Hello, I'm curious. How much time does it take for your Windows to load up to Welcome screen? How much time does it take to load all the services? For my best machine (AMD 64 Athlon 3700 2GB), bootup time to Welcome screen (XP) is only about 15 seconds. The services need another 20 seconds or so. On this machine, SUSE takes about 80 seconds to load. For my second best (AMD 64 M2V dual-core 1GB), the times are 25 and 40 seconds, respectively. On this machine, Ubuntu takes about 20 seconds to load. Mrk
All 3 PCs`; XP Pro on a AMD64 Opteron 240 @ 1.4 GHz XP on a PIIIm @ 1 GHz 2k on a AMD64 4200+ x2 @ 2.3 GHz From a cold start to Welcome in less then 30 secs. Ready to go in under 60 secs. Can not wait to throw a WD Raptor on the 2k machine.
Cold start to wellcome - 29 sec + services - 11 sec = 40 sec. AMD Barton 2500+ @ 1,5 GHz | 1 GB RAM | 60 GB Maxtor 7200.
2.40 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 1024 Megabytes (DDR SDRAM) Memory Starting XP From pressing the computer on button 30 secs to choice of operating system boot (XP or VISTA) 70 secs to welcome loading your settings screen 90 seconds to desktop screen 130 secs to all system tray programs loaded (43 running processes in task manager) Starting Vista 30 secs to choice of operating system boot (XP or VISTA) 70 secs to welcome loading your settings screen 85 to desktop 90 to system tray programs loaded (41 running processes in task manager)
My desktop PC takes a little over 2 minutes to Welcome. The majority of this time is due to Rollback Rx's 'intercept' of the startup process (which occurs with most of these 'instant restorers'). The functionality I derive from Rollback is definitely worth the wait. From there on, services, startup progs and AV-update take a little under a minute until system is fully ready. Desktop: P4 2.8 (HT), 1GB PC3200 RAM (DC), 36GB Raptor HDD, WinXP Pro.
Hope this is not to far off topic, but unless you have an extremely low amount of ram (under 512 say for XP). Just how much dose the amount play into the start up time. Have been reading a lot about the WD Raptors. Wow, boot times are greatly decreased by the addition of the 10k rpm drive. Has that been your experience Pvsurfer?
I can't honestly answer that, because my desktop's boot drive has always been the Raptor. However, there's no question in my mind that the Raptor's 10k RPM accounts for its very fast disk I/O operations! Fwiw, my laptop with a PM 2.0, 1GB RAM and a 60GB 7200 RPM drive takes about the same time to full readiness as my desktop - but it's noticeably slower than my desktop in disk I/O.
the 36 GB Raptor is slower than modern 7200 rpm HDDs in all but few specific benchs. The 74 and 150 GB are beasts
Hmm, I sure don't agree with that (based on my Sandra testing). My 2nd (D) drive is the 74 gig Raptor and while it tests-out about 10% faster than my 36 gig, that's not a big difference!
What is the difference between the 36 and the 72 or 150? Seek time, cache size? Did they quit developing\improving the 36 gig while they continued development on the larger capacity hdds? Really only interested in the 36 gig for my root drive with OS and a few apps.
Hello, I don't do almost any tweaks. Very rarely. SSDP, mainly. But I use classic themes, no bells and whistles - I like simple visual style in Windows. Mrk
I prefer classic themes too Dual-core + 2 GB of RAM + Matrix RAID + nLited XP + services tweaks + minimal load at startup = VERY FAST machine
Hello Mrk, In all of my years of computing, I don't think I've ever timed my startup! Each day when I start up. I just push the button and do other things at my desk while the computer boots up. Well, I timed my laptop: Toshiba A45 WinXP Celeron 2.6 GHz 768MB RAM Classic Theme ---------------------------- 3 seconds to Toshiba Logo appearing 7 seconds to Windows XP Home Edition Logo appearing 25 seconds to Desktop appearing: Loading settings 39 seconds - loading complete Then the Desktop: Custom box Win2K AMD Athlon 2400 1GB RAM --------------------------------- 20 seconds to "Starting Windows" graph at the bottom of the screen 80 seconds to Desktop appearing: loading settings 90 seconds - loading complete -rich
From cold start to log-in, 1:05. If entering password takes 5 seconds, hard drive activity ceases in another 35 seconds. 1:40 total. If I cancel the batch files that replace my registry and core system files during the initial startup, I get to the log-in screen in 35 seconds with everything finished in 1:10. That's with the normal 17 running processes and 5 that run once at startup. Could probably speed it up a few more seconds if I'd clean off my desktop. For a 366mhz Celeron with 160MB of RAM, it'll do. Rick
That is down right fantastic considering your PC specs. Most new "state-of-the-art" of the shelf builds do`t boot that fast.
I can't comment on the 150, but other than the storage difference the 36 and 74 have the exact same specs. As I said before, for whatever reason my 74 is about 10% faster than my 36 (which in actual use is negligable). I've had my Raptor 36 for 4 years and its never given me a problem of any kind... I would highly recommend it for your system drive.
Last time I read up about them the specs were the same, was just curious if they had changed and I missed something. 1 is definitely on my next toy to purchase list. As far as the nominal speed difference, probably just a slight variance in the manufacturing specs.\tolerances. 4+ years is a good life expectancy. Glad to hear. Had read that the early ones were a bit short lived.
Could you elaborate on this? Firmware improvements Also, two platters vs one platter Check the link above
Win 98 asks so little in comparison. You didn't think I was running XP on this relic did you? This only works on DOS based systems. Explained here. Rick
the funny thing is i got given this task as my key skills maths work at college. time the booting up. the loading screen login etc. I will have to time mine tomorrow once ive installed kis6.0 MP1 lodore
Really had not given it much thought. Ever think of at least upgrading to 2k? Have not found a PC yet, have put it on some real dinosaurs, that did`t handle it pretty well.
Why not a before and after just to see. I am not much on stop watches or benchmarking. I prefer the "seat of my pants" speed rating. But would be interesting just the same.
