Just wanted to ask something from other poser users... i am considering buying a new laptop that has 4 gigs of RAM, a dual core processor, the works.... BUT comes with Vista 64-bit.... i loathe Vista, as soon as my last computer (a desktop with only 2 gigs of ram) was delivered with it, i formated the harddrive right away and installed windows xp sp3 right away, no issues at all..

Therefore, my plan about this laptop would be to just wipe out Vista again and install xp sp3 on it... but, can sp3 understand 4 gigs of ram?? and is it possible that some of the drivers of the laptop won't be compatible with XP?? and the whole 64-bit system won't ruin something, as i'd be installing XP 32-bit (i dont have the 64-bit version)... ??

any experience about this anyone may have had, i'd appreciate it to read about it... thanks in advance.

Attached Link: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

but this is not 100% reliable!..... for example it won't work with my current Nivida drivers...

About drivers, unless your particular model has an option for XP32, you will have to find generic drivers for everything, which may or may not always be available. Many brands use customized stuff and you can only get drivers from the brand's own website/support, where they will refuse to support you if you change the OS (they may even invalidate your warranty altogether) So do extensive googling on the laptop before you buy it.

As for XP 32, you wont be able to use more then about 3GB RAM in any single app. Many apps wont see beyond 2GB. Recent versions of Poser will use ~3GB but become very unstable over 2GB.

Personally i would give Vista 64 a chance. On 4GB RAM and with a fairly recent laptop it runs fast and smooth. The security things mostly go away after you finish installing all your stuff and then only popup when you're trying to do something dangerous, which is not a bad idea. You can also disable them if you really hate them. Poser will also be able to use all 4GB and run more stable.

You will be better off with Vista 64 bit OS. You can turn off some of the Vista bells and whistles.  

hmmm.. alright, you guys got me convinced... it will probably be faster and easier to just deal with Vista-64, than uninstalling it and then cope with all the doo-dahs of installing XP and trying to make sure everything works...

one more newbie-to-vista question, though... is Poser 6 (the one i have) gonna be reliable on it? pretty much, any software that can be installed on XP, can also be installed on Vista, no probs? Just wanting to make sure... thanks already x the guidance....

Some individuals have been running Poser with the Windows 7 beta without any problems.  I am putting this out there because Windows 7 will be launching next week.

I can't comment about poser 6 as i never tried it on Vista.

As for the rest, main problems will be with older games, some drivers (esp printer/scanner ones) and some sound apps cause those are areas that have changed quite a bit from XP to Vista. You will also probably need updated versions of any antivirus, firewall, registry tweakers etc you use cause XP ones will usually not run in Vista.

I run Poser 6, 7 and 8 on Vista Ultimate 64, plus Vue 6 and 7 infinite, plus Photoshop CS3 and all of them work without any problems whatsoever and have done since day 1 with Vista.
Personally I wouldn't ever go back to XP.

Vista is ok to use BUT you should check out www.blackviper.com/ following the "Safe" advice will speed up Vista & make it run more stable than it will out of the box. I've used the guide on that site for every version of Windows & never run into any problems sticking to the Safe path.

Ps disable Aero & go with the XP look as it runs faster.

as an heads up to all, a friend of mine has a Centrino CPU powered laptop/notebook, and to her cost found that trying the /3GB switch borks the whole boot up sequence in XP 32bit.
was informed by an IT tech co-worker that the Centrino series will not work properly if made 'large address' aware in a 32bit OS

I do see a lot of misinformation here, I'll try to correct most of it.

First of all, for XP 32 the 3GB /Large switch mentioned is very wrong information, that is for XP Pro, not XP32. If you have WinXP 32 SP3 and you have a new laptop with 4Gb, XP32 SP3 will see and use 3.5Gb of that. Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32! It's for XP64 only!

Secondly your not better off with Vista 64 on a 64 bit laptop, actually not at all. First of all, even though you have 0.5 Gb more RAM available, that (and more) will be swallowed up by Vista itself. With Vista 64 and 4GB RAM you will have less then 3GB available, unless you tweak Vista to the extreme, With XP32 you will have a little more then 3GB available.

Thirdly, speed. XP by far is faster then Vista will ever be.

Fourthly, even though you will still have the 2Gb per application limit in XP32, for Poser that is not a problem at all. Poser can render in a seperate process, in theory freeing up 2GB for Poser and 2GB for FireFly. Rendering will be assigned it's own memory. Because of this and due to you only having 4GB of RAM, Vista64 will offer you absolutely no advantage at all.

I'll explain. Vista gives the whole full 3GB to Poser (not completely since there's no 3GB left, but makes things easy to explain). If your scene is using 512MB of RAM, you have 2.5GB left for rendering. But..... you will never need that, most likely only 1-1.5Gb. If your scene is 1GB, you will have 2GB left for rendering and probably you need it. If your scene is 2Gb, you only have 1Gb left to render and most likely Poser will crash.

Now to XP32. XP  gives the 2 maximum 2GB to Poser. If your scene is using 512MB of RAM, you have 2GB left for rendering in a seperate process (note the difference). But..... you will never need that, most likely only 1-1.5Gb. If your scene is 1GB, you will have 2GB left for rendering and probably you need it. If your scene is 2Gb, you only have 1Gb left to render and most likely the FireFly engine will crash, leaving Poser running, so you can still save a scene.

You can also assign rendering in a seperate process in Vista, but nothing much will change.

The thing is the 4GB of system ram. If that's all you have and all you can have, which is the case on most laptops, there will be no advantage at all in using Vista or XP64 when it comes to using Poser. With other apps this may differ, but the designers of Poser were clever enough to deal with the whole memory issue on XP, by allowing FireFly to run in a seperate process.

Fifthly.... Poser is still a 32 bit application and there for is limited in the memory it can use. A 64 bit system will not change that. Only if you have Poser Pro, FireFly will be 64bit and can use more then 3GB of ram. If you're on regular Poser, you will always be limited in ram usage. Some apps can use only 2GB, some 3GB and a few 4GB, I'm not sure how it is with Poser.

Lastly..... when running a 32 bit application on Windows 64, Windows will go use an emulattor to run 32 bit applications. Practically.....  your 32 bit application will run a bit slower compared to running in a 32 bit OS.

Enough info I guess.

If your system has more then 4GB of ram installed, the whole story is different and 64 bit is recommended. It also depends a little on the apps you use, but since likely most will be 32 bit, you will not see much advantage.

My laptop (very new), came with Vista installed. All ran smooth (with some annoyance because of the way that Vista works), until the first large Poser scene. Poser crashed, Vista crashed and I went back to XP SP3. You may have to look around for drivers, but most manufactors will have a XP driver set for the laptop. I'm glad I'm back on XP. Vista took a lot longer to do everything it does, XP responds and loads much faster. Applications open quicker. My daughter has a similair laptop, but by the time Vista has started on her system, I've got Poser running (and opened the first scene), checked my email and started browsing the internet.

As for Poser stableness...... Poser is not more stable on a 64bit system at all as someone mentioned. Poser was written for 32 bit and operates best on 32 bit. It runs fine on 64 bit also, but in my experience it's sligly more stable in a 32 bit enviroment.

I have 64bit Vista on a desktop (Galadriel) and on a laptop (Pixie).  Poser Pro and Poser 8 run just fine.  I will probably get Win7 for them upon its release.

If I were going to nudge you, it would be to get 8Gb RAM if you can afford to.  It's nice to have that extra capacity.

Quote - First of all, for XP 32 the 3GB /Large switch mentioned is very wrong information, that is for XP Pro, not XP32. If you have WinXP 32 SP3 and you have a new laptop with 4Gb, XP32 SP3 will see and use 3.5Gb of that. Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32! It's for XP64 only!

From microsoft's own site:

Boot.ini switches

"/3GB
This switch forces x86-based systems to allocate 3 GB of virtual address space to programs and 1 GB to the kernel and to executive components. A program must be designed to take advantage of the additional memory address space. With this switch, user mode programs can access 3 GB of memory instead of the usual 2 GB that Windows allocates to user mode programs. The switch moves the starting point of kernel memory to 3 GB."

What do you think that 'x86' in there stands for ?

www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

thats the SAME link I put up there Ben.
SAME information. and...XP32 aka XP X86 AKA XP PROFESSIONAL.

so before you start complaining, Read the posts. namely this from OUR links

Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 Memory Support. The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 is also 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.

now my XP Professional I'm using RIGHT now is Xp32 why? it's 32BIt. it used to run with the /3gb switch until I changed graphics cards so I DO know what I'm posting about.

thankyou, ghonma!
the  /3GB switch allowed me to finish a scene that had proved unrenderable previously ( i have 3Gb of physical ram installed )
on advice from a very well paid and knowledgeable IT consultant, i nervously edited my .boot.ini on both machines, to full success.

the reason for the HU was that due to something unforseen, this action resulted in a boot up failure for my friend.
as i stated before, we subsequently found out that the Intel Centrino CPU is an oddity in that it will throw a fit if you use the /3GB switch.

of course the /3GB switch has no effect if the app you are using is not itself, ' large address aware'

as stated in the Microsoft document, the /3GB switch has no useful effect in a 64bit OS ( windows), in fact is detrimental to performance.

except the OP wasn't installing XP64.. but XP32 on which the /3gb will work on the Pro version (sorry home? never heard of it...)

Win 7 x64 is much better than Vista (easy to turn off the annoying UAC and so on) and runs all my 3D and graphics progs without a hitch. It is far more stable. I've had no driver issues and it seems a little more responsive.

Also, let me stress that the /3Gb switch is not for XP64, it's for plain vanilla XP Pro. I don't know why the poster thinks this, but it's just plain wrong.

Quote - I do see a lot of misinformation here, I'll try to correct most of it.

You're spreading a lot more of misinformation here...

And no, i'm not going to explain and correct it this time, did that often enough... Look up old posts about the topic.

Just to clarify...... when the OP mentioned  XP SP3 bit, I was under the impression that he meant Windows XP home version, which is 32 bit also, and on that one the /3GB switch doesn't work. On Windows XP Pro 32 Bit the switch will work, but from what I did read the OP isn't talking about XP Pro at all, but about XP Home version. In the light of that, the info I gave is correct.

Quote - except the OP wasn't installing XP64.. but XP32 on which the /3gb will work on the Pro version (sorry home? never heard of it...)

You never heard of XP home?

..... humor. try it sometime.

Quote - Just to clarify...... when the OP mentioned  XP SP3 bit, I was under the impression that he meant Windows XP home version, which is 32 bit also, and on that one the /3GB switch doesn't work. On Windows XP Pro 32 Bit the switch will work, but from what I did read the OP isn't talking about XP Pro at all, but about XP Home version. In the light of that, the info I gave is correct.

to quote "Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32! It's for XP64 only!"

no, the info you gave is NOT correct.

Quote - > Quote - Just to clarify...... when the OP mentioned  XP SP3 bit, I was under the impression that he meant Windows XP home version, which is 32 bit also, and on that one the /3GB switch doesn't work. On Windows XP Pro 32 Bit the switch will work, but from what I did read the OP isn't talking about XP Pro at all, but about XP Home version. In the light of that, the info I gave is correct.

to quote "Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32**!** It's for XP64 only!"

no, the info you gave is NOT correct.

Sigh...... that's the best response in this case. Reading..... try it sometimes.

Aeilkema: To quote from your post: "Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32! It's for XP64 only!"

This is plainly nonsense. The 3GB switch is for XP32 and should NOT be used on XP64

OK, my mistake...... it should have been:

"Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP HOME! It's for XP Pro only!"

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - Just to clarify...... when the OP mentioned  XP SP3 bit, I was under the impression that he meant Windows XP home version, which is 32 bit also, and on that one the /3GB switch doesn't work. On Windows XP Pro 32 Bit the switch will work, but from what I did read the OP isn't talking about XP Pro at all, but about XP Home version. In the light of that, the info I gave is correct.

to quote "Whatever you do never use the 3GB /Large switch on XP32**!** It's for XP64 only!"

no, the info you gave is NOT correct.

Sigh...... that's the best response in this case. Reading..... try it sometimes.

I'm reading just fine thanks. you seem to be having the issues there. first, they never mentioned home at all - they only mentioned XP SR3 - you made that assumption they meant home yourself. secondly we had to yell at you to change your statement on which version of XP takes the switch anyway.. and thats after you linked to a page that told you quite plainly, if you read it, that you were wrong.

last reply to you from tho on any subject. it's just not worth the effort.

"Windows 7 64bit" is the future and XP and Vista will begin to fade just as Win98 and WinNT did.   Your new laptop SHOULD come with an upgrade coupon for Windows 7,  if it doesn't, shop elsewhere.

Your new laptop will be hungry for Win7 64bit,  and it will thank you for it.

take care

Attached Link: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4912831&CatId=3444

Windows7... far as I understand, Microsoft makes each new OS to consume more resources than its previous incarnations.... is windows7 the exception?? does it use less resources than Vista?

and well, honestly, if i can avoid Vista, i wanna do it,  as the few times i tried it in other people's computers, i found it clunky and a seriously bad copy of mac's OSX... just my personal opinion, no offense to anyone who happens to love the system...

again, thanks for all the info and debate... i still have like a month away to make the purchase, so any additional info is appreciated...

EDIT: this is the machine i am considering... it does say that for the 4 gigs of ram i need a 64-bit OS... maybe i should opt for XP-64??

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4912831&CatId=3444

That wouldn't matter much with that machine. I've noticed it has a Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator as graphics card. That one uses the systems memory, so you will not have the full 4GB available at all. The graphics card will take away 128-512Mb (or even more, can't say for sure, since it doesn't state which type it is).

Since Poser is your livelihood, I'm not sure if I would recommend this laptop at all. The graphics card will be a bottleneck in the system for sure. It's not that good at all. If you can, I would opt for a ATI or nVidia GFX Card that has dedicated memory, in other words it has it's own memory and doesn't take it away from the system's memory. Those cards will be a lot faster, will display OpenGL a lot better. The Intel® Graphics Media is a low level, low entry graphics card.

Another thing to consider is the 12.1" screen. Since the laptop is mainly for Poser, that kind of screen size is very small for it. I wouldn't go below 15 inch really for Poser use.

I would spent a little bit more money on it if possible or wait a little while longer.

Quote - First of all, for XP 32 the 3GB /Large switch mentioned is very wrong information, that is for XP Pro, not XP32.

XP or XP Pro both are 32 bits ...

yeah, i changed the link eventually, as i hadn't noticed the screen was only 12 inches.. the link i have up now is for a 15 inch one... and well, sadly for now my budget is around $500-600, so i have to do the best with those limited options...

thanks again for all the info and guidance!

on a second note, by the time i buy this laptop, it will probably have Windows 7 running on it... by the sounds of it, wouldn't it be better just to stick to that OS?

yup. tho if it's a 64bit CPU, make sure they've installed the 64 Windows 7.

As far as I can tell from searching, the 3GB switch works on XP Home as well as Pro.

http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00RkTK 

Quote - on a second note, by the time i buy this laptop, it will probably have Windows 7 running on it... by the sounds of it, wouldn't it be better just to stick to that OS?

Windows 7 is not faster as XP on laptops. You need a quad core processor to profit from the adantage that Windows 7. Otherwise XP is running faster also on PC. There were many tests that proved that.

If you're on a PC and do nothing Windows 7 needs 600-900 MB RAM while XP needs only around 300 MB RAM.

And of course there is a XP PROFESSIONAL 64 BIT.

I work with XP PRO 64 bit (with a dual core processor) on a PC. I used Windows 7 RC 64bit for one month before I returned to my old XP Pro 64bit.  I worked on both with Poser 8 and I can say there is no difference.

Windows 7 needs 20 GB of your harddrive, Windows XP under 5 GB. Windows 7 has a lot of optical effects, that I don't need (AeroPeek).

If you don't load big scenes in Poser stick with XP 32 bit, if you want to load bigger scenes use XP Pro 64 bit so that you can use your 4 GB without any problems.  Make sure your processor is supporting 64 bit. This is a good combination.

You can load big scenes in XP32 or Home also, you just need to render in a separate process.

Quote - Vista is ok to use BUT you should check out www.blackviper.com/ following the "Safe" advice will speed up Vista & make it run more stable than it will out of the box. I've used the guide on that site for every version of Windows & never run into any problems sticking to the Safe path.

Ps disable Aero & go with the XP look as it runs faster.

Nope, do not follow the advice of that site. It is a waste of time and can only give you potential problems. Stopping services is a waste of time. If they are not used they take a miniscule amount of RAM, if they are used then you need them.

Quote - If you're on a PC and do nothing Windows 7 needs 600-900 MB RAM while XP needs only around 300 MB RAM.

Memory is there to be used, unused memory is wasted memory. Vista and Win7 'use' more memory when idle because they are making use of that memory for pre-caching. It is a good thing that helps the system, not a bad thing.

Go with Windows 7 64 bit. It'll make better use of the available RAM and 64 bit capable CPU, allow more RAM to be used and will be ready for Poser Pro with its 64 bit capable renderer.

XP x64 is effectively dead now. Would be a pointless recommendation over Windows 7 x64

Quote - You can load big scenes in XP32 or Home also, you just need to render in a separate process.

You render also better on XPPro64 in a seperate process, but you have more GB RAM to LOAD your scenes. I know the difference between XP32 and XP Prof 64 bit because I worked with both and you can believe me that Poser loads a lot more with 64 bit. I never had the 'not enough memory' problem when the textures are loading for rendering since I'm using 64bit. Do you know the difference too?

Quote - [Vista and Win7 'use' more memory when idle because they are making use of that memory for pre-caching. It is a good thing that helps the system, not a bad thing.

Go with Windows 7 64 bit. It'll make better use of the available RAM and 64 bit capable CPU, allow more RAM to be used and will be ready for Poser Pro with its 64 bit capable renderer.

XP x64 is effectively dead now. Would be a pointless recommendation over Windows 7 x64

XP is not dead. Windows 7 is better than Vista, but it's still too large for home users. Don't believe the hype. They're selling a new product. They want your money.

And of course Vista and 7 are not better in use of RAM on Laptops and PC IF THEY DON'T HAVE QUAD CORE PROCESSORS - they're slower. Read some benchmark tests that indicate just that. And again: Windows 7= 20 GB of your HDD, XP less than 5 GB. On a laptop with the average HDD of 200 GB that makes a difference too. Why spend money on a quad core processor AND Windows 7 to gain from the advantages that Windows 7 offers?

And as always with Windows: it's better to wait until it comes with SP2, until then they hopefully find a way that the 'search' process in Windows 7 alone doesn't need more than 500 MB of RAM. This is ridicilous and it was already bad in Vista.

The search in WIndows 7 does not take more than 50MB - all of which is in its own address space and does not influence the amount of memory available to Poser. The same is true for most (if not all) of the other windows components.
Windows 7 64, Vista 64 and XP64 all have 4GB address space available for Poser. During the render phase some of it is used as shared memory leaving about 3.5GB for loading scenes.
Before you reach that you probably run out of other resources in Poser - independent of the OS.

On the 32bit versions you have 1.5GB available or 2.5GB if you enable the /3GB switch

Quote - > Quote - [Vista and Win7 'use' more memory when idle because they are making use of that memory for pre-caching. It is a good thing that helps the system, not a bad thing.

Go with Windows 7 64 bit. It'll make better use of the available RAM and 64 bit capable CPU, allow more RAM to be used and will be ready for Poser Pro with its 64 bit capable renderer.

XP x64 is effectively dead now. Would be a pointless recommendation over Windows 7 x64

XP is not dead.

I said XP64 not XP (32)... 

Quote -
Windows 7 is better than Vista, but it's still too large for home users. Don't believe the hype. They're selling a new product. They want your money.

What do you mean "still too large for home users"...?
I don't believe the hype that's why I've been using the beta since February and the RTM since June... I base my opinion on my experience.

Quote -
And of course Vista and 7 are not better in use of RAM on Laptops and PC IF THEY DON'T HAVE QUAD CORE PROCESSORS - they're slower.

Sorry but that is just incorrect. Yes they are better at using RAM than XP, much better and you don't need a quad core to make use of them. 

Quote - Windows 7= 20 GB of your HDD, XP less than 5 GB. On a laptop with the average HDD of 200 GB that makes a difference too.

 So what's 15GB? Would have thought anyone doing anything serious on a laptop is going to have at least an external drive as well. Drive space is cheap.

Quote -  
Why spend money on a quad core processor AND Windows 7 to gain from the advantages that Windows 7 offers?

You don't need to. The original poster was asking about a new machine, makes sense to go with the current best x86 OS available - it'll come with an OS whatever is chosen so the cost is the same either way - actually, the current retail price of 7 is cheaper.

Quote -
And as always with Windows: it's better to wait until it comes with SP2,

Then you'll be waiting a loooong time then

Quote - the 'search' process in Windows 7 alone doesn't need more than 500 MB of RAM.

It doesn't. If it does on your install then you've got something going wrong there.

@Magic:

GOOGLE! First entry "search in windows 7 RAM usage",  the "search" is not mentioned here:

Windows 7 drives RAM capacity explosion

quote from that article:
"Windows 7 will drive the average PC RAM capacity to 4GB in the next 18 months. That's the conclusion of researchers at the who are monitoring the ramp-up to Windows 7's launch on October 22. After evaluating data collected from early adopters of the Windows 7 RTM code spread across several hundred IT sites, the xpnet.com team observed that nearly 50 percent sported memory capacities of 4GB or higher, with some reaching as high as 12GB.

The average of all Windows 7 PCs was 3.7GB, which is in stark contrast to Windows XP PCs, where the average RAM capacity (for all versions) hovers at just under 1.7GB. Windows 7 RAM installations also best Vista's average of 2.7GB."

GOOGLE first entry "windows 7 RAM usage": I did not even read that, I quote just from the line on Google: "I was wondering what everybody else was getting in their ram usage for windows 7. Im getting 1.08 RAM in use with nothing running."

And I did only read German articles about the heavy RAM usage, that I don't quote here of course, but there were all in accordance about that, while nevertheless were praising Windows 7 a lot of Vista for usability.

I don't Google for you to prove likewise English language articles about why it only makes sense for users with a quad core processor to change from XP to Windows 7 because it occurs to me that you could have found them already if you informed yourself about  these topics. Of course there is a difference between benchmark tests and your own personal experience. I agree that Windows 7 has some on their plus side: when I installed and worked with it, I was surprised that I did not need to install any drivers for my hardware and music and video files needed no plugins - this is of course very helpful. But if I can't load Poser scenes as big as I did in XP64 with my RAM because Windows 7 uses them more and I can't even switch off some of the services that were not needed in XP it does not make sense to me. And yes, I was also answering to the OP about which OS would be good to him. I strongly advise not to use Windows 7 on a laptop as I did in the past against Vista.

You asked about 'too large': well almost double as much services as in XP...

"GOOGLE first entry "windows 7 RAM usage": I did not even read that, I quote just from the line on Google:"

you what?? you quote an article you've not even bothered to read??

Quote - "GOOGLE first entry "windows 7 RAM usage": I did not even read that, I quote just from the line on Google:"

you what?? you quote an article you've not even bothered to read??

Because my point is already in the headline. No I prefer to read information about PC in German, because it's easier to me, I was googling for Magic. Calm down!

Oh I mentioned that already in my above posting. Did you even bothered to read that to the end?

erm I'm calm. please don't tell me what to do or feel.

headlines mean nothing. tis an old trick in newspapers to give a headline that means little to the article. eg : Vicar screws mrs  Door!

a story about a vicar having problems attaching a handle to a married friends door.

so point having been made, read the articles you quote. for all you know the next line is 'and the ram usage dropped in half in the next few seconds'

oh and on windows 7, I'm running the damn thing and have been for months on a Dual Core AMD 64 with NONE of the problems you are yelling at ppl - it's faster than the XP install on the other partition.

I'll go by my own experiences thanks.

Quote - erm I'm calm. please don't tell me what to do or feel.

You're better in lecturing me?

Quote -
read the articles you quote.

And misinforming our fellow readers?

Quote - for all you know the next line is 'and the ram usage dropped in half in the next few seconds'

It is not, but who cares anyway. The other quote I gave tells what I mean. No need for further dialogue, K.

whatever lad. I don't really care what you do tell ya the truth. you seem to be on a personal crusade to tell ppl how bad W7 is.....

Since the OP was not clear about which version of Windows 7 anyway, another aspect by 3dNeo:
http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2785619

@mackis3D:

If you are quoting stuff which is along the usual lines of "oh my gosh, Windows 7 (or Vista before it) uses x much more RAM than XP" then there is no point in trying to explain things really.

Yes, Win7 (and Vista) 'use' more RAM than XP. Tell me, what is RAM there for? To be used right? Tell me, when you bring up task manager and see x much RAM free why do you think it is better to have more free?

Windows 7 and Vista make use of available free RAM for pre-caching so, rather than that RAM sitting there doing nothing, and unused RAM is wasted RAM, then they try to make best use of it by pre-caching potential code.

If that RAM is needed by any application then it is immediately dropped and is free to be used by those requesting applications - it is not lost.

Quote -
But if I can't load Poser scenes as big as I did in XP64 with my RAM because Windows 7 uses them more

Windows 7 x64 is far better than XP x64 both in terms of memory management and execution. If you can't do something in 7 then there is something else at fault.

Quote -
 and I can't even switch off some of the services that were not needed in XP it does not make sense to me.

Why would you want to switch off services. You gain miniscule amounts of RAM back, if any, from them since they consume tiny amounts if idle anyway.

Quote -
You asked about 'too large': well almost double as much services as in XP...

And declaring that Windows 7 is too large because it has twice as many services as XP is just wrong on many levels. Have you decompiled those services to ascertain that they are basically the same on each OS? Are you saying you know better than the OS developers what services are needed?

Quote - > Quote - You can load big scenes in XP32 or Home also, you just need to render in a separate process.

You render also better on XPPro64 in a seperate process, but you have more GB RAM to LOAD your scenes. I know the difference between XP32 and XP Prof 64 bit because I worked with both and you can believe me that Poser loads a lot more with 64 bit. I never had the 'not enough memory' problem when the textures are loading for rendering since I'm using 64bit. Do you know the difference too?

Let's not forget where still talking about 4gigs or RAM only, since that's what the topic is about. I'm using both and as long as you're using below 4Gb you will not see a huge difference between what Poser can handle on a 32 or 64 bit system. Once you go beyond 4Gb your statement is very true, but that's not what this topic is about. It's about Poser and 4 gigs of RAM.

The limiting factor is the amount of memory Poser can use. In a 64bit OS this is considerably more (3.5GB  instead of 1.5 or 2.5GB depending on the /3GB switch). If you do not have enough physical memory, the OS will use virtual memory and start swapping to disk. This is much slower as physical memory, but scenes will continue to load.