"your computer is low on memory, please close X program"

Ooh, someone got up grumpy. 

The facts of this issue have not changed between Windows Vista->7->8, specifically the x64 editions. 

Windows does not "want" to use more than 80% of available memory. There's one person who wants to argue this point for the sake of arguing. He doesn't even argue whether or not it's a major issue but if this happens at all. It's inane as anyone can see from their resource monitor how windows allocates memory and can observe the magic 80% number in action. 

If you have NO page file, then

Windows will issue low memory warning immediately upon reaching the 80% threshold. 

It's stupid but there's nothing you can do about it as Microsoft does not want to cap the buffer/reserver amount in absolute megabytes for some reason. At 8GB machines that's 1.6GB memory doing nothing much, perhaps it'll finally be patched when 16GB becomes commonplace as 3.2GB is fairly obvious overhead. 

This may be why Windows XP ran so much more smoothly. It did not have the magical 80% cap on your RAM usage. I had my last XP machine with 2GB or memory and never got 'Out of memory ' warnings and a few time my memory was down to only a couple MB's available and a few time the system crashed. But all-in-all, I was able to use most of my RAM and was able to open far more program application with those 2GB of RAM than I can with 6GB on Windows 7. The disappointing thing is that I always thought when moving to Windows 7 with twice the memory of my XP system (4GB of RAM as apposed to 2GB) that it would have a comparable 'User Experience'. I was wrong in that assumption. In fact 6GB (3 times as much as my XP system) falls noticeably short in the 'User Experience' area. I assume I would need 8GB of RAM to have a similar 'User Experience' and when Windows 7's sp2 or sp3 rolls out I am sure that will double as it did with XP when its sp's rolled out and forced me to go from 1GB to 2GB to maintain the same 'User Experience'

I still can't wrap my head around the need for a system doing typical computing with however many programs open, needs 6-8GB of data in memory in order to function properly. That is an awful large data to be sitting at the ready.

Things I have found out about this issue:

1. Adding RAM does not fix it and has NOeffect.
2. Increasing the Page File and/or Virtual memory does not fix it and has NOeffect
3. Closing Chrome Browser tabs or other programs does not fix it and has NOeffect
4. Disabling the Page File does not fix it and has NOeffect

What may be part of the issue:

1. Memory Leaking programs (typically browsers of almost any distribution)
2. Superfetch - While NOT the cause of the problem, may be exacerbating the issue due to the way its code is implemented. (I will explain later, Explanation #1)

Metal480AZ said something that got me thinking that what I posted and assumed before in overclocker.net forum about 'Out of memory' warnings to be more true which was, "It showed nearly 2GB of "available" memory but commit was maxed out. " (I will explain later, Explanation #2 )

The problem may possibly be Desktop Heap depletion. 

I will just cut and paste what I posted on Overclocker

Possible FIX other than disabling the warnings:

There seams to be some discussion that I have found that effect systems from Vista onward ..... namely more so XP, Widow 7, and Window 8 as the NT familly tends to suffer more in some way. It is called the 'Desktop Heap' setting

To be clear, we are not talking about the desktop you see on your display monitor with all of the icons and task bar. Every service, handle, app, window ect. is assigned an individual desktop out of the Desktop Heap. Even services that run behind the scenes that do not have UI windows.

Direct quote from MS KB947226

Every desktop object on the system has a desktop heap associated with it. The desktop object uses the heap to store menus, hooks, strings, and windows. The system allocates desktop heap from a system-wide 48-MB buffer. In addition to desktop heaps, printer, and font drivers also use this buffer.

Desktops are associated with window stations. A window station can contain zero or more desktops. The size of the desktop heap allocated for a desktop associated with a window station can be changed in the following registry value.

This got me thinking that even though there are many places on the web where you can read others saying that disabling the 'Superfetch' and its original predecessor, Prefetch in Windows does not do anything to improve or contribution to memory management issues or problems but when these things (applications that you MAY use because you used them every day at the same time) are loaded by the OS's Superfetch to take full advantage of RAM and make using RAM more efficient, it contributes to Desktop Heap depletion because all of thes things loaded will use its own portion of the Desktop Heap. There is only so much and is not Dynamic (something like 10MB or 20MB on earlier Widows) 48MB on current 64bit Windows. So when it is used up, the system says there is no more addressing for virtual address space regardless of you having available memory.

Explanation #1

This may be why some report that 'Disableing' Superfetch has improved or fixed this issue as it free up more of this 'Desktop Heap' and leaves more headroom. I personally think that this is like someone (Microsoft) putting baby oil in your cars window washer fluid reservoir (setting this Desktop Heap' at a predetermined number and designing Windows Memory Management to only use 75-80% and then redesign Prefetch to use more memory and Desktop Heap space loading more things in memory calling this improvement 'Superfetch) and then since every time you turn on the windshield washers it just smears (you get 'Out of Memory' warning with typical , average computing), you decide to rip off your wiper blades or disable you windshield wiper/washer switch (Disable Superfetch) to gain a smear and streak free windshield (no more 'Out of Memory' warnings). But then you can't clean your windshield very easily (the joys and benefits of Superfetch don't work anymore) since you didn't eliminate, fix or in any way address the cause of the issue ... like dumping and flushing the baby oil out of your windshield washer fluid reservoir.

Explanation #2

This also got me thinking that the the high commit may be one ways of seeing the effect of Desktop Heapdepletion. I am not sure at the moment if or how it would be all related

What I figured out and decided to do:

After going to many sites to figure out what it was, what it was used for and how best to adjust it I came to the conclusion (just yesterday) that I would try today to adjust the Desktop Heap via the MSDN instructions found at, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947246

What I did waschanged the 3rd value that was set by default in Windows at 768, and changed it to 1024. So far I havn't gotten any 'Out of memory' warnings but then I usually got them when I had 200, or close to 200 Chrome browser tabs open or over 100 along with other applications. I only made this configuration change just 24 hrs before posting this. I will post back the more experience and results I get. I have noticed though that my 'Available' memory in TM is showing 1-1.5GB higher than usual for the amount of open applications I have had open for the last 24 hrs.

Other supporting sites talking about this issue which I used are:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/126962

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ntdebugging/archive/2007/01/04/desktop-heap-overview.aspx

In this blogs.msdn URL there is a link to a video .... which actually takes you to another page where the real link is that I highly recomend that explains what Desktop Heap is in a consice, easy to understand way which I will post the link for your convenience below.

http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/jeff_dailey/ntdebugging-blog-talk-about-on-desktop-heap

anyone can see from their resource monitor how windows allocates memory and can observe the magic 80% number in action

Where does the resource monitor state that 80% is a magical number or show the number 80 as any percentage? I have never seen it and must assume you spent time roughly calculating some other numbers to arrive at this percentage conclusion.

Keep task manager and/or resource manager open, that's all it takes. There are also quite a few threads in various forums to the effect of "Windows is claiming I'm out of memory but I still have 1.6GB unused". The same numbers keep cropping up. 

With no pagefile finding the threshold is rather easy as you get immediately the low memory complaint. With pagefile it's a bit more fuzzy and slow as windows will allocate some of that last 20% of RAM butyou can also observe over time how the allocated ram will back down as windows moves things out of RAM into pagefile until you're again at or near the 80% mark. If you manage to exhaust the pagefile you will get low memory error immediately when unallocated memory hits <20­% physical RAM size. For best results do not power off windows, use sleep/hibernate instead.

If you think you can't be hitting 10.8GB virtual memory allocated, just prove it, check what resource monitor says when you get low memory error. On my work computer I have 8GB RAM and 3GB pagefile and I'll get low memory warning from time to time unless I restart chrome. 

At least the suspender extension actually works unlike similar firefox plugins. I have at the moment <800MB private memory for chrome, which is nothing. With a few dozen tabs and running for a few days, it goes over 3GB every time "normally". 

So then. All  'out of memory errors'  are a result of Windows not using more than 80% of RAM.

But with a Page File you are spared the error message when going over 80% RAM usage.

Nothing to do with software that us the Page File at all, yes ?

Which explains why with 8GB of RAM, and never having used more than about 52% of that,

I will never see this error if I were to disable the Page File, yes ?     

Well, BossDweebe, You are incorrect again in this assumption.  You apparently didn't go back and read much of the whole forum. I will repeat what I found, not only from my own experience but from what I have read of others. 

1. The guy you were referring to may not have had a Page file but others including myself have it enabled. So this is in NO way a protection against 'Out of Memory' warnings.
2. With my Page File I have a total of 12GB of VM and in only having open Chrome with a few dozen tabs open, couple Notepads, and maybe Windows Explorer, I have gotten the 'Out of Memory' warnings. With that , there is no way on earth I depleted 12GB

So try not to assuming things. Forum thread do't need dozens of pages of assumptions.

Ok, well I will have to at least thank BossDweebe for one thing. His MORE link pointed me to an Alex .... somebody, and upon following links from his article to another article and many links deep to half a dozen articles I came across what appears to look like, or at least looks promising, to be a possible solution or root cause of this issue. It goes to the heart of memory management and only something that engineer and OS development teams talk about. This may also explain why there is so much controversy over disabling Superfetch ad its predecessor, Prefetch on XP. Many people writing articles stating that it will do nothing for memory management , nor impact memory usage in a positive way much less get rid of the dreaded 'Out of Memory' warnings that it seams I have seen 100's of people complain about and probably has effected 1000's at some point or another. And then others swear by that fact that disabling Superfetch or its equivalent has fixed the issue. I am going to test out the adjustment which is configurable in the registry****and will post details if it pans out.

 In Reply To Olli Mannisto:

Ooh, someone got up grumpy

well, I re-read the forum rules of conduct.  I decided I should then edit some of my posts to make them more polite, keep the thread on track and constructive and also consolidated and reformatted them. 

It was just late .... or I mean early in the morning and feeling frustrated over this for the past two years of experiencing it with nobody seaming to know of a solution, MS not fixing it and not wanting to deal with someone assuming many thing and wasting everyone's time with superficial nonsense that was not true when they clearly didn't read anything in the thread and was just assuming everything. 

Just about all forums have these unwritten rules:

1. Make sure you have facts or at least factual things to say that can be proven or citations or at least to contribute positively.
2. Don't just chime in and say, "I have the same problem' as nobody want's to read 300 pages of 10,000 people saying that over and over and over again ,"I have the exact same issue".
3. Don't even remotely sound like a troll or you could get called on the carpet for it and/or flamed.
4. Make sure you put forth a best effort to read the whole forum so that you do't repeat others, make erroneous assumptions, put word in other mouth that shouldn't be there, come across an unknowledgeable know-it-all, or any of the pitfalls that almost always befall some well intentioned poster wanting to contribute positively without knowing what the real issues (notice plural as issues tend to evolve in a forum) or what has transpired throughout the process. ie: I have seen forums dozens of pages long where posters ask the same question dozens of times that was already answered dozens of times thus showing they read nothing.

anyone can see from their resource monitor how windows allocates memory and can observe the magic 80% number in action

Where does the resource monitor state that 80% is a magical number or show the number 80 as any percentage? I have never seen it and must assume you spent time roughly calculating some other numbers to arrive at this percentage conclusion.

If you have NO page file, then

Windows will issue low memory warning immediately upon reaching 80% allocated.

Then is my windows broken ? Because I get this every time I reach some magical limit whether its 80% or 75% and I do have a page file. Like I said 12GB total VM

It's stupid but there's is nothing you can do about it

Sure its stupid as with these days of GB's of memory, GB's can't be used. I can't imagine a Windows Server with 64GB or 128GB of RAM having 16GB or 32GB respectively going to waste.

WorKarounds: Get more RAM 

Now its your turn. Are you serious??? Now you are showing that you didn't read the thread. I will repeat again what I did at least 3 and possibly 4 times already. I have increased RAM with no effect or change . I have then lowered the memory footprint of all running processes, with no effect. These things have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it. I have dealt with this long enough trying many things that I would steak my like o this undeniable fact. One possible contributing fact may be that Chrome is a huge memory vortex black whole as some others have mentioned it leaks memory, which would show why I am RIGHT, and amount of RAM doesn't matter. As if this is a fact, Chrome will gobble up any and all RAM eventually, leaking as much as it can no matter how much you have.

Use the Page File 

Oh Lord, There is only one person in this forum that said they were NOT using the Page File and THAT person is NOT experiencing this issue. How much did you read? Or I mean how little of this forum did you read?

Chrome leaks memory like crazy ... 

Well, I have news for you. I had the same issue using Waterfox and Firefox so that is a totally wrong assumption as being the issue as this would imply that we all just stop browsing the internet. There seams to be many programs taht leak memory and I am Sure that Firefox and IE do their share. I personal feel that Waterfox leaks less because of how it is developed but then I am not sure and is more of an assumption.

FYI: Chrome Task Manager which I am very familiar with. It will show you how when I, you, or anyone closes half of their 200 open tabs that the memory footprint of the remaining open Chrome tabs starts climbing in memory consumption. You can watch it happen slow, steady and sure as a bean burrito will eventually give you gas. 

You can try 'the great suspender' 

Got it. Used it. It works marginally and only temporarily as after you suspend, its almost like closing tabs. The remaining open tabs will eventually grow and consume that 'Magical' percentage you talked about.

The only real solution I have found is to keep closing your browser every hour or two no matter what browser you use as I have had this issue with Chrome, FF, WF, and IE. But that is no real solution as it is inconvenient.

I will report back on the other thing I was checking into that looks promising.