extremely high ram usage >1gb!

Percy1983

It will be the superfetch in vista, it basically loads frequently used programs into your ram, so when you do use them its quicker. The more ram you have the more it will do this.

Its actually a good thing this its using up more ram, by all means if you open a program which demands all your ram it will quickly forget what it has in superfetch.

Be happy your ram is actually getting used to its potential.

[Deleted User]

Percy1983 wrote: »

It will be the superfetch in vista, it basically loads frequently used programs into your ram, so when you do use them its quicker. The more ram you have the more it will do this.

Its actually a good thing this its using up more ram, by all means if you open a program which demands all your ram it will quickly forget what it has in superfetch.

Be happy your ram is actually getting used to its potential.

The OP has said it's Windows XP, which doesn't have Superfetch as a feature.

OP, is it causing any problems aside from concerning you? 9 tabs is above the normal to have open all at once, although not uncommon. Any browser is going to use significant amounts of RAM with large numbers of tabs open (depending on the content of the pages).

I'm not sure there's a problem. You've put more RAM in and it's being used, which is the result you want.

Percy1983

There is still the prefetch in XP, not as effective as vista but it should still use some ram, any other programs opening on startup? (iplayer, file sharing etc)

DatabaseError

Just had a quick look - firefox (in 7 beta) using around 400mb
...but that's for 2 instances
..first one running 3 open tabs, a few greasemonkey scripts and imacros scripts on the open tabs (very, very busy )
..second with just 11 open tabs (my 'homepages').

Exactly the same attitude as Rik - I bought RAM to use it..not (just) to look pretty in my machine.

posted_2

A browser using 600MB (if that is a true figure) is not efficient use of memory, it uses 15 on mine when first opened, 600 is more than most XP machines came with in the first place.

[Deleted User]

Percy1983 wrote: »

There is still the prefetch in XP, not as effective as vista but it should still use some ram, any other programs opening on startup? (iplayer, file sharing etc)

I'd expect any overheads from the processes of Prefetch to be negligible in relation to the overall RAM installed as it doesn't operate in a comparable way to Superfetch. Superfetch preloads application data to RAM which is much faster than the speed of anything HDD based method, whereas Prefetch will over time build up records of what files are used with your most commonly used applications and processes and keep this information on hand for future executions, then with Task Scheduler move them so they be in line on the hard drive to improve general responsiveness when they are executed. Similar overall aims, but they do differ in execution.

theartfullodger

I'm running Linux(Ubuntu 9.04) with firefox - 4 sessions

- using 303Mb of 2Gb..

Heh ho.. Windoze....


Cheers!

Lodger

[Deleted User]

theartfullodger wrote: »

I'm running Linux(Ubuntu 9.04) with firefox - 4 sessions

- using 303Mb of 2Gb..

Heh ho.. Windoze....


Cheers!

Lodger

With what I'm doing at the moment, I'm only using just over 2% more of my RAM than you are and I've got a fair few things open. Swings and roundabouts..

theartfullodger

Now Vista Home Prem, same HW, IE, 4 sessions (same sessions) 1.15Gb...

Hmmmnn... very interesting (haven't looked at such things for years).

My perception is that the Windoze/IE is anyway (for some time, consistently, noticeably but not outstandingly) slower, more sluggish...

He ho, you pays your money (or not in Linux's case..) and you make's your choice...

Cheers!

Lodger