There is really nothing I'm aware of like that in XP or Vista as it really isn't necessary as they are way better at memory management.The specs you have I wouldn't worry about it.If having problems task manager can tell you what you need to know as far as cpu usage,ram usage and what process is using what.While it doesn't tell you everything it will get you started troublshooting.
When you were running Windows ME, the percent value you were able to check that was referred to as "system resources" had nothing to do with things like CPU usage and almost nothing to do with RAM. Because of the unfortunate choice of name, the vast majority of users believed they were seeing a measure of the portion of their computer's total capacity was still available but this wasn't the case.
In the context of Microsoft operating systems prior to Windows XP, the term 'system resources' was a measure of a small amount of reserved memory set aside for certain very specific things and referred to as 'heaps'. The type of things stored in this memory would be the fonts in use or the drop down menus being used by programs opened by the user. Measuring how much memory was being locked up by the collective heaps was important because when you ran out of the set aside memory the system would choke. The amount available was small because the whole system design was made when the typical amounts of RAM on a PC were relatively miniscule and Microsoft didn't want to reserve any memory that wouldn't be available for other things unless absolutely necessary. As RAM increased, it became possible, even commonplace to run out of system resources while the user still might have the vast majority of RAM free.
Since Windows XP, there were changes made to the OS that make measurement of 'heaps' irrelevant. As was the case prior to XP, it still makes sense to track the level of utilization of CPU cycles, memory (both RAM and virtual), and other parameters available by pressing Ctrl-Alt-Del as suggested by Shelly. You just won't find that old '% system resources' meter because it no longer applies.
Thanks for your reply. At first glance that was my thought as well, but the computer came with 512 MB RAM and I immediately added another 512 stick. The computer has only one program that has a considerable amount of data stored in it and not many programs are installed.
I have had no difficulty in operating anything I have tried. I am puzzled by those readings but unless I have a problem I will probably leave the RAM as it is and see what happens.
#10. "RE: SYSTEM RESOURCE'S IN VISTA" In response to don s (Reply # 9)
1 Gb of RAM is alright for Vista. What you're seeing there isn't horrible, you've got 633 Mb cached which can be freed up instantly if it's needed for applications.
Possibly some of your memory is being reserved for onboard video, which is why you're not seeing the full amount available. (893 Mb total?)
Shipping a computer with Windows Vista, with only 512 Mb of RAM ought to be a crime though. It's just deceptive to keep the cost down and it only results in frustration because it's inadequate. So it's good that you added another stick immediately.
