Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
  1. #221
    Anyone know what the current driver support is like? Are Windows 7 drivers (mostly) adequate?

    Debating whether or not to test this now or when beta hits.
    i7-4770k - GTX 780 Ti - 16GB DDR3 Ripjaws - (2) HyperX 120s / Vertex 3 120
    ASRock Extreme3 - Sennheiser Momentums - Xonar DG - EVGA Supernova 650G - Corsair H80i

    build pics

  2. #222
    As long as it is a desktop and not a laptop you should be fine.

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by Sackman View Post
    Because - 404MB of 4GB is 10%, and 281MB is 7% of your total RAM (obvious approx'es). Because Windows 8 is not just a desktop operating system. Consider having the same OS on a tablet with 1GB or less RAM. Imagine a tablet with 1GB of RAM, this is an extra 124MB of RAM it is able to utilise.
    You are missing the point. I was simply stating that it is not really possible to tell if the figures given by the RAM monitor are accurate. The OS can claim additional RAM if its unused by applications (e.g. to cache IO, file search database, preload often-used libraries etc.) but give it free the moment you start a resource-hungry application. To be honest, this is what I expect a good OS to do. Thus, it is not a good comparison method to say: this OS uses less RAM at idle therefore its more resource-efficient. Ressource-efficiency for me is optimal usage of the present resources. So if no the application uses the RAM, I encourage the OS to use more RAM to improve my computing experience.

    A better test of OS resource-efficiency is, as I already stated, launching many resource-hungry programs and observe the computer's performance. And here is where you really start to see the difference between Unix and Windows. The Windows kernel wasn't really developed with heavy multitasking in mind. Try launching Visual Studio, Word, Excel, some DB development software, Matlab, open a dozen or two browsers windows and add some PDF files to the mix, all that while playing music and you will notice delays and heavy swapping when switching between the stuff. My point is: a better investment of time for MS would be to reduce the process/thread overhead and efficiency of resource usage in heavy multitasking environment. This is what makes the end user happy, not 100Mb less reported idle RAM usage.

  4. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by mafao View Post
    The OS can claim additional RAM if its unused by applications (e.g. to cache IO, file search database, preload often-used libraries etc.) but give it free the moment you start a resource-hungry application.
    That is correct. The OS also adapts to the amount of RAM available in th machine. If you install it on a PC with 768MB RAM it will take about 300MB in idle, while if you install it on 8GB RAM, you might see +1GB RAM in idle.
    In operating systems that don't do that, you get a heavy use of the swap file even with +8GB RAM, which reduces the performance significantly.
    Last edited by haxartus; 2011-09-20 at 06:23 AM.

  5. #225
    That doesn't make me feel any better

Posting Permissions

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