Does anybody know how to find out how much RAM is on your computer running windows vista? I need to know for some other stuff. Thanks.
Windows Vista Memory
| aceventura2225 wrote: |
| Does anybody know how to find out how much RAM is on your computer running windows vista? I need to know for some other stuff. Thanks. |
Just go to the task manager
(type ctrl-alt-del, and choose "Task Manager")
Then go to the tab "Performance"
On the left you see the Memory usage, this represents the RAM your computer is using.
| tdfranc wrote: | ||
Just go to the task manager (type ctrl-alt-del, and choose "Task Manager") Then go to the tab "Performance" On the left you see the Memory usage, this represents the RAM your computer is using. |
Follow what tdfranc said and click on Resource Monitor it will show you more details about how much memory is being used. If you want to find out how much RAM is on your computer then click on the Start Icon and right click "Computer" and go to properties. In the pop up you will see how much Memory (RAM) that you computer has.
Shift+Ctrl+Esc that gives Task Menager 
find gadget call multi meter or something like that, it will show you the cpu process and the ram usage. i use it for monitoring my software usage. i use to be multitasking. so far, it already be one of my most important tool.
I would guess at least 265 MB, but Vista doesn't take up that much resources where only REALLY GOOD computers need it.
I've seen computers that suck running vista =p
I've seen computers that suck running vista =p
| Arty wrote: |
| I would guess at least 265 MB, but Vista doesn't take up that much resources where only REALLY GOOD computers need it.
I've seen computers that suck running vista =p |
Not to be mean, but you're way off. Vista is the total opposite. It's a freaking resource hogger. They say it requires at least 512 MB of ram, but you can barely run it with 1.5 GB. My friend has 3 GB of RAM and it still lags.
Whatever you do, don't get Vista if you can.
| jackill wrote: |
| Shift+Ctrl+Esc that gives Task Menager Wink |
That's one way, and thank you for showing me that. CTRL + ALT + DEL works as well.
I got vista to run down with only 400M before it ate about 800M, way to much if you'd ask me
| Diablosblizz wrote: | ||
Not to be mean, but you're way off. Vista is the total opposite. It's a freaking resource hogger. They say it requires at least 512 MB of ram, but you can barely run it with 1.5 GB. My friend has 3 GB of RAM and it still lags. Whatever you do, don't get Vista if you can. |
Yep, you need what would otherwise be excessive amounts of RAM for other OSes to run Vista without going absolutely insane due to lag/bad performance. My own Windows system (supposedly designed to be used with Vista) came with 1Gb of RAM and it could barely handle the memory requirements of the OS without any user software running... actually run an application and it was HELL. I ended up installing XP after about 5-6 months of Vista aggrevation... unfortunately, the XP drivers for the hardware are either difficult to find or don't exist in some cases, so XP performance is hindered a little too.
After vista came out saw the requirements for it and realized i would need a way better computer if now a whole new computer. So i stuck with XP for afew months but with everything switching over to vista i finally made the jump to linux. I strongly recommend this to any user facing windows problems.
Vista memory management is much different from previous versions of Windows.
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html
and
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/features/foreveryone/performance.mspx
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000688.html
| Quote: |
| This isn't a new concept, of course. But Vista treats system memory like a cache much more aggressively and effectively than any other version of Windows. As alluded to in the above lunch anecdote-- and as you can see from the Task Manager screenshot above-- Windows XP has no qualms whatsoever about leaving upwards of a gigabyte of system memory empty. From a caching perspective, this is unfathomable. Vista tries its damndest to fill that empty system memory cache as soon as it can. |
and
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/features/foreveryone/performance.mspx
| Quote: |
| Windows SuperFetch prioritizes the programs you're currently using over background tasks and adapts to the way you work by tracking the programs you use most often and preloading these into memory |
I believe (not 100% sure) Vista also lists the amount of memory used to cache stuff.
Even without the cache it still uses a lot.
Even without the cache it still uses a lot.
| Flarkis wrote: |
| After vista came out saw the requirements for it and realized i would need a way better computer if now a whole new computer. So i stuck with XP for afew months but with everything switching over to vista i finally made the jump to linux. I strongly recommend this to any user facing windows problems. |
Me too! Well sorta. My laptop came with Windows Vista, I stuck XP on in dual-boot and gave up on Vista pretty soon after getting it. But... KDE looked shiny, so I downloaded Kubuntu. It's a bit bloaty, but nothing like as bad as Vista or XP. I've stuck with KDE ever since - the only thing that's not working is my microphone, everything else I can do just as well (often better) on Linux to how I would do it on Windows. Plus, there's all the neat server stuff you can do - I've been using it as a very effective platform for numerous development projects, and it's been so much easier to how I used to use Windows to do the same thing. So much easier.
Also, Kate >> Notepad. In fact, even most of the command-line editors > Notepad (with the possible exception of VI, but that's just really stripped down so it's excused).
And Wine > Windows.
| Fire Boar wrote: |
| In fact, even most of the command-line editors > Notepad (with the possible exception of VI, but that's just really stripped down so it's excused) |
What? VI/VIM are one of the most powerful editors! Have you seen o'Reilly books about them? They ARE huge. But this is some kind of offtop
I hate Vista, have used one on friend's computer and... Not anymore! Too slow, too big, too fancy... XP SP2 with some updates handles all my tasks well...
... but still looking with jealous on MacBooks...
Not many will agree, but Vista does indeed perform better than XP on newer hardware.
Look at the PassMark results here.
p.s. - The most amazing thing is that the score actually drops with each service pack, for all operating systems.
Look at the PassMark results here.
p.s. - The most amazing thing is that the score actually drops with each service pack, for all operating systems.
| Fire Boar wrote: |
|
Also, Kate >> Notepad. In fact, even most of the command-line editors > Notepad (with the possible exception of VI, but that's just really stripped down so it's excused). And Wine > Windows. |
I found leafpad to be an almost identical copy of windows notepad for linux
... not tried kate tho| jackill wrote: |
| Shift+Ctrl+Esc that gives Task Menager |
Thanks I did not used that short cut key earlier. Its good to know
 |