Is Windows XP a bit of a dog (speed-wise)?



Tom Kreutz
07-09-2005, 11:22 PM
I'm running a Dell Optiplex GX240, 2.4 GHz Pentium 4, 512K cache, with 1
GB of RAM. I've been happily using Windows 2000 for three years, but
recently my machine was hacked, and the IT folks just installed Windows XP.

I find that every part of the GUI appears to have slowed down
considerably. Menus and windows visibly take time to open (it is still
relatively fast, but not instantaneous as before).

Is this typical of XP?

Thanks,

Tom

Shenan Stanley
07-09-2005, 11:22 PM
Tom Kreutz wrote:
> I'm running a Dell Optiplex GX240, 2.4 GHz Pentium 4, 512K cache,
> with 1 GB of RAM. I've been happily using Windows 2000 for three
> years, but recently my machine was hacked, and the IT folks just
> installed Windows XP.
> I find that every part of the GUI appears to have slowed down
> considerably. Menus and windows visibly take time to open (it is
> still relatively fast, but not instantaneous as before).
>
> Is this typical of XP?

Typical? Perhaps at default settings - not optimized.

You can turn off almost all of Windows XPs "prettifications" and fancy
sliding/fading tricks - speeding up everything. Using nothing more than
Microsoft's TweakUI PowerToy and the built in performance - your machine
should run faster (seemingly) than Windows 2000 did.

Control Panel --> System --> Advanced tab --> Performance section,
Settings button. Then choose "adjust for best performance" and you
now have a Windows 2000/98 look which turned off many of the annoying
"prettifications" in one swift action. You can play with the last
three checkboxes to get more of an XP look without many of the
other annoyances. You could also grab and install/mess with one
(or more) of the Microsoft Powertoys - TweakUI in particular:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

In TweakUI, be sure to look for "Menu Show Delay" tweak.. But that is not
the only one.

Remember - Windows XP is Windows 2000 - next revision. It was made to look
like it does to be more user friendly to those used to Windows 9x/ME - as
there was going to be no alternative/continuance of the 9x line.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--

Steve N.
07-09-2005, 11:22 PM
Tom Kreutz wrote:

> I'm running a Dell Optiplex GX240, 2.4 GHz Pentium 4, 512K cache, with 1
> GB of RAM. I've been happily using Windows 2000 for three years, but
> recently my machine was hacked, and the IT folks just installed Windows XP.
>
> I find that every part of the GUI appears to have slowed down
> considerably. Menus and windows visibly take time to open (it is still
> relatively fast, but not instantaneous as before).
>
> Is this typical of XP?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom

If you turn off all the eye-candy crap like Shenan said it should speed
up nicely. I wouldn't mess with Power Toys though unless it's your own
PC, there are some real cool ways to screw things up using Power Toys
and your IT folks might not like it if you doink up the wrong things.

Steve

Tom Kreutz
07-09-2005, 11:22 PM
Thanks very much. That DID help. I've been struggling to get decent
font rendering on my 17" LCD monitor - with ClearType and other futzing
around - and I think at one point I may have optimized for "appearance"
rather than performance. I need ClearType turned on, or things are
REALLY ugly. (It was turned off when I optimized solely for performance
as you suggested, but first optimizing for performance and then turning
on ClearType only seems to speed everything up.)

Thanks again for your help.

Tom


Shenan Stanley wrote:

> Tom Kreutz wrote:
>
>>I'm running a Dell Optiplex GX240, 2.4 GHz Pentium 4, 512K cache,
>>with 1 GB of RAM. I've been happily using Windows 2000 for three
>>years, but recently my machine was hacked, and the IT folks just
>>installed Windows XP.
>>I find that every part of the GUI appears to have slowed down
>>considerably. Menus and windows visibly take time to open (it is
>>still relatively fast, but not instantaneous as before).
>>
>>Is this typical of XP?
>
>
> Typical? Perhaps at default settings - not optimized.
>
> You can turn off almost all of Windows XPs "prettifications" and fancy
> sliding/fading tricks - speeding up everything. Using nothing more than
> Microsoft's TweakUI PowerToy and the built in performance - your machine
> should run faster (seemingly) than Windows 2000 did.
>
> Control Panel --> System --> Advanced tab --> Performance section,
> Settings button. Then choose "adjust for best performance" and you
> now have a Windows 2000/98 look which turned off many of the annoying
> "prettifications" in one swift action. You can play with the last
> three checkboxes to get more of an XP look without many of the
> other annoyances. You could also grab and install/mess with one
> (or more) of the Microsoft Powertoys - TweakUI in particular:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx
>
> In TweakUI, be sure to look for "Menu Show Delay" tweak.. But that is not
> the only one.
>
> Remember - Windows XP is Windows 2000 - next revision. It was made to look
> like it does to be more user friendly to those used to Windows 9x/ME - as
> there was going to be no alternative/continuance of the 9x line.
>

Michael Stevens
07-09-2005, 11:23 PM
In news:42824CFB.9060504@princeton.edu,
Tom Kreutz <kreutz@princeton.edu> replied with a ;-)
> I'm running a Dell Optiplex GX240, 2.4 GHz Pentium 4, 512K cache,
> with 1 GB of RAM. I've been happily using Windows 2000 for three
> years, but recently my machine was hacked, and the IT folks just
> installed Windows XP.
> I find that every part of the GUI appears to have slowed down
> considerably. Menus and windows visibly take time to open (it is
> still relatively fast, but not instantaneous as before).
>
> Is this typical of XP?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom

Yes, 2k will run circles around XP [98 and Me will fly on the same hard
ware] when all the XP bells and whistles are enabled. Run XP in classic
mode and it is almost as fast, but the trade off is availability of advanced
features 2K lacks. Cleartype being a big one for me. 8-)
Upgrading the hardware is the only way to take full advantage of XP
--
Michael Stevens MS-MVP XP
xpnews@bogusmichaelstevenstech.com
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com
For a better newsgroup experience. Setup a newsreader.
http://www.michaelstevenstech.com/outlookexpressnewreader.htm

frodo@theshire.org
07-09-2005, 11:23 PM
Michael Stevens <mstevens@bogusmvps.org> wrote:

> Yes, 2k will run circles around XP [98 and Me will fly on the same hard
> ware] when all the XP bells and whistles are enabled. Run XP in classic
> mode and it is almost as fast, but the trade off is availability of advanced
> features 2K lacks. Cleartype being a big one for me. 8-)
> Upgrading the hardware is the only way to take full advantage of XP

Interesting, my experience is just the opposite, XP is much faster than
2K. I agree that it should be run in Classic mode, it's just "better".

One of the biggest (hidden) things that slows down an XP system,
especially when upgraded from 98/2K, is the partition alignment. If it is
not right (because installer did not wipe and remake the partitions) then
XP will use 512 BYTE (not KByte) clusters rather than 4k clusters, and
this will make the system run like a snail.

re: LCD display not looking too good, BE SURE to run the video card at the
panel's native resolution (1280x1024 is standard for 17" and 19") and 60Hz
refresh (fine for a panel, but too low for a crt). Then get the ClearType
Tuner powertoy to adjust cleartype to your liking.


Is Windows XP a bit of a dog (speed-wise)?