Spyke
jello
programming.dev

The article is worth a read but to save you a click if you don't want to: Windows 11 is the worst in all metrics. Includes startup time, RAM usage, and speed of using apps (Paint, web browser)

This is a pattern that keeps repeating: Windows 11 was last in the battery test, took longer to render a video project in OpenShot, took its sweet time opening the File Explorer window, and opening built-in applications like MS Paint left enough time to fetch a fresh cup of coffee. Not to mention Windows 11 taking the longest to open websites and scoring worst of all in single-threaded CPU-Z.

36
LifeInMultipleChoicereply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I would say they would need to toss all the 11 scores and do it again without the drive being encrypted (as they acknowledged in the article). Then run modern apps to compare, because ram usage doesn't say much about speed. Newer games in specific do benchmark better on the same hardware from 10 to 11, showing that while the ram usage is b Higher, it is better used for the time period it is being produced for.

Write speeds and such are up as well apparently.

https://www.techspot.com/article/2349-windows-11-performance/

11
InnerScientistreply
lemmy.world

without the drive being encrypted

Tbf that's the default for Windows 11 so it should be what is compared.

0
Jambalaya
lemmy.zip

I hate windows 11 as much as the next guy, but just measuring the ram usage on a blank desktop isn't really a "benchmark" and doesn't say anything about the OS itself. If you installed Windows 3.1 I bet it would have the lowest RAM usage of all!

9
Epherareply
lemmy.ml

I would assume that newer versions use more RAM, too, because they gradually added features or tweaked configurations that use more RAM. But I don't see how this changes the reality of the actual usage number...?

You can argue that they're better utilizing modern hardware and providing features users want, so the usage number should be judged differently. That is definitely the case. But Windows is still the slowest consumer operating system, so it certainly doesn't absolve them of the critique.

2
UnspecificGravityreply
piefed.social

Except that windows 11 isn't offering the user anything that windows ten didn't. That's a big tradeoff for getting absolutely nothing in return but a slower system.

2
Dave.reply
aussie.zone

measuring the ram usage on a blank desktop isn't really a "benchmark" and doesn't say anything about the OS itself

Benchmark: noun

  1. a standard or point of reference against which things may be compared.

And frankly, whatever memory the OS hogs is less memory for applications to hog.

My laptop is 14 years old with a lightweight modern Linux distro. The "OS" - kernel, desktop environment , and system tray apps, a few widgets - uses 800MB of ram when it's parked at the desktop after startup. Which means the other 15.2GB is available to my applications, and it makes my wheezy old laptop perfectly functional for most things.

1
Ephera
lemmy.ml

[XP] had the lowest RAM usage with nothing loaded at 800 MB versus 3.3 GB for Windows 11 in last place.

3.3 GB used on an 8 GB system? WTF? I've heard people complain about the RAM usage, but that's obscene.

4
shalafireply
lemmy.world

I'm burning 10 of 32GB basically idling. Windows caches ALL the things. If I need those extra gigs, I could still use them.

1
real_squidsreply
sopuli.xyz

Heavily depends on the edition. I don't care about 11 so idk if it happens there, but 10 Home has much higher ram usage than LTSC. The lowest I could get on an official iso was 1.6 on a fresh 2019 (i think) ltsc install

1

You reached the end

Benchmarking Windows Against Itself, From Windows XP To Windows 11 | Spyke