XP choking

Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by oreverb, Oct 15, 2003.

  1. oreverb

    oreverb OSNN Junior Addict

    Messages:
    32
    I'm sure everyone else has noticed this one too. When there's a lot of hard disk activity (let's say we move a 1GB file to another HD, or defragment a HD), XP gets really non-responsive and user has to wait for disk processes to stop. You can move the mouse around but that's about it.

    This annoyance has been around in every Windows version I've been using, but I haven't noticed such thing in Linux. I guess there must be some architectural difference. I only hope that in the next version (Longhorn) this problem will be no more..
     
  2. ming

    ming OSNN Advanced

    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    UK
    I think the registry is clogged up with all the crap that are related to programs that you've uninstalled or got rid off. It will get clogged up over time as you add more and more files to your system, that's why you will find that there are registry defrag programs floating around.
    Things should speed up a bit if you defrag the registry, not to mention cleaning it out at the least.

    One thing to bare in mind about this.... Don't expect this 'problem' to be resolved at any time in the foreseeable future.
     
  3. oreverb

    oreverb OSNN Junior Addict

    Messages:
    32
    I'm pretty assured registry isn't the issue. My system is overall very swift and this hasn't changed since install. What I'm talking about is disk activity, when you're actually moving (large) files around and trying to do something else at the same time. Maybe it has something to do with resizing the pagefile.

    Edit: BTW, what's the best way to set the pagefile in XP, custom static size (for example 1024MB) or system managed? I read
    this article about pagefiles, would this apply to XP also - when system resizes the file, does it lower performance?
     
  4. cpugeniusmv

    cpugeniusmv Computer Genius

    Messages:
    485
    if you are moving to/from the drive that windows is installed on, then yeah...it's going to have slower access to system files, and a slower experience for you. that's the same with all operating systems as far as i know.

    i've noticed no slow downs when moving from/to different drives (ie, the ones without windows installed)
     
  5. X-Istence

    X-Istence * Political User

    Messages:
    6,498
    Location:
    USA
    Uhrm, cpugneniusmv, if you have not used any other OS than Windows, please dont reply.

    On FreeBSD or Linux, it doesnt lag your PC, or make it slower at all, this is because any process can ask for CPU time, and all will have to share it equally, whereas in XP, if one process has a high or normal priority, it lets those use up all CPU time, and not share it with other procs, one of the reason that Windows doesnt "redraw" a window when the program is very busy reading something from a file.

    Now with Windows XP, copying from the HD with Windows installed to a HD without it installed is less CPU intensive, as in this case Windows just lets the IDE controller do its job, where as copying normally will use more CPU time, as it takes chunks of the file, and writes em back to there where we want it.

    All other OS's do this as well, but a lot more efficiently, causing a lot less slow downs. One of the more reasons that Linux/BSD is used in servers, as servers need file access fast, but yet also very stable and without using to much CPU cycles.
     
  6. cpugeniusmv

    cpugeniusmv Computer Genius

    Messages:
    485
    i've had limited experience outside of windows, but i did have a job dealing with linux mandrake, and moving large volumes of data around from hard drive to hard drive with it.

    in my experiences, when you're copying files....it's slow.

    i copied about 30 gigs of music from one drive to another drive, in several systems every day for several weeks. on all of them, i could hardly do anything without it being slow.

    maybe i'm just unlucky...but i'm just saying what i know.
     
  7. X-Istence

    X-Istence * Political User

    Messages:
    6,498
    Location:
    USA
    Ah, okay. Keep mandrake linux out of the picture here, i have had the same experience with it, but all other Linux distro's do a lot better job.
     
  8. Bronx Bomber

    Bronx Bomber Guest

    i like mandrake linux =[
     
  9. FoSsiL

    FoSsiL Guest

    try defragging your drive once in a while.
     
  10. oreverb

    oreverb OSNN Junior Addict

    Messages:
    32
    Fragmentation isn't the issue (I'm defragmenting automatically every day both HDs). Seems to me X-Istence understood my point best, thanks to you for clarification on the subject.

    In my opinion Windows should've been designed the way most Linux versions are -- not one process should be given all CPU time. I don't know anything more irritating in an OS than it losing responsiveness to the user.