FreewareFan
Member
I ran across this site, and thought that it might be of help to some members here. I realize that some of the procedures are common knowledge, but there are others that are more obscure, but still very helpful.
As always, do a backup before you implement any of these procedures, just to be on the safe side.
http://9tutorials.com/2007/10/09/make-your-windows-xp-run-faster-than-never-before.html
Definitely do a backup before - you will be needing it before you get to the end of the suggested changes. Considering one of the suggestions is to completely disable System Restore - a backup will be your only option for recovering any problems.
Rather than debunk the inaccuracies in their "tutorial" - I'll find another.
FreewareFan
Member
Backups are absolutely the way to go, I agree!
One of the first things I do when I do a fresh install of Windows is to disable System Restore. If you are hit with anything above a level 2 virus, then System Restore isn't going to benefit anyone. So, to me, it's just so much waste of HD space, and system resources.
If you have the time, I would like to hear your "debunks" on what you perceive to be inaccuracies. I went through the entire list, and implemented most of the suggestions, even the one about disabling the Performance Counters.
Nothing in that "tutorial" jumped out at me with a red flag, so if you have some insights as to what could be bad information, please share... Thanks!
Well I've gone over the article - point by point and on closer inspection there aren't any serious "red flags" - but there are several "tweaks" that do nothing, or will degrade performance rather than optimize it.
Below are just some notes I wrote that can be followed through as you are reading the original tweak article. I know the formatting could be better, but I've had a big day and it's late, and bed is calling... E&OE :)
DISABLE INDEXING SERVICES - Good Tweak. As a replacement I would suggest looking at Locate32 (view demo).
OPTIMISE DISPLAY SETTINGS - ok, except use "Let Windows Choose" or "Optimize for Best Performance"
(the suggestion to use "visual styles" if you are concerned about low resources or performance is incorrect)
DISABLE PERFORMANCE COUNTERS = OK
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/48edd368-2bde-4647-9fea-1b5f28a23ca91033.mspx?mfr=true
http://download.microsoft.com/download/win2000platform/exctrlst/1.00.0.1/nt5/en-us/exctrlst_setup.exe
SPEEDDUP FOLDER BROWSING = OK
IMPROVE MEMORY USAGE = OK
CachemanXP - http://www.outertech.com/index.php?_charisma_page=product&id=7
OPTIMISE YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION = DEPENDS ON NETWORK SETUP
OPTIMISE YOUR PAGEFILE = DEPENDS (Better options might exist)
The best option is to let Windows Manage the pagefile (unless you are really short on disk space and cannot affort 2GB or whatever).
- If you have more than one physical hdd - consider putting the swap file on a different drive to where windows is installed.
RUN BOOTVIS - IMPROVE BOOT TIMES = DON'T BOTHER
"Please note that Bootvis.exe is not a tool that will improve boot/resume performance for end users. Contrary to some published reports, Bootvis.exe cannot reduce or alter a system's boot or resume performance. The boot optimization routines invoked by Bootvis.exe are built into Windows XP. These routines run automatically at pre-determined times as part of the normal operation of the operating system."
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/fastboot/BootVis.mspx
REMOVE THE DESKTOP PICTURE - (on low memory system) not a big deal, but won't hurt.
REMOVE FONTS FOR SPEED = OK (Be careful what you remove isn't needed by XP)
One report quoted - performance is noticably affected when more than 500 fonts are installed.
DISABLE UNNECESSARY SERVICES - Depends on which services.
Read through an explanation of what the services do before disabling them. If in doubt leave it alone.
http://www.theeldergeek.com/services_guide.htm
http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
Also setting to "disable" isn't always required - if the service is already at manual that may suffice.
TURN OFF SYSTEM RESTORE - up to user. (Performance benefit is negligible)
If disk space is an issue, consider reducing space allocated, before disabling completely.
DEFRAGMENT YOUR PAGEFILE - OK. consider a dedicated partition for the page file - or better still a dedicated partition on a separate disk. Consider defragging your pagefile as well as your data files. Consider an improved defrag tool rather than the free Microsoft offering.
SPEEDUP FOLDER ACCESS - DISABLE LAST ACCESS UPDATE = ok.
Windows XP has a feature that keeps track of when a file was last accessed. This comes in handy to defragmentation programs when they have to decide which file has the most accesses. Defragmenting your hard drive based on the most accessed files isn't a great speed improvement. Therefore you can disable the file access time stamp to give yourself a noticeable performance increase.
Microsoft says that this performance degradation is noticeable only when you have more than 70,000 folders, but many people say it does the job even if you have less folders:
DISABLE SYSTEM SOUNDS - users choice.
IMPROVE BOOT TIMES = NO BENEFIT (Unnecessary)
http://technet2.microsoft.com/windowsserver/en/library/ed01b95b-b36c-4630-bd50-df375ae86e2a1033.mspx?mfr=true
IMPROVE SWAPFILE PERFORMANCE = NO BENEFIT
ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 (DOES NOTHING)
MAKE YOUR MENUS LOAD FASTER = OK
MAKE PROGRAMS LOAD FASTER = NO BENEFIT
/prefetch:1 (DOES NOTHING)
IMPROVE XP SHUTDOWN SPEED = OK
SPEED UP BOOT TIMES I (Minimal, if anything)
Slows shutdown for questionable improvement in time to restart.
SPEED UP BOOT TIMES II = OK
SPEED UP BOOT TIMES III (Minimal, if anything)
FREE UP MEMORY (Performance Loss)
(Memory Manager or Memory Defrag tools have no net benefit on system performance)
ENSURE XP IS USING DMA MODE (Should be by default)
REMOVE ANNOYING DELETE CONFIRMATION MESSAGES (USERS CHOICE)
DISABLE PREFETCH ON LOW MEMORY SYSTEMS (Bad suggestion - doesn't understand how prefetch works).
The reasoning suggested as to why someone would turn off Prefetch is flawed.
The effect on performance is opposite to what is desired.
And some other sites I have in my favorites that are relevant.
Some Optimization Myths & Bad Tweaks.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/XPMyths.html#Optimization
http://tweakhound.com/xp/xptweaks/supertweaks11.htm
Some (mostly) OK Tweak Guides - read in conjunction with the above myths to work out the bits you can take with a pinch of salt.
http://www.tweakhound.com/xp/xptweaks/supertweaks1.htm
http://www.overclock.net/windows/9836-xp-definitive-performance-tweaking-guide.html
FreewareFan
Member
Thanks for taking the time and effort to reply with your findings and opinions, BuBBy! I have replied to certain of your comments below, with a comment of my own.
IMPROVE SWAPFILE PERFORMANCE = NO BENEFIT
ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 (DOES NOTHING)
I agree, it is only on Win98 and WinME that this has an effect.
MAKE PROGRAMS LOAD FASTER = NO BENEFIT
/prefetch:1 (DOES NOTHING)
Well, on some programs, it does provide faster startup times, on my system anyway.
I would suggest that a user try it on a program by program basis. It will certainly do no harm
if it is not effective on a particular program.
OPTIMISE YOUR PAGEFILE = DEPENDS (Better options might exist)
As we both know, the Pagefile has been a subject of much, much conjecture over the years.
DISABLE UNNECESSARY SERVICES - Depends on which services.
I have disabled each and every one on the list, with no ill effects. The only possible one that I would
make mention of is the disabling of Help, if a user has need of that service. I personally do not use it.
FREE UP MEMORY (Performance Loss)
(Memory Manager or Memory Defrag tools have no net benefit on system performance)
I'm not sure I follow you on this one, BuBBy. I think we'd both agree that the more memory you have available, the faster/better system performance is, yes? So, when a program frees up and makes available more memory to the system, how can it not be of benefit?
ENSURE XP IS USING DMA MODE (Should be by default)
Agreed, however, it does no harm to doublecheck, and only takes less than a minute to do.
DISABLE PREFETCH ON LOW MEMORY SYSTEMS (Bad suggestion - doesn't understand how prefetch works).
I'm totally with you on this issue!
All in all, after doing my own re - review of the suggestions on the website I provided, with the exception of the Disable prefetch on low memory systems, I cannot find anything that would be detrimental to someones computer.
In the long run, I think you'll agree that most beginning computer users will not do any of those tweaks in the first place. The more experienced users will venture out and do some of those suggestions, one by one, until they get confident with the methods and results of the tweaks. But at the end of the day, these tweaks, as with most tweaks, are subjects of controversy and debate. Some swear by them, some protest against them. Only personal experience will guide someone at the end of the day, and the only way to gain personal experience is to dive in, and get your feet wet.....
Happy computing! :-)
MAKE PROGRAMS LOAD FASTER = NO BENEFIT
/prefetch:1 (DOES NOTHING)Well, on some programs, it does provide faster startup times, on my system anyway.
I would suggest that a user try it on a program by program basis. It will certainly do no harm
if it is not effective on a particular program.
http://www.edbott.com/weblog/archives/000621.html
http://blogs.msdn.com/ryanmy/default.aspx
FREE UP MEMORY (Performance Loss)
(Memory Manager or Memory Defrag tools have no net benefit on system performance)I'm not sure I follow you on this one, BuBBy. I think we'd both agree that the more memory you have available, the faster/better system performance is, yes? So, when a program frees up and makes available more memory to the system, how can it not be of benefit?
http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?articleid=41095&feed=articleLink
http://www.neowin.net/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t210192.html
If you need more memory either install extra RAM or stop some running processes you don't need.
FreewareFan
Member
You posted:
" FREE UP MEMORY (Performance Loss)
(Memory Manager or Memory Defrag tools have no net benefit on system performance)
I'm not sure I follow you on this one, BuBBy. I think we'd both agree that the more memory you have available, the faster/better system performance is, yes? So, when a program frees up and makes available more memory to the system, how can it not be of benefit?
http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?articleid=41095&feed=articleLink
http://www.neowin.net/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t210192.html "
An excerpt from the first link clearly says "....to state the creating more Available Memory doesn't help is incorrect"
But you know what? I'm not here to debate the subject, nor to instigate ill will. You are a Mod, and I would assume that you are just looking out for what you feel is the well being of the forums' readers at large...
This could go on and on, and like I said, at the end of the day, these tweaks are subject to opinions and speculation. So, I will end with the statement again, that the reader can use what tweaks appeals to them, and ignore the rest. As for me and my computer system, I found 85% of those tweaks to be of benefit to my system.
Perhaps this might explain my understanding of why such utilities aren't a big "win" when it comes to trying to improve performance on your system.
http://www.bitsum.com/winmemboost.asp
In trying to determine the cost/benefit ratio of this performance tweak - there is a fairly significant setup & execution time while all of the data is pushed to Virtual Memory. As soon as Windows needs to access any of that data, it is going to move it straight back again. Again another cost hit and all for a performance benefit that will probably save nowhere near the extra time needed to push everything out.
Sure it's not going to blow up your PC, but it's all smoke and mirrors performance tricks showing an "Available Memory" counter rise almost to maximum. The user sees this and nods approval thinking a huge saving has been made, and the pc decks are clear and ready for business. As soon as they try to do something, Windows has to bring all that data back from the hard disk. Net effect = not much at all. Time taken = depends, but usually much more time you saved by making a program "run faster".
If you have 2GB of RAM and only 1GB is being used, then the remaining 1GB is being wasted. If (for eg.) windows could take 1GB of virtual memory off the hard disk and make use of that 1GB of RAM - performance would improve overall because that data is available in RAM and can be used immediately (instead of being copied from the pagefile into RAM and then used).
There are only two ways to reduce demands on RAM.
1. Install more memory into your computer.
2. Close down other running programs and services.
Hopefully that helps clarify why "RAM Cleaner Pro" or "MemTweak" or "RAM Defrag" type of programs while giving the illusion that they might be helping - at the end of the day rather than addressing the problem, they only make it worse.
I'm not having a go at you over any of this (I enojoy a good debate just like the next user) - I just feel like many of the people who commented when GOTD was approached and agreed to give away these "memory tools" that users should be aware - experienced technical users would never consider running them on their systems.
FreewareFan
Member
"I'm not having a go at you over any of this (I enojoy a good debate just like the next user)"
/Action on Me smiles, shakes hands, and walks away.. /End Action
You must log in to post.
