Windows 7... lightweight?

Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
I was wondering how lightweight windows7 was compared to XP, vista, or ubuntu. I have heard that it uses less ram and cpu than vista but XP still wins in memory.. is this true? Is anyone running the beta satisfied with it on the ONE?
 
The final build may be more lightweight but beta build 6801 was pretty much the same as Vista. A clean install produced about the same memory footprint and the same number of running processes. I played with it for a couple of days but went back to my Vista image. My guess is that Microsoft has yet to tweak the install process for Netbook class hardware. Given how much they've talked about it lately I'm guessing we won't see the improvements until the January public beta release.
 
Well, I was trying out Build 6956 in VirtualBox, and I can say that, currently, XP still beats it in regular speed. My XP virtual machine had only 256MB RAM, while my Windows 7 one had 512MB, and still, the XP seemed to run better. However, XP has been around for so many years, so it should obviously be good. I wasn't old enough to use XP when it came out, so I don't know all the quirks and whatnot that it had back in it's betas (were they even availible to the public? Probably, piracy goes back a long way :lol:). So, keep in mind that Windows 7 isn't even in beta yet, and it should be improved greatly by the time it is actually released.
 
playing a 1080P full HD movie:

XP - doesn't lag, plays smooth, ~85% CPU usage
Vista -lags every few seconds, not watchable
7 - skips every now and then, mildly annoying but watchable

in terms of memory use, windows 7 is about the same as vista, if not slightly lower

it does feel a lot faster than vista though.

edit: this is on 6801 btw, so YMMV if you're using 6956
 
Have tried it liked it(very nice looking) but went back to to Vista... will wait till final build comes out as no benifits as yet with 7..


regards
Andrew
 
Back
Top