As a rule of thumb: every "system load indicator" that promises you to aggregate memory consumption in a single number is useless shit - this is simply not possible on any modern OS.
Your discrepancy likely results from file caches.
top -o RES -b -n1
will print the system processes sorted by resident memory (if there's something to worry about)
]]>There was a new major GNOME release, resource usage differences are expected. That said nothing in this screenshot looks out of the ordinary. Are you sure you are interpreting the 900MB RAM (which given that you still have 16GB is completely negligible at that point in time) correctly?
You are likely seeing file system caches, which are normal and expected: www.linuxatemyram.com
What's the output of
free -m
I consider it ideologically important to avoid the accumulation of system clogging. If you do not follow this constantly, you can get into a rather uncomfortable situation in the future. Plus, it’s quite possible that the owners of weak PCs will identify my problem, and this discussion will help them.
Now I realize that my proposal regarding the initialization of unnecessary demons, is erroneous. Moreover, now I found out that there are discrepancies in the results of "free - m" and screenfetch. The first command has what screenfetch used to output before: no more than 700mb (606).
¯ \ _ (ツ) _ / ¯
]]>You are likely seeing file system caches, which are normal and expected: www.linuxatemyram.com
What's the output of
free -m
Perhaps the system resorts to creating the same daemons?
]]>