Lost Data Recovery ?????? CM

[RedBackman]

26 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

I agree with that, but the western state of mind is to waste resources and to oversize everything

 

ridiculous,

Modern OS ram usage doesn't exactly fall under either of those concepts though. Really the only superfluous part is animations/UI design - but those are relatively low overhead and designed at making things more visually appealing for users. Everything else is designed at increasing speed which is a functional use. There is always this misconception that an OS using more ram is a bad thing but only using 2 GB of 32 GB would be the real waste - like buying a sports car only to drive 10 mph on the highway. Since modern OS dynamically manage memory and hand it off to the processes you want to run there isn't much waste.

 

I agree with fdsa because their specific situation running a vm for just one lighter program doesn't really need the increased overhead but daily driving Windows 7 over 11 on a modern computer just because it uses less ram would be idiotic.

[fdsa]

3 hours ago, KannikaP said:

Is there not an option in those programmes to save files in Microsoft Office format, eg docx etc.

there is, but when you open these LibreOffice-generated .docx files in the Microsoft Office you find out that the document is broken and have to fix it again. So I've decided that it's easier to just use the Microsoft Office.

[fdsa]

1 hour ago, RedBackman said:

Modern OS ram usage doesn't exactly fall under either of those concepts though. Really the only superfluous part is animations/UI design - but those are relatively low overhead and designed at making things more visually appealing for users. Everything else is designed at increasing speed which is a functional use. There is always this misconception that an OS using more ram is a bad thing but only using 2 GB of 32 GB would be the real waste - like buying a sports car only to drive 10 mph on the highway. Since modern OS dynamically manage memory and hand it off to the processes you want to run there isn't much waste.

 

I agree with fdsa because their specific situation running a vm for just one lighter program doesn't really need the increased overhead but daily driving Windows 7 over 11 on a modern computer just because it uses less ram would be idiotic.

 

[KannikaP]

2 minutes ago, fdsa said:

 

I dont know what all these figures mean, but if it takes a couple of minutes more to boot up, or do some operation, I have plenty of milliseconds available in my life!   555

[RedBackman]

15 hours ago, KannikaP said:

I dont know what all these figures mean, but if it takes a couple of minutes more to boot up, or do some operation, I have plenty of milliseconds available in my life!   555

Most of them are not significant differences. The only notable differences are 3dmark sm2.0/3.0 and CrystalDisk 4k write speed. The sm2.0/3.0 difference could easily just be a driver optimization issue because the 560 ti was already a 4 year old card when Windows 10 first released and certainly doesn't get much optimization at this point. You can see on the Furmark and Valley test the gpu runs pretty much the same on each OS. For the SSD benchmarks CrystalDisk 4k write speeds don't match the AS SSD either which shows how finicky this sort of thing can be. Again low ram could be the bottleneck but it would need more tests and tweaking to really determine what's happening.

 

From my experience with more recent hardware I get slightly better speeds benchmarking on Windows 10/11 but usually the OS doesn't make a big speed difference either way as long as both have decent driver support - which makes sense because the hardware is going to be the biggest bottleneck unless the OS is really getting in the way. The biggest differences come in things that Windows 7 just doesn't really do: like DX12 support, security updates now that it's end of life, intel 12th gen and beyond processor architecture isn't going to work well, etc.

 

[GrandPapillon]

23 hours ago, RedBackman said:

There is always this misconception that an OS using more ram is a bad thing but only using 2 GB of 32 GB would be the real waste

the only reason that OEMs put so much RAM is for pure commercial reasons, nothing to do with needed specs and engineering. So encouraging waste to justify a commercial reason is not good for software efficiency, which should be the main concern IMO. Smaller RAM footprint, better performance.

[GrandPapillon]

23 hours ago, RedBackman said:

Really the only superfluous part is animations/UI design - but those are relatively low overhead and designed at making things more visually appealing for users

actually it's the other way around, core OS ops usually don't take much resources (though Windows tend to make a simple OS task even more complicated LOL)

 

it's the UI space that's taking a lot of resources, so much now, that your onboard GPU is needed to run a simple browser so that the CPU can run other valuable OS things. The UI and UX is the resource hog.

 

My Windows XP feels to run much faster than my current Win10 with 4 core and a GPU ????

 

Same with my Windows 2000, feels like lightning fast ????