HDW-mobile Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 lol Add DWORD = "HelpMyComputerrunsSlow=0" Add DWORD = "EatMoreMemory=1" :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucianmarin Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 No difference at booting... I think is slower because of loading all the prefetch directory... 'Superfetch' But Firefox load faster! :D Same goes for Winamp 5.094 Full with Modern Skin! :o I have an Athlon XP running at 2GHz... I think Longhorn is using a different booting system, but lunching applications is like on Windows XP, using prefetch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted July 20, 2005 Veteran Share Posted July 20, 2005 Microsoft claims Longhorn will be, er, faster The only reason why its faster is they added a superfetch feature to the prefetcher. If you look at the key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESYSTEMCurrentControlSetControlSession ManagerMemory ManagementPrefetcher you will notice in windows xp http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24749 Thanks to http://warp2search.net 586241930[/snapback] It's from the Inquirer. Need I say more? unless they didnt know about it back then until after research? 586242004[/snapback] Yeah, MS didn't know what they programmed into Windows. Moving this to XP discussion where more people can tear it apart. This isn't news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scaramonga Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 LOL :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: This is good for a laugh! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semaja2.net Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 man people are stupid to belive this BS i mean come on something like this is nothing to do with the reg keys, reg keys dont have technology in them ffs the superprefetcher is a whole new piece of software that would not be in your xp at all and there would be no way to transfer it over let alone a piece of **** regkey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
champagne_supernova Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Can anyone confirm this tweak? It came out from the theinquirer.net, how come that it's fake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 man people are stupid to belive this No stupider than listening and believing anything MS says for that matter :) reg keys dont have technology in them ffs the superprefetcher is a whole new piece of software that would not be in your xp at all and there would be no way to transfer it over let alone a piece of **** regkey 586242850[/snapback] Although I personally smiled at the 'article' in the first place, the issue is it wouldn't be the first time Microsoft has implemented "features" in the OS or a program that have been activated later on by a patch, service pack or even a wholly new version of the program. 2k vs XP discussion is a prime example of what happens when users are 'forced' to upgrade with the excuses that there is no way to backport the changes to 2k. 1. Publish a product. 2. Gather a large customerbase. 3. Obliterate competition, legal or non-legal means. 4. Publish a new product with no end user benefiting new features, claim they can't be implemented in the older OS. 5. Force people to upgrade to your new product. 6. ? Profit! When out of money or feel need for more money, return to 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertigosity Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 While it quite possibly is pure psychology (I haven't tested this on my own box with a stopwatch yet), it IS also possible that it was something experimental that Microsoft was playing around with in the Prefetcher code for something like say, Service Pack 2 (which IIRC Longhorn people were working on), but left disabled because they hadn't tested it enough, hadn't quite finished it, or just plain wanted to save it for a later release. This isn't entirely without precedent. After all, this IS Neowin, and there's a lot of Firefox fanboys around - so let's take XUL Error Pages as an example. It's been in there for while, maybe since about .9 or PR1, but it hasn't been enabled by default until the more recent builds. It's been picking up fixes and love all along, and people who are brave can turn it on using a preference in about:config, which bears some similarity in function to the registry (at least to the user). I still call BS, that this probably isn't true (but I'd be giggly if it was), and say the easy three-step process for making your XP machine "as fast as Longhorn" involves dropping your machine down to 64MB of RAM, installing every tray app in history, and digging out an old 3600RPM HD just for kicks. But I digress. And flat-out make stuff up. :ninja: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panacik Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 WOW! I tried it and my PC speed has really improved! I dont even see the Windows Splash screen now, it is just there almost instantly! I dont know what this tweak does but it sure does increase the speed A LOT! Thanks for the info! BTW... im BSing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowcra Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 so dos this work>? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiREFLi Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 so dos this work>? 586246583[/snapback] No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristotle-dude Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 yea, right! There no way changing one registry key is going to impove the PC speed... Even if this was true, Ms would already apply this "tweak". :no: 586242062[/snapback] What would be their incentive? Ask yourself honestly. MSFT is a corporation just like Apple and all the rest. The don't give a damn about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_demilord Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 Has anyone noticed a diference? Is it worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigCheese Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 A registry value can't do something on its own. In Longhorn, this value turns on the super prefretch feature in longhorn. This feature is non-existent in windows xp, so the value does nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEVER85 Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 What would be their incentive? Ask yourself honestly. MSFT is a corporation just like Apple and all the rest. The don't give a damn about you. 586248460[/snapback] Don't let the Mac fanboys hear that. They'll be sure to say that Apple cares about its customers because "Apple pwnz0rz Windoze" or something of the like. :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootWind Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 It's a placebo effect, nothing to see here. :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 No stupider than listening and believing anything MS says for that matter :)reg keys dont have technology in them ffs the superprefetcher is a whole new piece of software that would not be in your xp at all and there would be no way to transfer it over let alone a piece of **** regkey 586242850[/snapback] Although I personally smiled at the 'article' in the first place, the issue is it wouldn't be the first time Microsoft has implemented "features" in the OS or a program that have been activated later on by a patch, service pack or even a wholly new version of the program. 2k vs XP discussion is a prime example of what happens when users are 'forced' to upgrade with the excuses that there is no way to backport the changes to 2k. 1. Publish a product. 2. Gather a large customerbase. 3. Obliterate competition, legal or non-legal means. 4. Publish a new product with no end user benefiting new features, claim they can't be implemented in the older OS. 5. Force people to upgrade to your new product. 6. ? Profit! When out of money or feel need for more money, return to 4. 586246347[/snapback] So you think Microsoft shouldn't have created XP just implemented all of the features into 2000? Can you name me one company who ports features from their new products to their old version? Most company's won't update their old versions after they release a new version of the product, it doesn't make sense to keep updating theold when you should be working on the new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EZRecovery Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 check this out Look at the last person who posted the comment. :D https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=347126&st=0 Perhaps all these threads can be merged? :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 So you think Microsoft shouldn't have created XP just implemented all of the features into 2000? Can you name me one company who ports features from their new products to their old version?586249100[/snapback] Novell/SuSE Linux comes to mind. RedHat comes to mind. You can install practically (and well, not practically, you can) all the updates they've done for their newer distributions into the older ones, just takes a bit of time to upgrade each piece. But it works, without a glitch. So yes, I think MS should have backported majority of the XP for 2k since it was technically feasible, but then that would mean they actually cared for their users - which of course we know they don't. But it's easy not to care when there is no real competition - why care when you can wrap up the profits by forcing people to upgrade. Let's not turn this into a flamewar over the issue - the reality is they're money hungry bastids and we know it :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted July 22, 2005 Veteran Share Posted July 22, 2005 Microsoft does backport features. Ever heard of DirectX 9? That was back ported to Windows 2000. So was IE 6 I think. So were many other features. Lots of Windows 2003 features were backported into XP SP2. Avalong and Indigo are being backported to XP, among other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokar Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Can someone test this out with a benchmarking program or something??? Its one thing to say that windows FEELS faster. Its another thing to prove it with numbers. I can put an object in each of my hands and say one is heavier than the other from feelings... but its more accurate to weigh them on a scale and see the exact weight to find a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyanar Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Okay, I did it ... and ... I also did a Benchmark for all of you to proof if it's true or it's just a placebo ... Here comes the results ... The Final Reg-Entry has to look like this Attachment ... Be sure to use "PrefetchParameters" instead of "Prefetcher" at the end of the tree. Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\PrefetchParameters] "EnableSuperfetch"=dword:00000001 "EnablePrefetcher"=dword:00000003 superfetch.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZappBrannigan Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Can someone test this out with a benchmarking program or something???Its one thing to say that windows FEELS faster. Its another thing to prove it with numbers. I can put an object in each of my hands and say one is heavier than the other from feelings... but its more accurate to weigh them on a scale and see the exact weight to find a difference. 586253799[/snapback] Just read this at http://bink.nu/ Iquirer posted a story called: 'Longhorn's most useful feature "leaked "as XP tweak' stating that the Windows Vista (longhorn) new superfetch feature is also available in Windows XP.HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\Prefetcher you will notice in windows xp EnablePrefetcher = 3 and you will notice in windows longhorn EnableSuperfetch = 1 Well, guess what? You can put the EnableSuperfetch = 1 in windows xp and get the same speed. So I checked with Windows internals guru Mark Russinovich, he said this won't work, "SuperFetch" string isn't even in the kernel (check with strings.exe) So apparently it doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev0| Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 just goes to show how useless PC Mark is as a benchmark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyanar Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 okay, here some aditional Data from PCMark 2005 before and after RegEdit ... HDD - XP Startup: 9,983/10,108 MB/s (+ 1,25 %) Physics and 3D: 79,135/96,910 fps (+ 22,46 % (a bit strange?)) Transparent Windows: 479,232/461,301 windows/s (- 3,74 %) Web Page Rendering: 2967/2949 pages/s (- 0,61 %) File Decryption: 41,982/42,053 MB/s (+ 0,17 %) Graphics Memory - 64 lines: 566,189/565,934 fps (- 0,05 %) HDD - General Usage: 6,479/6,558 MB/s (+ 1,22 %) Text edit: 63,454/66,645 pages/s (+ 5,03 %) Image Decompression: 12,315/11,746 MPixels/s (- 4,62 %) File Compression: 2,294/2,347 MB/s (+ 2,31 %) File Encryption: 11,640/11,422 MB/s (- 1,87 %) HDD - Virus Scan: 20,975/23,046 MB/s (+ 9,87 %) All things, that run from HDD (slowest component in my rig) shows improvements. It's not the world, but it's also not only a placebo .. do what you wanna do, I'll stay with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts