XP boots slow

[knightofnight]

Here's the problem:
I just built a Pentium 4 3GHz (800FSB, 1mb cache) computer with 512mb ram, 30 gig hard drive, 16mb video card, ASUS P4P800 SE Motherboard.

It has Windows XP professional installed. The first time i installed it the windows booted when the bars at boot up went across 8 times, on a fresh install!!! When i did it on my friends computer, his went on the first! And his computer is AMD ATHLON 2200, 512MB Ram, 64mb video card, 30gig hard drive. I don't know what is the problem. Can someone pls suggest something. Because i spent a lot of money on the processor and motherboard and the booting speed is crap.

Do you think its the video card? I dun think its the hard drive because i bought a new one 160gig and the same thing happened. Is it because i partitioned the hard drives? or is my motherboard crappy?

Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks for reading

 

[bcastner]

I have two thoughts:

. disable (not uninstall) using Device Manager any unused network adapters;

. Give the XP idle process optomization process a chance. It can take several days if you are pounding on the machine. There is a very active idle process optomization that XP will do if given a chance. See my notes: Do It Yourself Bootvis.exe faq779-4518

 

[linney]

Is the bios updated?

http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthread.php?t=133148

http://www.broadbandreports.com/forum/remark,12084382~mode=flat

http://www.google.com/search?q="ASUS+P4P800+SE"+slow+boot&hl=en&lr=&start=10&sa=N

 

[micker377]

I'd like to know what your friend has done to his computer! I have the same setup except 768meg of ram, and 60gig hard drive. It's always taken 7 sweeps of the bar to boot up.

 

[fuhbar]

5 to 7 sweeps are normal I thought

 

[zobbo]

bcastner, why do you think it is the network adaptors?

 

[sicktrick]

in win2k, when the OS wasn't multi-tasking during bootup, the OS would wait for a nonexistent DHCP server before it would time out and give up looking for an IP address before it would continue on w/ the rest of the bootup process.

personally i have no idea what they mean by "8 sweeps" of the bar (or maybe I do). then he mentions his friend and didn't bother to mention how many "sweeps" he gets. so it's hard to envision this question without any meaningful metrics

 

[fuhbar]

they mean the sweeps of the black windows xp starting screen shortly after the bootup, I guess

 

[bcastner]

I have stared at enough Bootvis.exe analyses to know that for every enabled network adapter set in its properties to 'Obtain an IP address automaticly' the OS will attempt to do so. This can add 6-10 seconds per non-connected adapter to the boot time.

 

[BadBigBen]

@bcastner - good info, mate... this holds true to XP aswell... you can though set the IP adress to static... by going to the Network connections, right click on the Network adapter listet, then click on TCP/IP Internetprotocol and then on Extended, there you can then enter the Static (ie. 192.168.1.1 with a subnetmask of 255.255.255.0)...

this will alleviate the searching for the IP adress at boot...

@cpugenius - also edit your BOOT.INI file... starting with SP2, Microsoft has implemented a software version of the AMD Bufferoverflow protection (built into the Newer AMD CPU's) and causes havok with some INTEL32 bit systems... the option do delete, or replace, is called "/NoExecute=xxx" (where xxx stands for anything, like OptIn or OptOut)... the replacement for the said option is called "/Execute"...



Ben

If it works don't fix it! If it doesn't use a sledgehammer...

 

[knightofnight]

I disabled the network adapter, but it still was the same. I set the ip address to static and i also editted the boot.ini file but still the same result. No the bios is not updated Linney, but i will update it and then see.

 

[bcastner]

You can in addition:

. be wary of any USB device, except perhaps the mouse and keyboard
. be very, very wary of using the "sweeps" as a metric for judging your boot time. Fundamentally they mean nothing.

 

[micker377]

I agree with Bill about "Fundamentally they mean nothing". I only use mine (seven sweeps) as a reference of problems on MY system: when it takes 9 or above, time to check for problems! I normally use "sleep". About once a month, I'll need to reboot. I only actually shut down when I have to do internal maintenance.

 

[percent]

Look at these two things - these determine how quick your system runs - most ppl usually over see these items

1. the speed of the ram
read your motherboard book and check what the fastest ram it can support it will probly be 400mhz or 533mhz
remember that your ram can only go as fast as your fsb and as fast as your motherboard supports

2. the speed of the harddrive
if your motherboard only has an ide interface then you will want a 7200 rpm harddrive if you have a sata interface then you will want to get either a 10,000 rpm or 15,000 rpm harddrive

hope this helps

%, 2004

 

[percent]

also hibernate is one way to completely turn off the computer while increasing booting speed

this can be enabled in your power options in the control panel

once enabled go to shutdown then hold down shift and the standby button will turn into a hibernate button



%, 2004

 

[gpalmer711]

I'm with bcastner here and the USB thought.

I built a basic PC for my inlaws - AMD Athlon 2000XP+, 512mb Ram, 80 GB HD.

Once built the machine would boot in about 15 seconds from poweron.

Now that we have added their BT Broadband Modem - Via USB - Were lucky if it boots up inside 45 secs to a minute.


Greg Palmer
Freeware Utilities for Windows Administrators.

http://www.palmersoft.co.uk

 

[percent]

Sorry I forgot one more thing
with how much xp loads it is best to get 1024MB of ram
512MB is fine - but best would be 1024

%, 2004

http://www.darkcipher.net

 

[percent]

also never upgrade the bios unless you are having problems that are specifically addressed in the newer bios version

%, 2004

http://www.darkcipher.net

 

[knightofnight]

I tried 1024mb ram and updated the bios, same speed. My ram is ddr 400 pc 3200, nothing wrong with that. I guess it's like that. Thanks for the advice!