DOS and then
moved to Windows. I even beta tested Microsoft's .Net Framework and fully
switched to it while it was still in beta for production work. That's how
much I liked it and I've used it for years and know it inside and out.

I've never in my life before touched any form of Linux. Matter of fact, I
wanted absolutely nothing to do with Linux and anything open source.
Essentially, I thought similar along your lines Frank. So considering
this, do you really think that I switched to Linux on a whim?

If I used to despise anything to be honest, it used to be Linux and
anything open source. I've actually gotten into quite some heated
arguments about both with people in the past with me firmly on the Windows
side. And now? I'm writing this from Ubuntu not even slightly regretting
making the move to Linux, I'm glad I did. It's one of the best decisions
I've ever made.

So what pushed me this way? What made me change my way of thinking? The
simple fact that I no longer agree with Microsoft's way of thinking. Their
philosophy is one I can no longer agree with. Microsoft took things
that I already didn't like about XP, and made them even worse under
Vista. So that shows me where they are trying to go. They are essentially
trying to gain too much control over my system. And yes Frank, an
operating system that can at any given point in time decide if I am
allowed to use it or not *is* too much control.

That is my core problem with Microsoft. I can't and actually don't
fault them for what they do. I can see why they'd want to do that.
But that doesn't mean I have to agree with it nor does it mean I
despise them. I will of course support Vista and any other operating
system they release in the future with the software I write, but it's
unlikely that I will switch back because I just don't personally need
their OS anymore.

If Microsoft one day releases an Operating System that has an EULA I can
agree with and doesn't have features built-in to disrupt me and cause me
problems, that doesn't monitor me, doesn't try to restrict what I do with
my computer and has a really really compelling feature that I absolutely
want to have...then maybe I'll consider it.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
F

Frank

Stephan said:
No Frank, that is incorrect. I don't despise everything from MS. I don't
despise anything actually. I actually absolutely LOVE this keyboard I am
writing on right now, and Microsoft made it. It doesn't work 100% correctly
with any version of windows (and it isn't limited to this one, I have
more than one of this identical model on more than one computer), but the
keyboard itself is excellent. Very ergonomic, very good feel, quiet, and
the wrist rest is just perfect. It's a wonderful keyboard, one of the best
purchases I ever made. And believe me, getting electronics shipped from
Japan is difficult and expensive!

So no, I don't despise anything Microsoft.

I just simply don't buy into every single piece of Marketing Hype that
Microsoft releases. I don't only see the good parts, I also see the
problems and don't pretend they aren't there. I've also developed
operating systems myself. On a much smaller scale of course, for embedded
hardware. But the underlying principles essentially remain the same. On
the contrary, some things are more difficult when all you have available is
200MHz, 16 megs Flash and 32 megs of RAM. Every byte memory counts at that
point in time! =)

So most the things that may impress many users, that possibly impresses
you, does usually very little to impress me just because I know how it
actually works and that it isn't nearly as special as the marketing
department likes to advertise. I don't fault Marketing for what they do,
that's their job and they are supposed to be good at it. I wouldn't do
anything different in their place. But hey, that doesn't mean *I* need to
buy into it. =)

At the end of the day, I don't really have a problem with Microsoft. If
anything, I'm disappointed that Microsoft can't do better considering the
resources they have. I'm disappointed at some of the choices Microsoft has
made in how they treat their customers.

I don't even really have a problem with Vista per se. I was fine with the
user interface. Some things about it I actually did like believe it or
not. Performance wise it also did fine, though I'd kind of expect that on
my system that scores 5.3 and higher across the board. Highest score I
got for one thing was a 5.9 I think. Most of the stuff that annoys me I'd
just turn off and I'd be perfectly happy with it.

What I *don't* like, and why I primarily don't use it are the "extras"
that Microsoft forces on their customers.

1. I don't agree with the EULA

2. I don't agree with my hardware being monitored, WGA and what else the
other various acronyms are.

3. I don't agree with DRM and refuse to support it, software that enforces
it and content that contains DRM.

4. It simply lacks a few features that these days I would no longer want to
live without. It's a very very short list, but it's significant enough to
where most items on said list I use on a daily basis.

5. It's beyond overpriced. And that isn't an issue of being able to afford
it, I am currently contemplating a purchase of a new 2007/2008 Yamaha R1
when I move back to the US, and I mean cash not financed. I think I can
afford Vista. But that doesn't mean I actually want to pay that much.

I mean think of it this way. All my life I've been a programmer that
exclusively writes windows software. I started out on MS-DOS and then
moved to Windows. I even beta tested Microsoft's .Net Framework and fully
switched to it while it was still in beta for production work. That's how
much I liked it and I've used it for years and know it inside and out.

I've never in my life before touched any form of Linux. Matter of fact, I
wanted absolutely nothing to do with Linux and anything open source.
Essentially, I thought similar along your lines Frank. So considering
this, do you really think that I switched to Linux on a whim?

If I used to despise anything to be honest, it used to be Linux and
anything open source. I've actually gotten into quite some heated
arguments about both with people in the past with me firmly on the Windows
side. And now? I'm writing this from Ubuntu not even slightly regretting
making the move to Linux, I'm glad I did. It's one of the best decisions
I've ever made.

So what pushed me this way? What made me change my way of thinking? The
simple fact that I no longer agree with Microsoft's way of thinking. Their
philosophy is one I can no longer agree with. Microsoft took things
that I already didn't like about XP, and made them even worse under
Vista. So that shows me where they are trying to go. They are essentially
trying to gain too much control over my system. And yes Frank, an
operating system that can at any given point in time decide if I am
allowed to use it or not *is* too much control.

That is my core problem with Microsoft. I can't and actually don't
fault them for what they do. I can see why they'd want to do that.
But that doesn't mean I have to agree with it nor does it mean I
despise them. I will of course support Vista and any other operating
system they release in the future with the software I write, but it's
unlikely that I will switch back because I just don't personally need
their OS anymore.

If Microsoft one day releases an Operating System that has an EULA I can
agree with and doesn't have features built-in to disrupt me and cause me
problems, that doesn't monitor me, doesn't try to restrict what I do with
my computer and has a really really compelling feature that I absolutely
want to have...then maybe I'll consider it.
Hummmm...funny how some things are a tipping point for some and yet
totally irrelevant to others.
Frank
 
S

Stephan Rose

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:14:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

Hummmm...funny how some things are a tipping point for some and yet
totally irrelevant to others.
Frank

Would be boring if we were all the same wouldn't it? =)


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
 
M

Mike Glenn

why are you trying to expain things to a total moron?

he will shrug all your logic off and go along dancing on his own stupid
idiotic drum beat again....

vi-vi-vi-sta ta ta, vi vi vi sta ta ta
 
K

KickinChicken

And with the advent of that "connectivity" we get to look at stupid pics of
your woodshop that you feel some need to provide a link to.
The purpose of that site wood be....?
 
S

Swingman

"KickinChicken" slobbered in the public with message:
And with the advent of that "connectivity" we get to look at stupid pics
of your woodshop that you feel some need to provide a link to.
The purpose of that site wood be....?

In your case it proved to a jack*ss, deluded into thinking he was forced to
click through against his will, that he needs to get a grip on his impulses.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top