Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 43 of 43

Thread: Standardized Credits

  1. #41
    Nuadormrac
    Guest

    Re: Standardized Credits

    Yeah, obviously... The main thing for me though was wanting to use an x64 browser rather then an x86... True, it might not use the whole lot of RAM (at least a web page shouldn't), but I'm not sure if they ever did solve that slow memory leak problem with x86-32 software in Windows 7 yet, or not... Read about that one a fair bit ago, so did try to move apps over to try to avoid that one....

    Well, and it can make a slight perf difference, not that there's really much to viewing most web pages, unless one's watching video on it or something. In the WoW beta for instance, and have noticed that the frame rates and all does seem a bit higher on the x64 variant of it. Course raiding is far more instense then web browsing though, for obvious reasons. The memory leak, never did hear if that ever got fixed or not....
    Last edited by Nuadormrac; 08-22-12 at 04:35 PM.

  2. #42
    Past Administrator
    Fire$torm's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 13th, 2010
    Location
    In the Big City
    Posts
    7,938

    Re: Standardized Credits

    Actually every version of Windows to date has had poor to mediocre memory management. Part of the reason for that is the backwards compatibility M$ has maintained between successive versions of the OS. The two worst IIRC were WinXP and Millennium Edition.


    Future Maker? Teensy 3.6

  3. #43
    Nuadormrac
    Guest

    Re: Standardized Credits

    It's funny to see XP on the same list as winME... Often one sees Vista there... ME was of course so bad (was an MSDN subscriber at the time), many fellow MSDN subscribers swore off ever loading winME onto their development machines, and had pretty much only bad things to say about it on the MSDN forums. tbh, I remember running betas that had less issue then ME, which umm yes, I did see in RC1.

    But yeah, Windows does have some issues; security is one where they have been very much exposed (no pun intended), in part because of security vulnerabilities that has tended to exist in different versions of Windows, and in part because, due to it's popularity there is more payoff for black hatters (and the unfortunate script kiddies as well) to focus some effort in exploiting it.

    I'm not sure if I could find that article again, it was long ago. But from it, it sounded like win64 software run under win7 x64 wasn't seeing the same leak as x86 under win64... It's less of an issue if one reboots quite frequently, though with some projects (evo under Yoyo being one noteable exception), the lack of check pointing can mean that if one shuts down, rather then hibernates, one can end up losing a lot of work.... Evo, which doesn't always end at 100%, can also crunch for a half a day or more, even on an i7...

    hehe, other then looking on it, on a dual boot, I skipped winME (though did keep XP rather then going to Vista, with the exception of the beta I did look at) having gone to 7. For me, I went from win95 (pre-SE, yuck for many reasons), to 98, to dual booting NT 4.0 (which became my main OS then) with 98 for the software that woudn't run on NT, to win2k... winME arguably sucked big, fat, hairy, donkey balls

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •