[dibbson]

No sleep of death for me, been running since it's been cooked with no reset, it is probably your ameba arkswitch combo as arkswitch has and can cause issues. I'm not saying that's it, but i have not experienced any SOD on 23545 or 23544. Although I also have zero extra cabs installed besides prov and mms.

It is funny you are that low, I am currently at 62MB and have not soft reset or used clean ram since I flashed this last night. But none the less, I'm gonna give you'll my long 2 or 3 cents about the RAM issue you are reporting, so here goes....

Back a few years ago when Vista launched, I had the privilege of being one of the MS representatives for the Vista OS launch. One thing that did for me was let me pose questions to the Vista Dev team. As I tend to tear apart a PC or MAC OS rather quickly when they come out, one of the first things I noticed was the way Vista managed, controlled, released, etc... memory. And one of the big irritation factors for me was the way Vista allocated memory from your main system RAM to your graphics card or lack there of (on board mobo chipset) or what ever the case may have been. As at the time, I had a brand spankin' new nVidia 8800 (powerhouse gcard at the time) with 512MB of on board video ram. So why would I need any extra RAM allocated from my system RAM to my gcard? Seemed pointless to me. So for a week or so, I went on a hunt trying to figure out why and a way to release the system RAM from my gcard. After not finding anything to do about it, I took advantage of speaking with the Vista dev team to try and find an answer. So I posed the question in a diminishing returns/bottle neck situation type of question. I asked what if someone had a gcard with 256 or 512MB of on board ram (which back then was plenty) and they had 1GB of system ram, and vista was allocating say.... 256MB of system ram to the gcard, Vista itself was taking up 376MB which would leave less than half of your system memory left for apps. You then proceed to run a few apps and the system RAM start to bottle neck (ie. reach 100% usage). At that point would the OS start to release the allocated system RAM that was initially allocated to the gcard to offset the extra load from the running applications....? Direct answer from the Vista dev team at the time was yes, yes the OS can release RAM and there was supposedly a built in percentage of system RAM of when it needed to start releasing more RAM from the gcard (and other non essential items), although it may not reflect that change in RAM under gcard properties where it showed how much system ram was being sent over from the system, mostly because of the way the pae system was so broke in reporting system RAM sometimes.

Anyways, long story short, this may be what they are doing with these new builds, as the 235xx series is a pretty active and experimental com branch. It would not surprise me if they were experimenting further with dynamic RAM control with a percentage based releasing scheme (ie. release the RAM when it gets to a certain point). This would also explain the lower RAM numbers but if you noticed as I did with the last couple of builds, the speed of the wm system improved drastically across the board. So I would not worry about the RAM thing, this may be MS just improving system speed by better dynamic control and releasing of RAM.