I have been looking forward to read “Windows XP vs Windows Vista” articles. Here is the first one I found. It is not in English so being translated through Bablefish’s online translation service.

Windows XP vs Windows Vista - Performance Review

I was particularly interested in the RAM usage after installation of Windows Vista and also the number of services running, right after install and without any addition of the user. Seems like:

Windows XP runs with 24 active processes taking up 223 MB of RAM and Windows Vista runs with 41 active processes taking up 436 MB of RAM. If I am doing my Maths right, hopefully I am wrong. Where 512 MB RAM was suggested for Windows XP, 1 GB suggestion is not enough for Vista.

223/512 * 100 = 43.55 % - Memory usage in Windows XP
436/1024 * 100 = 42.57 % - Memory usage in Windows Vista

This has made me think again what to get. 1 GB or 2 GB? Since in my case, 512 MB suggested for Windows XP was and is not enough with me. I don’t want same thing happening with Vista for me. The price difference between 1 GB and 2 GB memory kits is 70$ minimum.

There are two Performance features in Windows Vista, which if tackles the above problem and works efficiently. 1 GB will be more than enough… I am talking about,

Windows ReadyDrive

From WinSuperSite Vista Review:

The hybrid hard drives combine a standard hard disk with large amounts (1 GB or more) of non-volatile flash memory. This memory acts a cache of sorts, providing a number of benefits. First, the system will boot up and resume from various sleep states much more quickly, allowing users to get back to work more quickly. Because the hard drive, with all its moving parts, spins up much less frequently, you’ll experience better overall performance and better overall battery life.

Windows ReadyDrive, the hardware used for it, I have read will be available in first months of 2007 perhaps and that too mostly for Laptops. So I don’t see it helping the users soon either. Depends on the price too? and I wonder what use it will serve for desktop users with 2GB of RAM except speeding up the start-up and shut down times.

Windows ReadyBoost

From WinSuperSite Vista Review:

ReadyBoost uses spare space on USB-based storage devices like memory keys to increase the performance of your computer. It does this by caching information to the USB device, which is typically much faster than writing to the hard drive. Information cached to the device is encrypted so it can’t be read on other systems.

There are a number of caveats. Your USB device must meet certain speed characteristics or Vista will not allow it to be used in this fashion. Space that is set aside on a USB device for ReadyBoost cannot be used for other purposes, unless you reformat the device or remove it from service with the PC. And you cannot use one USB device to speed up more than one PC.

ReadyBoost seems to have the most impact on systems with less than 1 GB of RAM, which makes sense, and it clearly will benefit notebooks more than desktops, since it’s often difficult or impossible to increase the RAM in a portable machine. Microsoft recommends configuring ReadyBoost with one to three times the amount of RAM you have installed in your system. So if you have 512 MB of RAM, you should try to dedicate between 512 MB and 1.5 GB of space for ReadyBoost on a USB device.

So “the most impact” on systems with less than 1 GB of RAM? This seemed the cheapest option, incase it will have an impact even on a system with 512 MB of RAM, since the USB Data Travelers/USB Memory Sticks are very cheap. That said, you would want to get 1 GB or 2 GB of RAM for Windows Vista? I wonder if it’s possible for memory makers to have 768 MB + 768 MB = 1536 MB memory kits. The price difference then between 1 GB and 1.5 GB will end up being 30-40 $ perhaps? I am no Business degree holder. *sigh*

This had to come when I decided to go for 1 GB. :\