Jump to content

Vista running on 220mb of ram.


raymerjacque

Recommended Posts

I installed vista through VMWare after customising the disc with vlite.

It is ultimate version and i removed none of the functionality at all, not even the games or even the windows mail.

here i have 2 screenshots of the task manager. first one of vista after installation.

Vista :

--------

vistabk9.jpg

second i have one of xp, take into consideration that xp has a few items running in background, but they amount exactly to 158.709mb. and even if you subtract that total from memory in the pic you still get 305.291mb usage.

XP :

-----

xpxm9.jpg

my point is that even in vlite beta version i was able to make vista run at basicly same if not faster speed to windows xp .... looking forward to release of next version :)

i have uploaded my preset, you can just remove the drivers from the preset.

vista.exe

Edited by raymerjacque
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I am a complete noob at this and very excited to try vlite for myself. I would like to know what you removed to make your ram so low, or is that included in your preset? If so, can you tell me how to add your preset to vlite or is there a place I missed that would help me?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, i did not want to remove any functionality from vista since my pc is on a network and i use it for almost everything, i also have a printer and scanner and i make use of alot of third party items such as usb drives, cellphones etc ...

the main thing that i removed that made the biggest difference was "super fetch" feature, basicly superfetch function makes use of availible ram to speed up applications.

in other words, if you have 1gb memory it will take 300 - 400mb of unused ram and use it to store all your most commonly used applications, so everytime you open an application it open really, really fast. while it is a nice feature to have it also has a MAJOR drawback. once superfetch stores applications in that extra section of ram, that ram is used and you cannot access it, so when you want to play a game or something that requires alot of ram, the game will run very slow because you have "x" ammount of ram where you would normally have "y" ammount of ram availible.

but i removed alot of other things as well, but superfetch made the biggest difference. to import my preset simply run the file an extract it to it's default path, then look at the menu on the top left of vlite program, there is an import feature there.

good luck...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in other words, if you have 1gb memory it will take 300 - 400mb of unused ram and use it to store all your most commonly used applications, so everytime you open an application it open really, really fast. while it is a nice feature to have it also has a MAJOR drawback. once superfetch stores applications in that extra section of ram, that ram is used and you cannot access it, so when you want to play a game or something that requires alot of ram, the game will run very slow because you have "x" ammount of ram where you would normally have "y" ammount of ram availible.

bulls***! it's called a cache and the memory can be freed whenever an app requires it.. it has another drawback however - extreme hard disk activity during the cache population process.. and if you're operating in an extreme environment (constantly dealing - opening and closing - with lots of heavy apps) you may find out that the population process may never stop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes if you using your pc for work purposes where you open and close office and other apps 2000 times a day then prefetch is a good thing, but for the home user that uses office once every two weeks and mostly plays games prefetch can be a b!tch. the home user is mostly using random programs, and every bit of memory and cache that i can spare helps, with prefetch switched off multi tasking and gaming is visibly faster than having prefetch switched on. i have tested this already.

i left ready boost in the preset because readyboost is a good thing and i have not seen any drawbacks or reason to remove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

seriously a clean xp will use a lot less ram than vista

39 processes!

read my post again. i already said that i have applications running in the background in xp.

among them are nod32, netchat etc ... i also stated that my pc is on a network and i said that all the extras equal to around 150mb of ram, so minus 150mb from the total in the picture and you get a rough idea of how much ram xp is using on my system.

by default windows vista uses around 450mb of ram on my system after install with no apps running ( around +/- 100mb more than xp ) . i have managed to bring it down from 450mb to 220mb without removing any functionality that i normaly would use.

Edited by raymerjacque
Link to comment
Share on other sites

all of the above is theory based so far, i have only tested it inside VMware, i will install vista within the next 2 hours or so on my system ( have to wait for connected users to get of the internet ) and then i will post stats and pics of vista running on my pc with the same programs running in background and then a descent comparison can be made between xp and vista.

my aim was not to get vista running faster than xp. my aim was to get it more or less to run at the same speed and to minimize the slowness you experience with multi tasking in vista.

the one major drawback that p!sses me off about vista is that fullscreen video is not supported by nvidia yet, ATI fully supports this function and for that reason i will never in my life ever buy a nvidia card again. with nvidia there are allways issues, allways have to get latest patch for everything you want to do. my other box with ati is using the same drivers it did a year ago and has no problems what soever.

i will be trying the new nvidia drivers for vista tonight, so hope fullscreen works now ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awsome, below is the screenshot of my vista running at almost same speed as my xp ran. and i have the same programs running in background as i did in xp ( nod32, deamon tools, netchat, internet etc ... )

windowsvistatj0.jpg

XP - 464mb of ram.

Vista - 476mb of ram.

That is only 8mb difference between the 2.

very nice :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok now this is just plain weird. i have now done the windows updates, i changed nothing else, just the updates and vista is now using less ram than before with the same applications open. i do notice it has 39 processes instead of 40, but the updates must have disabled 1 or maybe the extra process was a program updating in the background ...

either way my vista is now using only 402mb of ram, and that is with the Aero theme enabled with full glass effects. that is less ram than xp was using .....

here is a pic :

----------------

windowsvista2ky6.jpg

So i recommend you guys do the vista updates after installation, i saw among the updates there was compatibility updates among others.

my vista is now using 62mb less ram than xp did, sweeeeet :thumbup

Ah, i forgot to mention, the new nvidia drivers still don't support fullscreen video on tv out :(

i can use independant monitor configuration and open a movie on my tv while able to work on my monitor, but there is conflicts with real player, so that puts me back to square one since i use realplayer for south park :(

Bad nvidia, very bad nvidia !!! :realmad::angry:

Edited by raymerjacque
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread desperately needs a screenshot of a lightweight XP. XP on my old laptop uses 37MB RAM at the desktop. As a more apples-to-apples comparison, my desktop's XP sits on 100MB RAM at the desktop, with start-up applications like e-mail, firewall, d-tools running.

post-129079-1173715568_thumb.png

200MB is a nice achievement for Vista. Did you disable most of the Services?

However, to claim that XP is heavier than Vista is just silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, you not understanding me here.

my pc is on a network, i have firewall programs, antivirus, deamon tools, network tools and printers, netchat, media sharing tools, internet connection sharing etc .. ( all these are running on my machine ), not to mention people accessing my box 24/7.

i cannot cut down on half the services most people can because i will screw up all the features i use. i need most of those services, so maybe you can disable everything and run xp on 37mb of ram, but i can't.

XP uses almost 500mb of ram on my box with all these applications running, now i got vista to use less ram running all the same applications. if you wish to disable services go ahead, you can't do it in vlite at this stage anyway, you gotta do it manually after installation, so either way my preset is still pretty darn good as it does not affect services.

i have achieved my goal so far with vista, i can't wait for the new vlite version so i can maybe tweak it some more tho .. but for now my goal has been met.

220mb is what vista uses with all aplications switched off and just internet connection sharing switched on. once i put all my apps on it goes to 402mb, but in xp it uses 464mb. xp uses 62mb of ram more than my vista at this stage.

Edited by raymerjacque
Link to comment
Share on other sites

; vLite preset file

[Information]
Version = 0.9 beta on 2.0.50727.42 Microsoft Windows NT 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2
Target = Windows Vista (vLite) ULTIMATE 32bit 6.0.6000.16386

[Components]
;# Games #
Premium Inbox Games

[Options]
User Account Control (UAC) = Disabled
Force Glass Effect = Yes
Hibernation = Off

[Protection]

[Drivers]

U remove only games? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...