On 2/19/2011 6:13 PM Arfa Daily spake thus:
Meaning no disrespect here, but are you sure it's *memory* that's getting depleted here? I've got Win2K, and keep the Task Manager on my taskbar. It indicates CPU usage %, not memory, at least if you're talking about the visible indicator it shows onscreen. (Of course, it also shows memory usage for each task as well as CPU usage.)
ing
s lro.
e,
at
i wher
the
to
ee,
ion
You would think the biggest bottle-neck would be your ram at 160Mhz? (166 for DDR single-channel). You would run great using XP or Win2K.
position
and
I've never had major problems with Windows, either -- and a late friend of mine told me how the Macintosh OS simply fell apart on his machine and required re-installation. * But...
Microsoft has never done enough to assure that third-party Windows applications are reliable and compatible. Worse, Microsoft is in the process of destroying its own applications, by letting the programmers design them -- a very, very, very bad idea. (I'd heard this rumor for some time, and it was confirmed in a magazine article about Ray Ozzie, whom Microsoft hired a few years ago to fix things up. Steve Ballmer has apparently blocked most of his attempts to "do things right".)
Microsoft's fundamental problem is that it has never understood that the interaction between the user and the operating system (or applications) is /the/ most-important thing.
I have no intention of ever switching to the Macintosh, if only because Apple is even worse than Microsoft -- Apple lies through its teeth.
What do you consider fancy? I use Cinelerra a non-linear video editing suite that I consider as fancy and powerful as Adobie Premier, Sony Vegas, or Final Cut.
By "fancy" most people mean, you're using software they've seen on sale at Staples or Best Buy.
Jeff
Can't argue with that. I'd consider Photoshop or Ventura Publisher to be "fancy" software.
160MHz would make it DDR2-667Mhz or PC-5300 memory. With 64 bit memory transfers (normal for a 64 bit OS and an AMD X2 processor), the transfer rate is: xfer rate = clock rate * bus multiplier * DDR doubler * 64 bits = 160 Mhz * 2 * 2 * 64 = 5120 MBytes/sec Methinks that's fast enough for most applications.
=A0 * =A0 2 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 * 64
I am NO expert, but it appears you are just plugging numbers where you want. He has DDR single-channel. Clock speed multipliers raise by increments of 33...so how can 160 be considered valid?
Well, I'll admit that I'm making a substantial number of guesses due to the usual lack of supplied details.
The 160Mhz memory clock is the real clue as DDR-333 is 166MHz while DDR2-667 (PC2-5300) is 160MHz. You had it backwards (but I didn't initially notice).
Whether the memory is slow or fast doesn't matter. The problem is that the operating system is showing a substantial memory leak, and exhibiting a corresponding slow down. Neither memory configuration should have such a slow down.
Yes, I'm quite sure that it's memory. If you are not familiar with Win 7, there are desktop 'widgets' available, one of which is a pair of little graphic 'speedometers' for want of a better description, the larger of which indicates CPU capacity percentage, and the smaller of which indicates percentage of physical memory in use. Aside from this, I think I said elsewhere in the thread that I have tried various memory analyser and cleaner utilities, and the current one I've been trying out, also has a display to indicate how much memory is in use, and if I have that one up with the Windows widget, they agree exactly.
Arfa
"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...
I was looking again at what you were saying in one of your other replies, about how fast the memory is filling up for it to go from 35% to 90% in 3 days or so, but I think that I may have given the wrong impression there. It doesn't just do it on its own. If I restart it right now, it will come back with around 35% of memory in use, for the tasks that run all the time on the machine. If I just leave it at that, and go to bed, when I get up in the morning, it will still be at 35%. As it will at lunchtime, if I still do nothing. It is the action of using the machine that causes the memory to start to fill up. I use email a lot, but T-Bird is left running all the time, so I guess it's not actually anything to do with that. I use Explorer a lot to retrieve files on the machine, and Internet Explorer 8 for web browsing. I use Windows Live Mail for newsgroup handling, and Acrobat and latterly PDF-Viewer (although the problem was there before I even got that program) for viewing pdf schematic files. I suppose that I need to look carefully at what amount of memory is in use before I start a particular task, and then recheck after I close it back down, although I am sure that in general, I have actually done this, and seen that it never seems to go back down to quite what it was, before whatever task was started up, which is why I felt that it was an operating system thing in that it wasn't totally removing everything from memory that was associated with that task, after I close it down. As to the memory type, PC components are a mystery to me. I am merely reporting here, what the system reports to me as to the type and speed that's in there.
Arfa
It
ck
the
er
t t hk,
to
ype
Possibly, you could download and run an analyzer and let us know CPU and memory type, etc.
Most linux distributions come with The Gimp and Open Office. The Gimp for my needs is as good as any build of Photoshop I've ever used. And probably could be used commercially. Open Office Works as well as the good old offices before Microsoft went crazy. I'd say it compares to Office 2000/XP. And comes with all your needs. I use Evolution for email, a perfect GNU replication of M$ Outlook for my needs. All this is no cost. Not even the OS. I haven't booted into W7 on this dual boot PC for a month. Here is a snapshot of my 3D Cube desktop. The switch is on a cube that reduces back into the switcher image them rotates on 3 axis. Running on desktop #1 is Cinelerra.
I'll give Linux a look when I have the money for my next computer.
The problem is that I still use Office 2000 (I use Word every day, and love it), and there's the remote possibility I might need Ventura again. Without going into the excruciating details, Ventura is one of the great applications. It takes a week or so to get familiar with, but is /extremely/ easy to use. It's a classic example of why "good" software often has a shallow learning curve.
In article , Meat Plow writes
I'd put good money on it being Firefox. Seems to gobble up memory and not release it on exit.
In article , Jeff Liebermann writes
*coff*Absolutely.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required