Vista performance

[claidheamhmor]

Give Vista 4GB of RAM and it's a lot quicker. Not as quick as XP, but quicker. There is one interesting improvement to Vista though: disk caching. The other night, I was cleaning up my hard drives; I was copying 60GB from one drive to another, while at the same time I was running 4 separate delete processes, each of several gigabytes, on the drivers. (I was using the fantastic file management app, Total Commander, to do this, BTW). As you can imagine, the drives were churning away, running at 100% utilisation. Then I noticed that Total Commander's process was using almost a gigabyte of RAM...and that despite all the disk activity, the desktop and running apps seemed perfectly responsive. I loaded GuildWars, and that was completely playable; it didn't seem like it was being impacted by all the activity.

Certainly seems like Microsoft radically improved disk-handling techniques (if you have enough RAM, at least).

Comments

[musicalchaos.livejournal.com]

Laptop or Desktop, though? I usually find laptop to have a mark-up of at least 50% over the equivalent desktop variety.

[openmindedmale.livejournal.com]

Oh, true.. desktop.

Anyway, even doubled it's still not expensive, not when one remembers how RAM prices used to be.

Now what I really want is superfast AND cheap SSD drives.. they're coming, but they're a few years off yet.

[musicalchaos.livejournal.com]

Well, not horribly expensive, but there's one more contributing factor. I'm a broke college student. *chuckles*

[openmindedmale.livejournal.com]

Heh, I know what that's like :)