Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Leopard using way too much RAM?
- Thread starter swac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I noticed finder using alot more than in Tiger, but overall I think the memory management is alot better than in Tiger.
I would say that is normal... In tiger it takes 30 Megs that is without all the new features that do take a lot of memory, QuickView, Coverflow etc... In order for these things to run well they use RAM wich is faster.
I wouldn't make the assumption. Don't forget Coverflow, and QuickView built in. THink of Preview App and FinderApp with part of iTunes running at the same time.
well finder is taking 25MB for me, and adium uses 14MB. Safari however is using 115MB, and iTunes 90MB. Kernel_task is taking a good 135 though. If you have been in OSX for a long period of time, or had adium open for a long time, try restarting adium, or your whole computer, and see if they come down at all. It seems like most programs use more and more over time, so eventually you have to reset them by restarting...
285 MB for SafariLeopard hangs onto things longer
On my 4GB G5, I will have only 30MB free. Most of the memory is being held as 'inactive.' This is caches and other data which could potentially be accessed again, so it hangs on to it just in case.
If free memory is suddenly needed, the kernel can instantly dump some of the inactive memory and allocate for a new use.
As long as the algorithm works well, this is an improvement over Tiger.
Vista, on the other hand, made similar changes from XP and seriously screwed up.
On my 4GB G5, I will have only 30MB free. Most of the memory is being held as 'inactive.' This is caches and other data which could potentially be accessed again, so it hangs on to it just in case.
If free memory is suddenly needed, the kernel can instantly dump some of the inactive memory and allocate for a new use.
As long as the algorithm works well, this is an improvement over Tiger.
Vista, on the other hand, made similar changes from XP and seriously screwed up.
Leopard looks normal to me.
This is right after I rebooted. My Finder jumps up to 35MB as I do my work, but Adium remains at 22MB. And don't mind my Firefox -- I have 12 tabs running so yeah..
This is right after I rebooted. My Finder jumps up to 35MB as I do my work, but Adium remains at 22MB. And don't mind my Firefox -- I have 12 tabs running so yeah..
leopard eats up ram on my computer
dock is 20
itunes is 50
kernel 215
mail is 40
safari is 550!!
word is 90
i only have 1.8 gigs free with a decent amount of programs running
dock is 20
itunes is 50
kernel 215
mail is 40
safari is 550!!
word is 90
i only have 1.8 gigs free with a decent amount of programs running
With all this talk about Safari and RAM, I think I'm going to have to considering using FireFox.... that's horrible! I can't believe Safari takes up sooo much RAM!! I actually liked Safari..... no wonder it's so fast, now I know the reason why.
Would cleaning your cache and temporary files help any to reduce the amount of RAM used?
Would cleaning your cache and temporary files help any to reduce the amount of RAM used?
Leopard looks normal to me.
This is right after I rebooted. My Finder jumps up to 35MB as I do my work, but Adium remains at 22MB. And don't mind my Firefox -- I have 12 tabs running so yeah..
Wait a minute, I noticed some new things... is the VM size usually that huge?
Mine on my MacBook Pro is 38.14GB. 2nd, I remember it used to be that it would show the actual number of page ins and outs, now it has the size of the page ins/outs.
I guess the real question is what happens to Safari's ram usage when you open more programs? What is wrong with Safari using 550mb of ram if nothing else is using it as long as it gives it back if another process needs it? Personally, I like to see the memory utilised as much as possible rather than being sat there unused...
You can largely ignore the "VM Size" value - it doesn't mean that much space has been allocated to anything (including the disk): It certainly isn't the same as Virtual Memory in Windows, which is more analogous to swap space. Leopard now shows swap used and on your screenshot it's zero
