Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7

Status
Not open for further replies.

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31
[citation][nom]phatbuddha79[/nom]Microsoft always touts and hypes things up before release, but rarely do they ever come through. I'll believe it when I see it.[/citation]

Maybe so, but if it is actually true, it'll be nice. Win7 is already resource-friendly and Win8 is promised to be even better. Let's see if it will be done.
 

phishy714

Distinguished
May 16, 2011
449
0
18,860
28
... and this is why "pc sales are going down the drain" even though i personally don't believe that they are necessarily. It is because the avg. user does not need any i-series cpu's, much less bulldozer amd cpu's or anything. All you need is that beat up old, 5 year old computer sitting in the cornere to be able to use Windows 8 (the latest and greatest in the eyes of the avg consumer). Why would you ever need to buy a new computer, then, if you can check your email, use facebook and watch online movies without much problem?


gg
 

COLGeek

Cybernaut
Moderator
Betas always start out this way. Wait until the "good idea fairies" get done adding all of their cool features and then measure resource requirements.

Been there, done that, all the way back to NT5/W2K and every version since then.
 

burnley14

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
682
0
18,990
3
I'm less concerned with this than I used to be, now that greater system resources are commonplace. Especially memory. Memory is so cheap now that any system can have 8GB for only $35. Based on this, why not make everything faster even if it is at the cost of memory usage? People with 3-year-old netbooks aren't going to spend the $100 to upgrade to this from XP, they would just buy a new netbook for about the same cost.
 

internetlad

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2011
1,080
0
19,310
10
[citation][nom]Phishy714[/nom]... and this is why "pc sales are going down the drain" even though i personally don't believe that they are necessarily. It is because the avg. user does not need any i-series cpu's, much less bulldozer amd cpu's or anything. All you need is that beat up old, 5 year old computer sitting in the cornere to be able to use Windows 8 (the latest and greatest in the eyes of the avg consumer). Why would you ever need to buy a new computer, then, if you can check your email, use facebook and watch online movies without much problem?gg[/citation]


Are you seriously moaning that the new OS from microsoft is TOO efficient.

Some people will find something wrong with everything.
 

phate

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
149
0
18,680
0
MS is getting more efficient and demands fewer resources with Windows 8.

Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.

WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31


I like it. And Unity can be switched off ;)

It's logical... no matter how much people flame MS, I'm sure they have enough sane people there to make a good OS (Win7 is, after all, a great one!). I just hope they don't pull a Vista on us, when they released a beta of Win7 as a full OS.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31


More PC gaming is all it takes. I hope that hardware companies will eventually realize that they'll make moar profit if they shift half of console n00bs to PC.
 

damianrobertjones

Distinguished
Aug 14, 2010
587
1
18,995
1
Test machine:
Toshiba Sat A300-177
230Gb hard drive
2Gb ram


9.08Gb - Initial used space
63 - running services
528Mb - In use

Not bad considering a bran new HP 6460b/HP 5330m/HP 8640p will ship with OVER 100 processes straight out of the box! I'd expect a tablet to kick the above 63 to near the 70 mark but of course this is the DEVELOPER PREVIEW SO ANYTHING CAN CHANGE! It's amazing how people can't seem to understand that.

Fewer resources as in memory use can also appear that way due to tweaking superfetch ("Oh no my laptop is using 2.7Gb ram and I'm worried but then again I have no idea what superfetch is" brigade would scream if they left it how it was)

P.s. In this day and age 4Gb is VERY cheap while 8Gb is hardly going to break the bank
 
G

Guest

Guest
I think already I'm getting Windows 8 fatigue after hearing so much about it. I just bought Win7 less than a year ago, so there's no way I'm forking over $100 - $200 for Windows 8, no matter how much these "amazing features" are touted on all these tech sites.
 

dickcheney

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2011
194
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]internetlad[/nom]Are you seriously moaning that the new OS from microsoft is TOO efficient.Some people will find something wrong with everything.[/citation]

Increasing resource consumption by the OS is what has driven Moore's law... I dont want to see P4s in 10 years from now.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Not to old mind you. one or the requirements is WDDM (Windows Display Driver Module) Some early DX9 chips do not conform, such as Intel GMA 900.

Win 7 will work without WDDM but you lose all the gloss like Aero, which is non essential, Windows 8 leverages the GPU in Metro to the extent of WDDM class DX9 GPU!

So don't get your hopes up for reviving that 5yr old Laptop if its running a crappy Intel GPU!
 

chechak

Distinguished
Jun 15, 2008
156
0
18,690
1
i think windows 8 has new Direct X that support newer games on pc ,for now there is few DX11 games and win8 will bring new DX ...so what will happen ?
 

phate

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
149
0
18,680
0
"Increasing resource consumption by the OS is what has driven Moore's law... I dont want to see P4s in 10 years from now."

What are you smoking and where can I get some? People care about the programs that run on TOP of the OS, not the OS itself. Especially people that are concerned about speed. The less resources the OS uses the more I can utilize for whatever I actually want to ACCOMPLISH ie gaming, folding proteins, database queries, whatever.
 

phatbuddha79

Distinguished
Aug 8, 2009
228
0
18,690
1
People have taken my comments waaay out of context. I love Windows 7 over Vista any day. I think it's great they're touting better efficiency, but this is still too early in the game to brag about it. We've seen too many promised features about past versions of Windows that do not make it into the retail product.
 

bourgeoisdude

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2005
1,216
1
19,290
1
[citation][nom]COLGeek[/nom]Betas always start out this way. Wait until the "good idea fairies" get done adding all of their cool features and then measure resource requirements. Been there, done that, all the way back to NT5/W2K and every version since then.[/citation]

Clearly you skipped Windows Vista and 7. Did you even look at the graphic above? Clearly Windows 7 with SP1 ran with fewer resources than Windows 7 preview did.
 

legacy7955

Distinguished
May 16, 2011
437
0
18,780
0
More important to me is ..Has MS improved windows update?

If so could they PLEASE stop with the service packs (which always seem to cause issues) and just implement a stream of regular updates!
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31


Umm... they DO have regular updates besides the SPs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY