I have a 4 GB RAM memory. In task manager you can see tha Committed memory is 5,6/7,9 GB RAM. Why that if In use memory is just 3,1 GB ? Is Windows using the Page File ?
123434
In Windows 7's task manager, I can select different columns to show. There are a bunch that are related to memory and memory usage, but I'm not sure what it all means.  I have a Dutch installation of Windows, so I'll try to translate them; as I'm not sure of the English names.    In order:   Working set Peak working set Private working set Commit charge Paged pool Not-paged pool
43574
I have noticed this on many different Windows machine, on many different occasions: the RAM usage reported by Task Manager or Resource Monitor often seems to add up to an amount which is significantly lower than the actual amount in use.  For example, many times on my laptop or my desktop, I have seen something like 7GB in use, and yet the total of the Working RAM Set is more like 3GB. I just can't figure out where it's being used!  Here's an extreme example I noticed today in Resource Monitor on a server:    If you right-click the image and open in a new tab, and view the numbers, you'll notice that the Working Set (which doesn't include nonphysical virtual memory) add up to about 1.7GB. I get similar numbers by adding up RAM usage in Task Manager when "Show processes from all users" is enabled.  Now here's a screenshot of task manager's Performance tab:    This says 7.6GB of physical memory is in use.  I see this all the time, on personal computers, laptops, and now servers: the total RAM usage reported by system tools only accounts for about 1/4 of the RAM usage I observe. WTF is going on???  Is there any satisfying explanation of where all my RAM is? What is gobbling it up, and why is it leaving no trace?  EDIT: Here's a picture of the graphical RAM use, as user whs asked for:    EDIT 2: In response to James' response, here's a picture of the nonpaged processes in poolmon.exe, sorted by size:    These results confuse me. poolmon correctly states that I have 6GB of nonpaged pool in use, but all the nonpaged pool processes are less than 8MB in size.  What could this mean? Is poolmon failing to detect some of the processes using the nonpaged pool?
48604
I checked using RAMMap on my PC that about 1.5 GB of my installed 4 GB RAM is driver-locked.  Most results from google searches tell me that this is usually caused by drivers of virtual machine management tools like VMWare, etc but that's not the case here since I don't have any such tools installed on my PC.  How can I pinpoint exactly which driver(s) is/are causing this and how can I make the memory available to other processes?  I was thinking that the locked memory would normally be freed up and taken by other processes when required but that's not happening and my browser (Firefox) freezes everytime the memory usage for it becomes >350 MB which is very low (just playing a song from youtube and opening up facebook makes the browser freeze after a few minutes). What can I do to solve this?
16637
I have 16GB of system RAM. On startup with no applications open except the task-manager Windows is using about 3gb of RAM. I looked in the processes tab, but nothing seems to be out of the ordinary. How can I find out why my Windows is using so much RAM.    all processes from all users      Reading from the poolmon it seems that my wireless broadcom driver is using about 0.4GB of of RAM. Even if I remove  it would still be using  2.6GB on start-up, which is still too much.      After reinstalling the wireless driver associated with the memory leak. I have a new screenshot and would like to confirm that it was indeed a memory leak.
56202
I was wondering if I could keep program A from reading my entire ram, as it does not need to monitor what program B is doing.  Also I am on windows 8.1 64 bit.
4397
I've been running several VM's with VirtualBox, and the memory usage reported from various perspectives, and I'm having trouble figuring how much memory my VMs actually use.  Here is an example:   I have a VM running Windows 7 (as the Guest OS) on my windows XP Host machine. The Host Machine Has 3 GB of RAM The Guest VM is setup to have a base memory of 1 GB If I run Task Manger on the Guest OS, I see memory usage of 430 MB If I run Task Manger on the host OS, I see 3 processes that seem to belong to VirtualBox:   VirtualBox.exe (1), using 60 MB of memory (This one seems to have the most CPU usage) VirtualBox.exe (2), using 20 MB of memory VBoxSvc.exe, using 11.5 MB of memory  While running the VM, the Host OS's memory usage is about 2 GB When I shut down the VM, the Host OS's it goes back to memory usage goes down to about 900 MB   So clearly, there are some huge differences here.  I really don't understand how the GuestOS can use 400+ MB, while the Host OS only shows about 75 MB allocated to the VM.  Are there other processes used by VirtualBox that aren't as obviously named?  Also, I'd like to know if I run a machine with 1 GB, is that going to take 1 GB away from my host OS, or only the amount of memory the Guest machine is currently using?  Update:  Someone expressed distrust over my memory usage numbers, and I'm not sure if that distrust was directed at me, or my Host OS's Task Manager's reporting (which is perhaps the culprit), but for any skeptics, here is a screenshot of those processes on the host machine:
60542
In my Windows 8, video card shows 640 MB of available memory (Screen Resolution > Advanced Settings or with dxdiag). But ubuntu (with lspci command) shows 256 MB. so who's right?
47013
I am trying to find out how much memory my application is consuming from within the program itself. The memory usage I am looking for is the number reported in the "Mem Usage" column on the Processes tab of Windows Task Manager.
115420
Don't know if this is the right place to ask this question.  I've been reading that 32bit OSs (like the Ubuntu i'm running right now) can't adress more than 3.2gb or 3.3gb of RAM memory.  I remember for my old Computer Architecture course that the memory limitation was 2^32 "pointers" (don't remember the right word). I mean, the memory was represented like an array where the CPU can acces it directly, but up to its limit. If the CPU is 32 bit, then it can address 2^32 words, if it's 64 bits 2^64, etc.  So, if what i said before is right, then, my OS should be able to address 2^32 = 4294967296 = 4Gb.  I'm thinking maybe some sort of space is reserved to the particular use of the Kernel, cache, buffering or swapping. But don't have the correct answer.  Can you give me a hint?
10398
I have a similar issue as . You can pretty much take his screen shot and apply it to my issue: Windows 8.1, 99% disk usage or in that vicinity for a longer period of time (minutes). Yet the individual disk usage stats don't add up to more than roughly 1MB/Sec. I have an SSD disk capable of much higher throughput.  The question I linked to doesn't provide much answer, but one comment hints to low free disk space. That is an issue with my disk. I have only ~1GB left of free space on my C drive. But my follow-up question is why would that matter? Windows does pre-allocate 6GB of virtual drive, doesn't it? At least that's how I interpret "currently allocated" in the Virtual Memory settings screen under System Properties &rarr; Performance options.  I've tried to use the  to gain some information on what's using the disk, but the amount of data logged in just a couple of seconds is so vast that I don't know where to start. The only thing I see is that service.exe accesses the registry a lot... But I guess that's normal? If anyone care to take a look, the log dump is  (19MB)  To summarize:   Does the disk usage really go up when free space declines? If so, why? Can anyone deduct from my Procmon log file what program or process causes 99% disk usage?   edit: To comment on the "malware"-answer in the other post: I'd like to know, not guess. I doubt it is malware in my case, but if it is, my logs should show that.  update: Similar case just happened. Any clues from these two ResMon screenshots?      "System" doesn't really tell me much.
82270
I'm running a Dell Studio XPS, with quad core processor, two threads per core, with 12GB of installed RAM. According to Windows, only 7.99GB of that RAM is usable.  The really weird part is, up until two weeks ago I only had 8GB of RAM and then only 3.99GB was usable. So 4GB of RAM is consistently being taken.  I've checked in every screen, under every option in my BIOS and there doesn't seem to be a memory option there at all (that's a damn Dell for you). I've read that a lot of times this can occur because of the video card stealing some RAM for itself.   Is there some way I can check this, other than the BIOS? I have onboard graphics, not a separate card.  I'm running Windows 7 64-bit.
94677
I have 1GB of RAM, and when I run NetBeans and Firefox, they get about 300MB of RAM. At some point, the system becomes very slow, probably 100 times slower than normal, switching windows (Alt+Tab) becomes a huge task and the computer is practically useless. This is probably the moment when it starts to swap.    Two questions:   According to images provided, where has all the RAM gone? When I calculate all the processes memory, it is far smaller then 1GB. Is it normal for system to become 100 times slower when the RAM is full and using swap space?   On another computer with 4GB of RAM I have no problems.     Update: I added 2GB of RAM, now I have 3GB. Anyone who wants to use heavy apps with 1GB on Unity, I don't think it's going to work. Works fine on an empty desktop :)
9269
I am having windows 10 pro 64 bit OS,With 4 Gb RAM. But in memory section its showing 2.66 GB usable. Why? doing some research(Googling) I found that 32 bit machine can't utilize the full RAM. But though I am having 64 bit machine, still why its showing 2.66 GB usable? I tried a tweak through MSConfig &rarr; Boot &rarr; Advanced option &rarr; unchecking but nothing is working.  ------------------ System Information ------------------        Time of this report: 6/3/2016, 08:39:50          Operating System: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 10586) (10586.th2_release.160104-1513)                  Language: English (Regional Setting: English)       System Manufacturer: LENOVO              System Model: 20351                      BIOS: InsydeH2O Version 03.73.069ACN28WW                 Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4030U CPU @ 1.90GHz (4 CPUs), ~1.9GHz                    Memory: 4096MB RAM       Available OS Memory: 2722MB RAM                 Page File: 3268MB used, 1885MB available               Windows Dir: C:\WINDOWS           DirectX Version: 12       DX Setup Parameters: Not found          User DPI Setting: Using System DPI        System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent)           DWM DPI Scaling: Disabled                  Miracast: Available, with HDCP Microsoft Graphics Hybrid: Not Supported            DxDiag Version: 10.00.10586.0000 64bit Unicode   --------------- Display Devices ---------------           Card name: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family        Manufacturer: Intel Corporation           Chip type: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family            DAC type: Internal         Device Type: Full Device          Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_8086&amp;DEV_0A16&amp;SUBSYS_380C17AA&amp;REV_0B      Display Memory: 1473 MB    Dedicated Memory: 112 MB       Shared Memory: 1361 MB        Current Mode: 1366 x 768 (32 bit) (60Hz)
118607
We're about to install a memory intensive application and will purchase a server for it.  The server will have at least 4 CPUs, with multiple cores. While the application is memory intensive, the consultants we're speaking with said that 32GB should be sufficient.  They also said that if I add more memory than that, the server will slow down because of the "extra wiring" to connect all of the memory.  I'm not planning on putting VMs on the hardware so I don't need extra memory to partition for virtual machines.  However I am concerned that 32GB may not be enough.  Does the consultant's assertion that more memory than I need will slow the machine down correct?
91001
What I understand about 32-bit OS is, the address is expressed in 32 bits, so at most the OS could use 232 = 4G memory space -- I assume the unit is bytes, so 4GB.  Does this mean if any machine with a 32-bit OS (be it Windows or Unix) has more than 4GB total of RAM + page file on hard disk, for example 8GB RAM and 20GB page file, its memory will never be "used up"?  By "used up" I mean that increasing RAM or page file won't help the performance; of course, it's always possible an application will keep requesting memory from the OS but failing.  Similarly, if this 32-bit OS machine has 2GB RAM and 2GB page file, increasing the page file size won't help the performance. Is this true?
65399
if I understand correctly, in the following output produced by free, 3535m is the actual free memory available to applications, only 413m is used, is this correct?  need some clarification on the difference between Mem and -/+ buffers/cache row.   free -m              total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached Mem:          3949       3854         95          0          9       3431 -/+ buffers/cache:        413       3535 Swap:         2047       1322        725
64558
I started learning about pointers in C++ and I figured I should educate myself a bit on how memory works and is accessed. I read that when we say a processor is 64-bit, it has a 64-bit register and can access 2^64 address locations. I also read that it can fetch 64/8, so 8 bytes of data at a time, but the data bus is not the same thing as the register right? Do they need to be the same size or does that just happen to be the case usually? And is it the size of the register or the data bus size that determines what we refer to it as, such as 32/64-bit? Also is there a difference between register size and address size?