ATI CCC memory usage

[sodcha0s]

I see this topic argued time and time again in multiple threads, so when I recently did a fresh install I decided to attempt to end the speculation on how much memory it actually does use. The method was simple, installed Xp Pro then patched with SP2 and took a screenie. Installed Catalyst 6.2, .net, CCC with a screenie after each, then finally took another with CCC open. The results:

XP Pro w/SP2 fresh install
after installing 6.2 drivers
after .net 1.1 install
after CCC install
with CCC open

From these shots it looks like a full install of ATI's drivers, .net and CCC use an extra 80MB of memory, going by commit charge. While not slim by any means, it's hardly the 300+MB that some people have been claiming. I'm not a fan of the CCC myself, but until ATT fully supports the x1900 series that's what I choose to use.

 

[TraumaRN]

I dont think I saw some people were suggesting 300+MB I never saw that, I saw claims for 80-100MB, and yea thats definitely a bit of a footprint especially once you get some sort of anti-virus, spyware and AIM/trillian/whatever.

It maybe enough to put your idle useage over 300+ MB.

Here is my system idling. If I shut down AIM it drops to 195-205 depending on what else has been running.

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/DeathBUA/218.JPG

 

[BFG10K]

This whole debate becomes pointless if you use ATi Tray Tools.

IIRC it only uses about 1-2 MB tops.

 

[Zebo]

.

 

[sodcha0s]

One person has been claiming it quite adamantly. And there has been a lot of false speculation on both sides about it's memory usage. The other end has CCC using only 17MB, but if you factor in the .net install which is required to run it, the real number is closer to 50MB. I'm not trying to take sides here, just showing actual numbers...

 

[sodcha0s]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
This whole debate becomes pointless if you use ATi Tray Tools.

IIRC it only uses about 1-2 MB tops.

For me the memory usage isn't a problem anyway, 80MB is only ~8% of my physical memory so I'm not getting worked up over it. However I will switch back to ATT once it fully supports the x1900's.

 

[Zebo]

. see below

 

[TraumaRN]

Well just did some quick testing, if I start everything down save my internet connection I'll idle at 174, if I kill the internet connection drivers(stupid bloated connection drivers) it drops down 152. And I have .net 1.1 installed. So apparently I've validated you sodcha0s

Anyways, to the point concerning nVidia control panel it apparently uses about 5-6mb when open, 1-2mb when closed. I'd rather have that standard instead of having to use ATT. Or maybe joe blow who doesnt know computers and only have 512MB of ram or even like myself running only 1GB. The only way I can play BF2 smoothly is the fact that I keep my background so clean, same goes for FEAR, because I dont have the money for 2GB ATM.

 

[Zebo]

Arrr I made a mistake I found my old rant thread a little closer in time to the actual occurance - And I had bloated XP at the time.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...hreadid=1735106&enterthread=y&arctab=y

120MB delta is what ATI needs to run.

So while not super bloat it's still hellla bloated compared to nV

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: sodcha0s
One person has been claiming it quite adamantly. And there has been a lot of false speculation on both sides about it's memory usage. The other end has CCC using only 17MB, but if you factor in the .net install which is required to run it, the real number is closer to 50MB. I'm not trying to take sides here, just showing actual numbers...

The 17MB came from the actual memory used, not the commit charge. Commit charge counts VM which is the space allocated on the HD and reserved by the memory for usage. So it really depends on what you count, the actual memory usage (which IMO is all that matters) or VM + actual usage. Like others have pointed out though, this argument is pointless now that ATT works with X1900 (only the OC portion doesn't work).