Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7

News
By Marcus Yam
published

Your old PC that came with Windows Vista will still run Windows 8 quite well. In fact, all you need is an old Intel Atom netbook with 1GB of RAM.

Usually a new version of Windows demands higher system requirements than the one before it. This wasn't the case with Windows 7, and it looks like it also won't be the case for Windows 8.

Microsoft yesterday demonstrated on stage at the Build event Windows 8 running on a three-year-old Lenovo S10 netbook, which packed an early model of the Intel Atom CPU and 1GB of RAM. Not only did it run Windows 8, but it ran it better than it could Windows 7.

The latest version of Windows 7 was demonstrated running with about 404 MB of RAM used for 32 processes. Windows 8 in its current, unfinished state is doing the same with about 281 MB and 29 processes.

This is not only good news for those who are still running on computers that are several years old, but it's also for those seeking a performance boost from the greater efficiency. Hopefully this will also translate into better power consumption numbers for notebook users.

Marcus Yam
Marcus Yam
Marcus Yam served as Tom's Hardware News Director during 2008-2014. He entered tech media in the late 90s and fondly remembers the days when an overclocked Celeron 300A and Voodoo2 SLI comprised a gaming rig with the ultimate street cred.
79 Comments Comment from the forums
  • phatbuddha79
    Microsoft always touts and hypes things up before release, but rarely do they ever come through. I'll believe it when I see it.
    Reply
  • nforce4max
    I am little more skeptical than some are now days but then again from their tablet demo even a chicken or pigeon could use.
    Reply
  • amk-aka-Phantom
    phatbuddha79Microsoft always touts and hypes things up before release, but rarely do they ever come through. I'll believe it when I see it.
    Maybe so, but if it is actually true, it'll be nice. Win7 is already resource-friendly and Win8 is promised to be even better. Let's see if it will be done.
    Reply
  • phishy714
    ... and this is why "pc sales are going down the drain" even though i personally don't believe that they are necessarily. It is because the avg. user does not need any i-series cpu's, much less bulldozer amd cpu's or anything. All you need is that beat up old, 5 year old computer sitting in the cornere to be able to use Windows 8 (the latest and greatest in the eyes of the avg consumer). Why would you ever need to buy a new computer, then, if you can check your email, use facebook and watch online movies without much problem?


    gg
    Reply
  • COLGeek
    Betas always start out this way. Wait until the "good idea fairies" get done adding all of their cool features and then measure resource requirements.

    Been there, done that, all the way back to NT5/W2K and every version since then.
    Reply
  • burnley14
    I'm less concerned with this than I used to be, now that greater system resources are commonplace. Especially memory. Memory is so cheap now that any system can have 8GB for only $35. Based on this, why not make everything faster even if it is at the cost of memory usage? People with 3-year-old netbooks aren't going to spend the $100 to upgrade to this from XP, they would just buy a new netbook for about the same cost.
    Reply
  • bak0n
    How much of that windows 7 is from windows updates?
    Reply
  • internetlad
    Phishy714... and this is why "pc sales are going down the drain" even though i personally don't believe that they are necessarily. It is because the avg. user does not need any i-series cpu's, much less bulldozer amd cpu's or anything. All you need is that beat up old, 5 year old computer sitting in the cornere to be able to use Windows 8 (the latest and greatest in the eyes of the avg consumer). Why would you ever need to buy a new computer, then, if you can check your email, use facebook and watch online movies without much problem?gg

    Are you seriously moaning that the new OS from microsoft is TOO efficient.

    Some people will find something wrong with everything.
    Reply
  • phate
    MS is getting more efficient and demands fewer resources with Windows 8.

    Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.

    WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.
    Reply
  • amk-aka-Phantom
    9309912 said:
    MS is getting more efficient and demands fewer resources with Windows 8.

    Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.

    WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.

    I like it. And Unity can be switched off ;)

    It's logical... no matter how much people flame MS, I'm sure they have enough sane people there to make a good OS (Win7 is, after all, a great one!). I just hope they don't pull a Vista on us, when they released a beta of Win7 as a full OS.
    Reply