Windows 7 uses less system resources than Vista?

[Monkey_Business]

I read a rumor that Windows 7 is noticeably faster than Windows Vista because it is programmed to use less system resources, such as less CPU usage, and especially less RAM. My Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit SP2 uses a little over 1GB of RAM idling in desktop.

I haven't seen windows task manager in W7, but I heard that is uses about a quarter less RAM than Vista.

W7 is also far better programmed than Vista, and is much more stable, has less bugs, and is especially faster.

A friend of mine built a new gaming PC with W7, and it boots up in about 15-20 seconds!

Vista on my PC takes a good Two minutes to boot up entirely.

 

[Mem]

Its faster on low end PCs,personally on my PC its close to Vista x64 performance speed wise (which I had used for 2+ years before).

Win7 x64 on my PC is as stable as my old Vista x64 was ,again no major issues with either.
Ram wise my Win7 x64 is using over 1GB but you have to remember both Vista and Win7 will cache ram(read up on Superfetch etc..)unused ram is a waste they say.

Bootup can be down to number of things like software installed ,drivers etc...my Vista laptop boots up in around 20 secs so its really down to what you have installed and hardware used.
Do bear in mind any new recent OS like Win7 has its own bugs,Service pack one is due this year for Win7 so no OS is perfect.

Win7 is based on Vista but tuned better for speed on low end PCs IMHO.
Both are excellent on stability.

 

[blackangst1]

I have an e6600 @ 2.8, with 4 gigs 4-4-4-10 memory...and 7 feels about the same as Vista did to me. It boots faster, BUT! the way 7 loads the desktop, it isnt actually done loading when you get to desktop. That said, Id say overall it boots up a little faster. Sitting idle uses ~about~ the same memory (700-900MB)

 

[zerocool84]

I read a rumor that Windows 7 is noticeably faster than Windows Vista because it is programmed to use less system resources, such as less CPU usage, and especially less RAM. My Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit SP2 uses a little over 1GB of RAM idling in desktop.

I haven't seen windows task manager in W7, but I heard that is uses about a quarter less RAM than Vista.

W7 is also far better programmed than Vista, and is much more stable, has less bugs, and is especially faster.

A friend of mine built a new gaming PC with W7, and it boots up in about 15-20 seconds!

Vista on my PC takes a good Two minutes to boot up entirely.

There's a bigger problem with your computer if it's taking 2min to boot-up. W7 isn't that different from Vista and definitely not worth it if you think it's that much faster than Vista. There's been many benchmarks done and there's virtually no difference in games and loading stuff.

 

[Red Squirrel]

It is quite faster. It's still more bloated then XP, but not as bad as Vista.

I remember when I tested the vista beta and OMG it was just so slow, and ate so much ram. This was on a quad core and I gave it like 4 gigs of ram.

 

[Monkey_Business]

The only OS which can use DirectX11 is Windows 7. It does NOT work on Vista, or XP.

 

[zerocool84]

It is quite faster. It's still more bloated then XP, but not as bad as Vista.

I remember when I tested the vista beta and OMG it was just so slow, and ate so much ram. This was on a quad core and I gave it like 4 gigs of ram.

Well umm yea that's a Beta. I have W7 and Vista both on fresh installs and they use practically the same amount of ram. Also there's practically no difference in gaming either.

 

[lxskllr]

Well umm yea that's a Beta. I have W7 and Vista both on fresh installs and they use practically the same amount of ram. Also there's practically no difference in gaming either.

Yup, I benched both Vista and Win7 in VMs, and they were virtually identical. Win7 did have a faster startup, but who cares? Even using a notebook, I'm not starting more than a few times per day. My desktop never gets restarted except for updates that require it.

Edit:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=623235

 

[Mem]

It is quite faster. It's still more bloated then XP, but not as bad as Vista.

I remember when I tested the vista beta and OMG it was just so slow, and ate so much ram. This was on a quad core and I gave it like 4 gigs of ram.

You can't compare beta versions,even Win7 beta to final is like night and day in difference.

As to Win7 being bloated to XP well its not IMHO,it has more features which is to be expected on a much newer OS,I got a friend of mine( long term XP user) to try Win7 RTM on his PC and he was more then impressed on speed,looks etc....he is now a Win7 user .

 

[Scotteq]

The only OS which can use DirectX11 is Windows 7. It does NOT work on Vista, or XP.

DX11 does work on Vista, and was issued as part of an update last year.

Here's the KB articles:

32 bit
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...FamilyID=e1199d12-5b23-4769-b1e0-210ee147ce15

64 bit
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...FamilyID=e2da6ef8-92b6-4370-9e22-2c05a8c37ab0


Just run the command dxdiag from an elevated command prompt to verify.

 

[nerp]

Weird to say 7 is more 'bloated' than XP since I remember XP as chuggy as hell and watching windows redraw as the HD chatters along. In 7 and Vista, stuff just opens without the damn swapping. You guys are weirdos.

 

[Modelworks]

One thing that changed that really helped memory usage was the way the desktop is handled in win7.

In vista the desktop has two copies in ram. Everything displayed on your screen is contained in those two buffers. When you change something or move a window the window is changed in the buffer in ram and then swapped with the ram that is displaying the video so you can see the changes. If you are using a high resolution with lots of stuff going on then that tends to use up ram and resources.

In 7 the desktop has become a true compositing desktop. There is only one copy, the copy you see. Changes like opening a window are added in layers sort of like in photoshop when you set transparency on layers and can set which is over the other layers below it. There is no swapping out of buffers and no extra memory or resource usage. This is something that will not ever be in vista because it was decided that it would require an almost total rewrite of the display interface.

You can see the MS page with graphs and charts explaining it here:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/04/25/engineering-windows-7-for-graphics-performance.aspx

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

I'm liking Win7 (x64 Ultimate) so far, after a good bout of bear wrestling and puching it in the nads a few times (ClassicShell, Win7 DSFilter Tweaker, adding QuickLaunch, turning off Interactive Services Detection, hacking imageres.dll, disabling monitor blanking, etc.)

 

[pcslookout]

Best part I like about Windows Vista and Windows 7 is being able to have a video as a wallpaper with Dreamscene! Works great in Windows 7 64 bit!

 

[greyeyezz]

Vista actually runs faster than 7 on my single core. Mem usage is about the same after tweaking.