|
The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition
|
|
|
Any Flaming Results in a Temp Ban or Worse. Your Choice!!!
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
21. September 2008 @ 15:29 |
Link to this message
|
I WISH I WISH I WISH we had single sticks of 128GB RAM. if only... :(
:D :p
haha
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. September 2008 @ 15:37 |
Link to this message
|
Oh yeah, crysis loads in 9s not 30, but windows takes 9 minutes to load rather than three, or 40 seconds for XP One does wonder. Also, I very nearly ran out of RAM even at 4GB. Who's to say I won't very soon? That's poor, as even with 700MB of it unusable due to using 32-bit, I have never come close to running out of RAM in XP. I'm sorry but an OS using 2GB of RAM at idle and taking four minutes to load on what is frankly, a near top-spec machine is unacceptable, when both those results are 5 times better on XP, an OS that does everything Vista does. (DirectX10? Wortheless. Fancy UI? Use StyleXP or the Royale theme, heck even windowblinds. The only use it has is enabling quad crossfire or triple SLi, and honestly, seeing how that scales, it too teeters on the edge of the worthless bin, as you need a poxy nforce board or skulltrail for the SLi, and quad crossfire just doesn't work on most games)
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
21. September 2008 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
umm vista loads up quicker then xp....
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
21. September 2008 @ 16:54 |
Link to this message
|
spamual,
Quote:
umm vista loads up quicker then xp....
Umm, That's BS, so you just made the flowers grow! ROFLMSOAO!! I've yet to see a vista machine that took less than 4 minutes to load! And that includes on a 64x2 6000+ with 4GB of Ram (2x2)! It's a long ways from loaded when it makes that little musical ding dong sound, ya know? It ain't done until the hard drive light stops dancing! LOL!! You'll still have to wait to open anything before then anyway!
Respectfully,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
21. September 2008 @ 17:49 |
Link to this message
|
umm lol 4mins....were they using 40gb ide drives???
ill do a test of mine from after the bios till vista loads.
infact some ssds are loading vista under 30s
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
21. September 2008 @ 19:49 |
Link to this message
|
spamual,
Quote:
umm lol 4mins....were they using 40gb ide drives???
ill do a test of mine from after the bios till vista loads.
infact some ssds are loading vista under 30s
Actually it was an eMachine T5330 with the 64x2 6000+ in it replacing the stock 64x2 4400+, and 2x2 GB of Ram, and Vista Ultimate. The hard drive is a Sata 3.0gB/s 250GB Hitachi DeathStar w/8MB cache. 4 min, 17 sec till the drive light stopped flashing all over the place. The desktop is up, but whatever you try to open won't open until the hard drive finishes loading everything. I know, I tried to open several things thinking that it just didn't work and all of a sudden all of them opened one at a time. I thought the damn thing was broke. I've done a lot of Vista conversions, and I've yet to see where Vista outperformed anything! The Public Genuinely hate it! Even though some have the progys to strip out a lot of the BS that Vista makes you put up with. Everyone of them has been more than happy with XP-Pro SP3! I can't afford the cost of SSDs!
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
21. September 2008 @ 20:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
the public hate it becuase of the crap they heard about it. it happens every OS launch, and also for other things it happens aswell, where alot of people here a little crap about something, then they, not trying it also claim it, and spread it, and soon, its a snowball effect.
honestly, how much crap was loaded into the machine that it took 4 mins. my vista installtion doesnt take anywhere near this.
something must have gone wrong russ, very wrong.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
21. September 2008 @ 22:27 |
Link to this message
|
spamual,
Quote:
something must have gone wrong russ, very wrong.
It's as it came from the factory except for the new CPU and 4GB of memory. He bought the memory because he thought it would speed it up and he upped the CPU for the same reason. Now he's happy, where before he wasn't! Who am I to argue?
Best Regards,
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
|
rick5446
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
21. September 2008 @ 22:53 |
Link to this message
|
I was just getting used to Vista, till I had 2 tear down the Computer 2 send my P5Q Brd back. I had 9,500Gig HDD + 1 250 AS The main HDD with the Vista on it. I did not actually time it, but it did boot fast. Now I did notice sometimes it took longer 2 load a program. Sometimes Firefox would just pop-up, other times it would take 30 40 sec. VLC the same way. I do find the search engine to be extremely slow. But its more thorough. If U got crap in the recycle bin, well if U use Vista ya know what I mean
Now I'm not an Overclock er, or a Tweaker. The last Tweaking I did caused me to do a complete re-imstall. So I quit that BS
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. September 2008 @ 23:01
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 06:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
It was an HD753LJ, your favourite 'fastest 7200rpm drive'.
This was MY install of vista, I timed it, a clean install. Hard disk was full for the most part, but was defragmented.
And I'm going to ignore any flak I take for the HDD being full up, as I booted XP off my raptor with only 10% free space once, it only upped the boot time from 50 seconds to a minute.
|
|
rick5446
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. September 2008 @ 07:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Is their that much of a difference between 32 & 64 for either XP or Vista
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 07:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
XP 32-bit works well. Vista 32-bit works, ish. Vista 64-bit also works ok for the most part XP 64-bit is trash.
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
22. September 2008 @ 10:54 |
Link to this message
|
but sam, raptors have a much quicker rpm....
you full HDD WILL be the effect of that no doubt.
ill show you a vista boot up with a clean install when i get my build done. (hopefully with a samsung F1 320GB single platter disk)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 10:57 |
Link to this message
|
They do, which makes them load an OS in around 70% of the time. 70% of 4 minutes is 2.8 minutes. If I can load windows XP on a fresh install in 50 seconds, Where have the other 2 minutes gone? (I booted XP off a WD2500AAJS on a clean install a while back and it took about 90 seconds - I'd wager the 753LJ is faster than the 2500AAJS).
The final nail in the coffin is that a Sempron 64-bit 3600+ with 1GB of RAM takes longer to load Vista, than a Celeron M360 1.4Ghz with 256MB takes to load XP (525 seconds versus 380 seconds)
The Vista laptop even has an instant BIOS, so has a good 5-10 second advantage on the XP one...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. September 2008 @ 10:58
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
22. September 2008 @ 12:26 |
Link to this message
|
im not talking about bios boot included as that differs vastly for each computer, but from when vista starts loading till when you can start opening firefox etc.
Vista uses more resources... its universally know, why try and boot it with 1GB?
2GB as the standard when vista came out, same as 256 was when XP came out
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 12:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ah well, I'm counting not just the BIOS boot, but until the OS has finished booting up, not from when you're able to start clicking. With multi core processors, you can start opening programs long before the OS has finished loading - the side-effect is that they still take ages to open at that stage as the HDD is busy loading everything else.
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:06 |
Link to this message
|
Ok, so Vista might not run well with less resources, but WHEN you have a GOOD computer with 4GB of RAM in it already it works FASTER than XP Pro. This is a fact. I encourage anyone with a CLEAN HDD to go try it out ;)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:11 |
Link to this message
|
It's not faster than XP, nor will it ever be. Due to what Vista has to load, that's a technical impossibility. It's faster to shutdown on a powerful system, and it's faster to open programs when prefetch is enabled, but that has the downside of increasing the already high bootup time. There's no free lunch, not just with Vista, that applies to any OS.
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:20 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah, it's prefetch that makes it faster. It works so damn well though. I can turn on my computer, get some water and it's all booted up. Then whenever I want to open up programs later on they open fast.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:22 |
Link to this message
|
I'd imagine it would conflict with me though, I only have 4GB of RAM, and since I max out games, I would probably run out. Vista 64-bit for me used 1.6-2.1GB at idle, and I got it up to 3.5GB in a game, which is pretty close.
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:25 |
Link to this message
|
You dont realize how it works then. It keeps these programs in memory so you can start them up pretty fast. But if you start to run out of memory from active programs then it takes out those prefetch programs from memory and "gives it back to you" in a way.
You don't actually start running out of ram due to prefetch.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:28 |
Link to this message
|
Makes more sense. But if games don't fit in memory then surely you can see it has little purpose. I don't really give a damn if firefox takes 1 second to open instead of 2, neither do I care much about very small games loading fractionally faster. It's the big games that matter, and the big games that cause problems. On top of that, a minute extra bootup time versus 20 seconds less for loading a game doesn't really suit me either.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
spamual, 2gig was not the standard when vista came out as a customer of mine got a new dell laptop in the spring of 2007 with 512 megs of ram. talk about slow as molasses so told her to get at least another gig of ram which she did & i installed it. latop lasted another week or 2 before the hd crapped out & had to be rma'd.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. September 2008 @ 15:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ouch, unlucky!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
22. September 2008 @ 16:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
when did it come out, january 2007?
im pretty sure 2x1GB sticks were the norm back then
|
