System Performance feels like its lagging to me...

[pr-man 1]

Well I here is my system in short form

 

T-bird @ 1.3

384 PC2100 DDR

Epoz 8K7A Latest Bios

Ati AIW Radeon 32 meg DDR

80 gig Maxtor ATA133 (running at ata100) 7200rpm

20 Gig WD ata-66 running at ata-66 5400rpm

Turtle Beach Santa Cruz

and other stuff such as cdroms,dvd etc

 

Problem I have when I run a game such as Jedi Knight 2 or other intensive games, when I exit them it takes quite a few seconds for it to exit

to the desktop and for the whole desktop to be back to normal. Am I being to picky? Cann anyone give me some ideas on how to best tweak

my system for optimal performance given my hardware?

[CUViper 0]

Get more memory. JK2 is very memory intensive, so while you are in the game, some of the other processes get thrown out to virtual memory. Then when you quit the game, the delay you note is from loading the desktop and such back into main memory.

[pr-man 1]

damn 384 megs of DDR is not enough?

[Sampson 0]

CUViper has nailed your answer. 384 is great for Word Processing, Spreadsheets, even internet surfing. But, the more memory you pack into your machine when you are running games, the easier the computer will "breathe." XP is putting your desktop and whatever it can into virtual memory which is nothing other than a cache on your hard disk. After exiting the game, XP has to retrieve the desktop from the hard disk, read it to ram, paint the desktop, and a host of other things.

 

Even with more ram, you may still experience some delay, but your machine will love you for it.

 

I don't really like "tweak" programs. You never know what you might break playing with them since many are registry hacks. But, there is one "trick" that has been part of windows since the beginning - fonts. Some folks love fonts and have hundred installed. When Windows comes up it reads all those fonts and caches them. If you aren't a big font fiend, copy those that you hardly ever use off into a folder and out of \winnt\fonts. You can always put them back, but you'll find that your programs seem to get a little snappier. On really fast machines, this will probably not be as noticeable.

[Alien 1]

pr-man - how have you got your page file set up? fixed size, or allowing Windows to handle it? If the latter, then try setting the min & max size to 1.5 x the amount of RAM you have. With previous versions of Windows it used to be 2.5, but now it seems ok to only do 1.5. In fact I'm only currently using 1x.

[pr-man 1]

Alien I have a set one already

[pr-man 1]

Wierd I just noticed that XP is set to utilize memory for the best performance of the system cache and not programs. is that right?

[pr-man 1]

also is system restore important?

[Sampson 0]

System restore is like wearing a belt and suspenders. It "backups" the registry and support files before you install new hardware or software so that you can revert back to an earlier configuration in case something goes south.

 

Some feel this background task takes up too many processor cycles and disable it. As your registry grows, each time it is saved it will consume more of your hard disk.

 

Its a judgment call.

[Sampson 0]

The best performance of the system cache is to move it as a contiguous file to the outer ring of the hard disk. Speed disk by Norton's does this (fat 32; I'm not sure about NTFS). I don't believe that Windows does, so I am not sure what "best performance" means. Usually Windows tells you to let the system manage the cache and many feel that they can do a better job setting the size manually.

[Alien 1]

Sorry Sampson, but Speed Disk can only do that under a 9x based OS, not any of the NT-flavoured ones.

[JP- 0]

Basically, no matter how large a swap file you have its never going to be as fast and as 'instant' as more memory Just get at least 512 and you should see a big difference in things like returning to the desktop.

[Sampson 0]

These reviewers sure got fooled then: http://www.sofsol.co.nz/p0001662.htm

http://www.ciol.com/content/reviews/software/101121401.asp

[Alien 1]

They probably did the same as me - used it on 9x & just assumed it could do the same on XP & won't find out until they actually go to try it which is how I found out.

 

Edit: what I mean is they were used to using it on 9x/ME before they moved upto XP & didn't realise that the NT/2K/XP version has been castrated.

[Sampson 0]

I stand corrected. I quit using Speed Disk when I went to 2K. I use O&O now and ask it to defrag by Last Access. It does not move the cache file on the hard disk, nor as far as I know, does it "optimize" it.

[pr-man 1]

Guys I have another problem. My computer locked up and when i rebooted chkdsk deleted some files according to what the text flying across the screen said. now I have to type my user password in everytime I boot up. How do I set it back to auto logging me in like it was before?

[Sampson 0]

Been a long time since I did this. Check Microsoft before you do this:

How to implement autologon for WinXP

A. Click on "Start"

B. Click on "Run" - and type "control userpasswords2"

C. click OK

D. Select the Users tab,

E. Clear the "Users must enter a user name and password to use this computer" check box

F. Click "Apply".

G. A dialog will appear that asks you what user name and password should be used to logon automatically,

H. Supply a Username, Password, and Confirm Password

I. Click "OK".

J. Click on " Start"

K. Open the Control Panel

L. Dbl Click User Accounts

M. Click “Change the way users log on or off”

N. Clear Check box for “Use the Welcome Screen”

O. Clear Check box for “Use Fast User Switching”

P. Click Apply Options.