RAM usage going UP with the more you remove?

[allisd00m]

not too long ago, I was messing around with nLite, made an install and then tested them in MS Virtual PC. when I'd test them in VPC, I was surprised how little resources you could get XP to use (was getting it down to around 40mb), but then realised that this was a virtual mchine and when I actually install it on a hard drive it would use a lot more resources. when I actually tested this, I was surprised to find out that it didn't use any more RAM than it did in VPC (around 40-50mb)

anyway, I shortly wiped that install because it was mainly just testing (it was only a rough build, I couldn;t even install live messenger without getting some errors, that's why I got rid of it)

anyway, now that I'd done enough testing and reading up on which services do what and if they are needed, OK to uninstall or just disable (before I'd just remove the oens that seemed ok (windows update) or search these forums for a simple description), I fine tuned a new install a lot more and got it pretty much perfect for me and only used 37.5-45mb ram in VPC (http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/3256/smallxpjx0.png smallest I've got). last minute earlier on, I decided to load up the last session and just switch the ryanvm update pack I was using to the latest beta, and didn't bother to test it in a VPC, assumed it would be fine

anyway, I install that and check the task manager when it boots, and it tells me it's using around 70mb, which it sometimes does on my VPC installs on first boot (after I restart and log in again it's fine) so I thought I'd just restart and it would be OK, anyway I restart and same again, around 70mb, so I put this down to possibly a problem with the update pack (afterall its only beta, plus in VPC with the previous update pack it was using half of that), so I thought I'd install the same build in VPC while editing another nlite install to re-replace the update pack with the older one

so I install the current on VPC and to my surprise, it's using only 40mb or so like it should, though it's using double on my "real life" install, so I just decided to wipe and reinstall with my "re-downgraded" install (exact same install just the latest non-beta update pack I was orignally going to use before downloading the beta pack), anyway same again... using around 65-75mb ram on boot...

now, if it hadn't of been for that time that I got an install (while just testing) to use the same amount of resources in VPC (40mb or so), I would've just put it down to this being a real life install and not a vitual install, but because of the first situation this has left me confused, because if anything the first situation was just testing stuff with nLite, but now that I've actually done a lot of research and made a "properly done" install, it seems to be using double the resources (also the items in task manager on boot (around 15 running or so) don't add up anywhere near 70mb ram)

sorry for the long explanation but anyone else experienced this, and any idea what's going on?

cheers in advance for any help

Edited February 2, 2008 by allisd00m

[spystyle]

not too long ago, I was messing around with nLite, made an install and then tested them in MS Virtual PC. when I'd test them in VPC, I was surprised how little resources you could get XP to use (was getting it down to around 40mb), but then realised that this was a virtual mchine and when I actually install it on a hard drive it would use a lot more resources. when I actually tested this, I was surprised to find out that it didn't use any more RAM than it did in VPC (around 40-50mb)

It should be "relative"

If X is faster than Y in VPC, it should be faster than Y in real life too.

If X uses 40 MB RAM in VPC, it should also use that much (or very close, depending on drivers) in real life too.

That's what I decided anyway, so I benchmarked a bunch of different OSs in VPC before installing the fastest one on a real computer.

Cheers,

Craig

[allisd00m]

thanks for the reply

that's what I assumed it would it be like (and was when I first tested it), but for my latest install it seems to be completely off

same install:

Virtual PC (installed earlier)

real life install (installed yesterday, same install just using the classic theme atm)

the pf usage in the RL install for some reason is double than it is in VPC, which I've never seen in previous installs I've made

[spystyle]

Well, if my "relative" theory is right (and it might not be), perhaps the difference between VPC and real life is caused by the difference in hardware?

Cheers,

Craig

[allisd00m]

that's def a possibilty, but what confuses me is on an install I made a few months back, it only used around 40mb, and now my "better" and "properly done" install I made recently seems to use over double the resources, that's what I can't understand... that's what lead me to believe maybe there's something that I removed that I shouldn't have and was wondering if anyone else had that problem and knew the solution

the trouble is, I could tweak my install here and there to fix it, but I'd need to install this on a RL computer everytime to test the install

Edited February 3, 2008 by allisd00m

[cluberti]

You also have to remember that you have 128MB available of "RAM" in the virtual machine and 512MB of RAM in the physical box. Are the paging file sizes the same, and can you test it in a VM with 512MB "RAM" and the same paging file (I know that requires another machine or adding RAM to that box, but it's the only way to have an apples-to-apples test).

The amount of RAM and the paging file modifies the memory manager's commit bias, so you can have 40MB of RAM used on a 128MB box, but the paging file gets committed quite a bit, whereas a 512MB box shows 80MB of RAM used, but almost nothing in the paging file.

I would suggest doing this on both your virtual and real machines, to see what amounts of "RAM" you're actually using in the VM, and in the physical machine.

[aviv00]

virtual pc is diff cos in virtual less drivers are loaded to memory