Windows 7 - task manager is horribly gimped!

[VirtualLarry]

I've noticed that even though Task Manager shows 430MB used out of 512MB, the OS acts like it's paging heavily, when switching tabs in IE, etc.

Is there memory that is allocated out of physical memory, that doesn't show up in the memory graph in Task Manager?

I know that in XP, the pages used by the OS to map VM weren't included, so it was possible to get paging/thrashing, even when the memory used didn't exceed the amount of physical RAM present in the box.

Edit: Now I see the problem. The memory usage gauge and graph is all based on physical RAM. Which is useless. Windows always seems to reserve 100MB or so of RAM as a cache, so even though the OS is paging heavily, with a VM load greater than physical RAM, it never shows it in the graph, in fact, it never even shows all of physical RAM filling up.

TOTALLY USELESS INFORMATION. Thanks MS, for screwing up the most simple and useful diagnostic tool to see if you need to install more RAM or not.

It's the dumbing down of stuff like this, and making windows say that 4GB of RAM is installed, even when the OS can only address 3.25GB, etc. that really irks me.

Edit: Even more Gimping. There's no Shutdown option in Task Manager, nor can you choose the columns of information to display on the Processes tab, like you could on XP. What a waste of bytes. "Resource Monitor" is similarly gimped, it doesn't show a total application VM usage number either.

MS REALLY wants to pull the wool over users eyes.

 

[JackMDS]

The OS has self algorithm to tune the relation between Page Memory and actual use of RAM. It does not wait for the actual available RAM to be zero before using Page Memory.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Things like showing 4GB of installed RAM when not all of it is usable, switching the task manager's memory display from commit charge to physical memory, etc., simply reflects that the fact that many Windows users aren't professional system administrators. Although the previous values may have been more accurate and/or useful to technically-savvy people, they were confusing to novices, which I'm sure is a support headache for Microsoft.

If you want more detail and accuracy than the task manager can provide, use the Performance management console.

 

[lxskllr]

If you want more detail and accuracy than the task manager can provide, use the Performance management console.

Or download the Sysinternals suite.

 

[notposting]

Processes tab, View menu, Select Columns.

 

[Meghan54]

Edit: Even more Gimping. There's no Shutdown option in Task Manager, nor can you choose the columns of information to display on the Processes tab, like you could on XP. What a waste of bytes.

As for being unable to choose the columns of info in Processes tab, look again.

But since you seem helpless, here's how to add a new column of info......

Click on the Processes tab, then click on the View button above......the third option that is in the drop down box that appears is "Select Columns". Click on that and you have as many, if not more, choices to display.

Works the same under the Networking and User tabs, too.


I see notposting beat me to it......

 

[Nothinman]

TOTALLY USELESS INFORMATION. Thanks MS, for screwing up the most simple and useful diagnostic tool to see if you need to install more RAM or not.

Memory stats are always borderline useless because of the way virtual memory works. It's very difficult or impossilble to give 100% correct statistics on memory usage. This isn't new with Win7, it's always been that way.

 

[JackMDS]

If you want more detail and accuracy than the task manager can provide, use the Performance management console.

Well said if One have professional concern One should make the afford to use professional Tools.

Example, Download this pull down the View Menu and choose select Columns. Choose the Memory Colums that are of interest to you.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well, I'm glad to see that I was wrong about not being able to select columns in Task Manager's processes tab, I guess I didn't have that tab selected when I checked for that, and they hide the menu option otherwise.

But still, I think it's a pretty valid complaint that they changed the commit charge graph to physical memory.

I thought that Win7 was about simplifying the user experience, not making it useless. It used to be so simple to just pull up Task Manager, click on the "Performance" tab, and see whether or not that graph was showing a higher number than your physical RAM, that meant that you needed to upgrade your RAM.

I think that when memory mfgs catch on to what MS has done, they will complain loudly.

 

[JackMDS]

I thought that Win7 was about simplifying the user experience

You are absolutely right.

The problem is your view of the Users. :\

90% of the users do not know, and do not care about this issue. As long as the Computer does what they need to do they are pleased.

Enthusiasts do care about it, but they are the minuscule minority, and they suppose to be sophisticated enough to figure it out.

 

[theevilsharpie]

I thought that Win7 was about simplifying the user experience, not making it useless. It used to be so simple to just pull up Task Manager, click on the "Performance" tab, and see whether or not that graph was showing a higher number than your physical RAM, that meant that you needed to upgrade your RAM.

On the contrary, showing the commit charge in terms of the commit limit was confusing for users because even heavily impacted systems would show as using only 25-50% of available "memory." By changing the graph to show available physical memory, it very clearly shows when physical memory is a bottleneck.

I think that when memory mfgs catch on to what MS has done, they will complain loudly.

Microsoft changed this with Vista, so I'm pretty sure memory manufacturers have "caught on" by now

 

[VirtualLarry]

On the contrary, showing the commit charge in terms of the commit limit was confusing for users because even heavily impacted systems would show as using only 25-50% of available "memory." By changing the graph to show available physical memory, it very clearly shows when physical memory is a bottleneck.



Microsoft changed this with Vista, so I'm pretty sure memory manufacturers have "caught on" by now

No, it doesn't. The gauge on the left in XP showed commit charge, not as a percentage, but as a raw total. It was simple, if that number was higher than installed physical RAM, then you were paging, and should upgrade the RAM.

Showing physical memory, doesn't show any sort of bottleneck. Ever. Even when memory IS the bottleneck. Try it, with a low RAM system (Win7 x64 on 512MB of RAM). The physical memory used never goes above 512-80. Because Win7 always keeps 80-100MB free for caching, it will page out apps to make room for the disk cache. Which makes it utterly useless for diagnostic purposes.

 

[theevilsharpie]

No, it doesn't. The gauge on the left in XP showed commit charge, not as a percentage, but as a raw total. It was simple, if that number was higher than installed physical RAM, then you were paging, and should upgrade the RAM.

That's not necessarily true. A system with a lot of background processes that just sit in memory may have a higher commit charge than available physical memory, but if they've been paged out, then they aren't using physical memory at all. The lack of physical memory only becomes a bottleneck when the lack of it starts impacting performance, and that will clearly be visible in the task manager. When I run my larger virtualization labs, I routinely run into a memory bottleneck, which is clearly visible by my 98% memory usage in the task manager.

Showing physical memory, doesn't show any sort of bottleneck. Ever. Even when memory IS the bottleneck. Try it, with a low RAM system (Win7 x64 on 512MB of RAM). The physical memory used never goes above 512-80. Because Win7 always keeps 80-100MB free for caching, it will page out apps to make room for the disk cache. Which makes it utterly useless for diagnostic purposes.

The minimum memory requirements for Windows 7 64-bit is 2GB of RAM. If your machine met the minimum requirements, the task manager would clearly show a physical memory bottleneck even with 100MB reserved for other uses.