GottaBeMobile - Vista Boot Tip - Make it faster?? : Tablet PC & Mobile PC News & Video Reviews, and Tablet PC Forums

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

« Sennheiser ME3-N Arrival | Main | Congratulations to Sumocat! »

Vista Boot Tip - Make it faster??

I haven't seen this tip before just now. Lifehacker has posted a tip on how to use multiple cores during the boot process of Windows Vista. Kind of cool if it works. Mine was on the defaulte set at 1 and I have changed it to 2. I can't reboot right now, but it's ready for the next time I can shut down. Give it a shot and comment below if you notice a difference during your next boot. This could potentially be a great tip for some of the slower Dual Core Tablet PC's out there - but on the other hand - if you're on battery, I wonder how much the extra CPU cycles during boot will drain the battery.

Cool Tool

6/24/2008 9:32 AM MST

Vista Boot Tip - Make it faster?? Comments [23] | Digg This | del.icio.us | Citations

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:04:12 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Hmm, not sure about this one Matt. I'd read this before and don't think many, if any saw any increase. Using mult-meter on my M700 (Dual Core) and desktop (Quad Core) all the cores seem busy during boot up, in fact both cores on the M700 are close to maxing out before settling down again.

But hey, proof is in the pudding and maybe some people will post improved boot speeds. The best way to increase boot time is still likely to be to prune those pesky apps in startup (Adobe, I'm looking at you)!

Gavin Miller

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:55:30 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Someone also posted a way to apply this in XP. As for its effectiveness, my understanding, based on the XP hack, is that this affects the boot.ini file (or the equivalent in Vista), which means it only affects the booting of the OS. Once the OS is started, it will use the processors as it normally does. At most, it can trim that time between when you hit the power and when you see the Windows screen, which is not much for me. Also means no help with those startup apps. That, however, is just my initial interpretation and just based on the XP hack. Could be different in Vista.

Sumocat

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:58:56 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

I guess my question would be, does boot time really matter to most who use Vista? I hardly ever shut down my UMPC, sleep mode has been working just fine.

Mike

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:17:07 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Okay, I was half right in the wrong direction. Affects Windows after boot, not before, but since Windows runs on all cores by default, the most you can do is limit the number of processors Windows uses. In other words, you can slow down your machine (for diagnostic purposes), not make it faster.

Sumocat

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:47:59 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

But the default in Dual Core is just one processor. So if what you are saying is real, sumocat, all the dual core are booting slower because of this setting.

ctitanic

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:20:16 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

It's not one processor. If you look at CPU usage in the task manager on a dual core machine, you'll see two graphs of activity, one for each processor. This is the default, or at least I assume it is because it's the one that always comes up. The boot hack allows you to change the number, but obviously you can't exceed the maximum.

Sumocat

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:30:03 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

I just put the hack to the test and set the processors to 1. Task manager only showed one processor after reboot. Interestingly, I didn't think the boot was that much slower. It was definitely sluggish after I logged in, but didn't lose much time before that.

Sumocat

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:46:52 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

So, what is your conclusion after your test? did this help?

ctitanic

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:47:34 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Of course, I agree with you, putting 4 wont help you at all if you have only 2 cores. ;)

ctitanic

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:51:03 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

For all I have been reading, this trick helps, but just for a short period of time because at the end of the boot Windows will take over and use both processors, no matter how many of them you have put in this setting.

ctitanic

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:03:51 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

My conclusion is this hack does nothing except give you the option to reduce the number of cores Windows uses. When I set it at 1, only one core was shown in the task manager (and it was running slow enough to be convincing). When I set it at 2 or returned to default, two cores were shown. This was on my Core 2 Duo Toshiba R25 running XP. That's just my experience of course, but it looks to me like the default is to run on however many cores there are. If someone would send me a quad core machine, I'll gladly test it further. :)

Sumocat

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:18:32 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

sumocat, put me on that list of people willing to test a quad core :D

ctitanic

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:32:38 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

well, I just tried it as well as clicking "max memory" i have a x61t with 2 gig ram and i did notice a huge difference in boot time. If i have time later i will try to find a stop watch and give times

creek

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:53:36 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Creek:

Is your X61T running XP Tablet or Vista?

LeoB

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:04:35 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Er it's a hoax... http://www.hackosis.com/index.php/2008/06/23/windows-quick-way-to-boost-vista-boot-time/

James Tenniswood

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:09:07 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

vista ultimate

creek

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:53:06 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

hi creek i did the same and i managed to reduce the booting time from 3:00 mins down to just 55 sec

and i have an x61t......

kadaro

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:54:00 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

sorry just t add my x61t running vista ultimate..

kadaro

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:30:10 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

yeah, i think this works only because the x61 boots at a snails pace. i have seriously had 5 minute boot times, so this is like a miracle to me :) i would give times but apparently i don't own a stop watch...

creek

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:53:30 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

So does it only affect Vista (I am also running an X61T but with Vista Bus)

Trekk69

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 8:20:14 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

WOW - I didn't expect this one to get so many comments! :) I just did a reboot for the first time since this change. I 'think' I noticed a difference in boot time - not sure... Another boot or 2 will be needed to see for sure.

Matt Faulkner

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:09:51 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

I'd be careful with this as it may cause system lock ups or boot issues. If you do try it, be sure to backup and be cautious.

So discussion I read about it here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=3521249

JwY

Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:37:45 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)

Okay, I'm starting to believe this hack will work for some computers, specifically the X61. Three people reporting dramatic results on the same model is hard to ignore. Windows should auto-detect the number of processors and run accordingly, but I'm guessing that's not happening on the X61.

The test for that is simple: Set the number of processors to 1 and see what happens. If it's as slow as the default, then the X61 must only be using one processor at startup. If not, then something really weird is happening.

Sumocat

Comments are closed.