<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>computer,review and game &#187; PERFORMANCE</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chip.revivalx.com/tag/performance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chip.revivalx.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:18:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Tips 6 Vista/XP</title>
		<link>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/10/02/tips-6-vistaxp/</link>
		<comments>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/10/02/tips-6-vistaxp/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 06:36:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tutorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PERFORMANCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RAM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[XP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chip.revivalx.com/?p=289</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[YOU CAN TWEAK VIRTUAL MEMORY SETTINGS FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE
In the Windows 95/98 era, conventional wisdom held that you should manually set your virtual memory [i.e., pagefile] size to at least 1.5 times the amount of RAM in order to optimize performance. [By default, Windows will manage pagefile on its own: You will likely find the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3 style="text-align: justify;">YOU CAN TWEAK VIRTUAL MEMORY SETTINGS FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In the <strong>Windows </strong>95/98 era, conventional wisdom held that you should manually set your virtual memory [i.e., pagefile] size to at least 1.5 times the amount of <strong>RAM </strong>in order to optimize <strong>performance</strong>. [By default, <strong>Windows </strong>will manage pagefile on its own: You will likely find the initial pagefile size set to 0.5x or 1x the amount of <strong>RAM </strong>you have]. We were skeptical about this tip, but our benchmarks surprised us: Some systems showed no change at all, but some(particularly older machines) showed substantial improvement beyond the usual random noise we see in benchmark results. We got at least a 10 percent jump after we upped the initial pagefile size to 2x amount or <strong>RAM </strong>on two separate machines. It won’t work for all computers, so the jury’s still out on this one, but because it’s so easy to do and there are no negative consequences, it’s worth a shot just to see if it has any effect.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span id="more-289"></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>DO IT </strong>In the <strong>XP </strong>System Control Panel, click Advanced, then [under <strong>Performance</strong>] click Settings, Advanced. In the Virtual Memory module, click Change. Click Custom size then up both initial and Maximum size to roughly double your amount of <strong>RAM</strong>. Click Set [important!], then OK out of all <strong>windows</strong>. In <strong>Vista</strong>’s, click “Advanced system settings” in the System Control Panel and follow the same instructions.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">CLEARING THE PREFETCH DIRECTORY [OR CACHE] WILL IMPROVE STARTUP TIME</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">One of the most notorious <strong>Windows </strong>tips ever is that deleting all the files in the <strong>Windows</strong>/Prefetch directory will cause your system to boot faster. We tested the tip by repeatedly measuring boot times on a trio of both <strong>XP </strong>and <strong>Vista</strong> machines with overstuffed Prefetch folders, then running the same test after clearing the folders out. The result: No improvement in boot time in any of the cases. Some testers have reported that clearing the Prefetch cache actually <em>lengthens </em>boot time, though we didn’t experience this either.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>DON’T DO IT</strong></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">WRITE CACHING WILL IMPROVE PERFORMANCE ON<strong> SATA</strong><strong> </strong>DRIVES</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This feature is disabled by default in <strong>VISTA </strong>because if your computer loses power before a write is completed,you can lose data. If you’re confident in your UP’s capabilities, crank it up and you’ll see at least a 10 percent improvement in <strong>performance</strong>. Remember, write caching is supported only on <strong>SATA </strong>drives. The options are grayed out for older <strong>ATA</strong> disks.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>DO IT </strong>In Explorer, right-click the drive you want to speed up and select Properties. Click the Hardware tab, select Properties again. Click the Policies tab. Check both of the boxes beneath “Optimize for <strong>performance</strong>.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-305" title="Switching to Windows Vista for Seniors_ A Guide Helping Senior Citizens Move From XP to Vista (Computer Books for Seniors series)" src="http://chip.revivalx.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Switching-to-Windows-Vista-for-Seniors_-A-Guide-Helping-Senior-Citizens-Move-From-XP-to-Vista-Computer-Books-for-Seniors-series.jpg" alt="Switching to Windows Vista for Seniors_ A Guide Helping Senior Citizens Move From XP to Vista (Computer Books for Seniors series)" width="125" height="160" /></p>
<div id="seolinx-tooltip" style="border: 1px solid #000000; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; display: none; opacity: 0.9; position: absolute; width: auto; z-index: 99999; text-align: justify;">
<table style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; border-collapse: separate; width: auto;" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td id="seolinx-table" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 1px; padding: 0pt; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold;">
<div style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; overflow: auto; width: auto;">
<table id="seolinx-paramtable" style="border: 1px solid gray; margin: 0pt; border-collapse: separate;" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://toolbarqueries.google.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> PR: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Google pagerank" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.google.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> I: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Google index" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.google.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> L: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Google links" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> LD: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Yahoo linkdomain" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.bing.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> I: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Bing index" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Sitemap.xml" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.semrush.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> Rank: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="SEMRush Rank" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.semrush.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> Traffic: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="SEMRush SE Traffic" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.semrush.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> Price: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="SEMRush SE Traffic price" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
<td style="border: 1px solid gray; padding: 2px; background: #f0f0f0 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; color: darkgreen; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; white-space: nowrap;"><img style="vertical-align: middle;" src="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/favicon.ico" alt="" width="12" height="12" /> C: <a style="color: blue; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 7pt; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;" title="Compete Rank" href="javascript:{}">wait&#8230;</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</td>
<td id="seolinx-tooltip-close" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 1px; cursor: pointer; vertical-align: middle; width: auto;" title="close"><img src="chrome://seoquake/content/skin/close.gif" alt="" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div id="seolinx-tooltip" style="border: 1px solid #000000; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; display: none; opacity: 0.9; position: absolute; width: auto; z-index: 99999; text-align: justify;">
<table style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; border-collapse: separate; width: auto;" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td id="seolinx-table" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 1px; padding: 0pt; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold;"></td>
<td id="seolinx-tooltip-close" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 1px; cursor: pointer; vertical-align: middle; width: auto;" title="close"><img src="chrome://seoquake/content/skin/close.gif" alt="" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div id="seolinx-tooltip" style="border: 1px solid #000000; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; display: none; opacity: 0.9; position: absolute; width: auto; z-index: 99999;">
<table style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; border-collapse: separate; width: auto;" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td id="seolinx-table" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 1px; padding: 0pt; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold;"></td>
<td id="seolinx-tooltip-close" style="border: 0pt none; margin: 0pt; padding: 1px; cursor: pointer; vertical-align: middle; width: auto;" title="close"><img src="chrome://seoquake/content/skin/close.gif" alt="" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9059050452?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=revivproje-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=9059050452">Switching to Windows Vista for Seniors: A Guide Helping Senior Citizens Move From XP to Vista (Computer Books for Seniors series)</a><img style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=revivproje-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=9059050452" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/10/02/tips-6-vistaxp/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tips 4 XP/Vista</title>
		<link>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/27/151/</link>
		<comments>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/27/151/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tutorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PERFORMANCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chip.revivalx.com/?p=151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PUTTING YOUR PAGGING FILE ON A SECOND HARD DRIVE WILL IMPROVE PERFORMANCE
Splitting up the pagefile and your everyday apps is common sense. Doing this allows Windows to dump temp junk onto one drive while not having to interrupt reads or writes on the other. If you have two hard drives, this is a tip that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center">PUTTING YOUR <strong>PAGGING </strong>FILE ON A SECOND <strong>HARD DRIVE</strong> WILL IMPROVE <strong>PERFORMANCE</strong></p>
<p>Splitting up the <strong>pagefile </strong>and your everyday apps is common sense. Doing this allows <strong>Windows </strong>to dump temp junk onto one <strong>drive </strong>while not having to interrupt reads or writes on the other. If you have two hard drives, this is a tip that definitely works and works well: Expect at least a 5 to 10 percent speed boost, depending on the existing speed of your rig and, especially, the performance of your drives. But any second drive will help at least a little: While not recommended, you can even put the <strong>pagefile </strong>on an <strong>external USB drive </strong>and see some <strong>performance </strong>gains.</p>
<p><span id="more-151"></span></p>
<p align="center">CLEANING OUT <strong>CACHED </strong>AND TEMP FILES IMPROVES <strong>PERFORMANCE</strong>, ESPECIALLY OF YOUR <strong>WEB BROWSER</strong></p>
<p>Unless you have so much junk on your <strong>hard drive</strong> that you are nearly out of free space, deleting any number of files-whether they’re temp files or permanent ones-won’t improve performance at all. The only exceptions to the rule are for programs or processes that involves every file on your drive: <strong>Virus </strong>scans or full disk backups, for examples, are faster if there’s less data to deal with. It make sense to clear this files out using Disk Cleanup every now and then for the sake of good digital hygiene, but you won’t get a <strong>performance </strong>boost for your trouble.</p>
<p><strong>DON’T DO IT</strong></p>
<p align="center">TURNING OF <strong>SYSTEM RESTORE</strong> IMPROVES <strong>PERFORMANCE</strong></p>
<p><strong>System restore</strong> is a real aid when it comes to rolling back bad <strong>Windows </strong>patches and <strong>driver </strong>updates, but by its very nature, it is said to impact performance because it’s always creating restore points, thus robbing you of a little power. The truth: <strong>System Restore</strong> lurks idle most of the time and rarely does anything at all, creating checkpoints only during app installs plus once every 24 hours by default. Even then it spends only a few seconds doing so and only during idle time. It’s virtually unthinkable that you’d try to run a program at the exact same time that <strong>System Restore</strong> began creating a restore point, and even if you did, you probably wouldn’t notice. The proof is in the benchmarks: We got nearly identical results on <strong>PCMark </strong>whether <strong>System Restore</strong> was on or off. [Note, however, that <strong>System Restore </strong>can consume a fair amount of disk space-this is configurable-so if gigabytes are precious to you, consider throttling it back.]</p>
<p><strong>DON’T DO IT</strong></p>
<p><strong><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-155" title="Windows XP For Dummies, 2nd Edition" src="http://chip.revivalx.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Windows-XP-For-Dummies-2nd-Edition.jpg" alt="Windows XP For Dummies, 2nd Edition" width="126" height="160" /><br />
</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0764573268?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=revivproje-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=0764573268">Windows XP For Dummies, 2nd Edition</a><img style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=revivproje-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=0764573268" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/27/151/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tips 3 Vista/XP</title>
		<link>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/25/tips-3-vistaxp/</link>
		<comments>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/25/tips-3-vistaxp/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:31:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tutorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Explorer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PERFORMANCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REGISTRY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SATA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[XP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chip.revivalx.com/?p=124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

WRITE CACHING WILL IMPROVE PERFORMANCE ON SATA DRIVES
This feature is disabled by default in VISTA because if your computer loses power before a write is completed,you can lose data. If you’re confident in your UP’s capabilities, crank it up and you’ll see at least a 10 percent improvement in performance. Remember, write caching is supported [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: left;">
<p style="text-align: center;">
<p style="text-align: center;">WRITE <strong>CACHING </strong>WILL IMPROVE <strong>PERFORMANCE </strong>ON <strong>SATA DRIVES</strong></p>
<p>This feature is disabled by default in <strong>VISTA </strong>because if your <strong>computer </strong>loses <strong>power </strong>before a write is completed,you can lose data. If you’re confident in your UP’s capabilities, crank it up and you’ll see at least a 10 percent improvement in <strong>performance</strong>. Remember, write <strong>caching </strong>is supported only on <strong>SATA </strong>drives. The options are grayed out for older <strong>ATA disks</strong>.</p>
<p><span id="more-124"></span></p>
<p><strong>DO IT </strong>In Explorer, right-click the drive you want to speed up and select Properties. Click the <strong>Hardware </strong>tab, select Properties again. Click the Policies tab. Check both of the boxes beneath “Optimize for <strong>performance</strong>.”</p>
<p align="center">MINIMIZE MENU LOADING DELAY TIME THROUGH A <strong>REGISTRY </strong>HACK</p>
<p>By default,both <strong>XP </strong>and <strong>Vista </strong>wait 400 milliseconds before presenting expansion menus [those menu items with right-facing triangles on them]. You can eliminate the wait completely for instantaneous menu expansion [though be warned, you may not actually like it]. Note that this will <em>not</em> make, say, you’re your primary File or Edit menu show up faster-those menus automatically load as fast as possible.</p>
<p><strong>DO IT </strong>Run <strong>regedit </strong>at the Run prompt. Browse to <strong>HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Desktop</strong>. Double click the <strong>MenuShowDelay </strong>key in the right-hand pane and set the value to 0.</p>
<p align="center">CHANGE YOUR DEFAULT ‘VIEW SOURCE’ APPLICATION WITH A REGISTRY HACK</p>
<p>Viewing <strong>web-page</strong> source file in Notepad is hardly a user-friendly experience. You can hack the registry to change which app opens source files, but using <strong>TweakUI </strong>is a better choice.</p>
<p><strong>DO IT </strong>Load <strong>TweakUI </strong>[http://tinyurl.com/553fw6], browse to <strong>Internet Explorer</strong> &gt;View Source. Click Change <strong>Program</strong>… and browse for whatever app you prefer. This only changes the setting for <strong>Internet Explorer</strong>; to change the View Source app for <strong>Firefox</strong>, type <strong>about : config</strong> in the address bar, scroll to view_source.editor. path, and change the setting by pasting in the full path to the application you want to use. [The <strong>Firefox </strong>tip works with XP and <strong>Vista</strong>, but you’ll have to tweak the registry if you want to do the same for <strong>IE </strong>under <strong>Vista</strong>.]</p>
<p align="center">DISABLING <strong>Q</strong>O<strong>S</strong> AND <strong>IP</strong>V<strong>6 </strong>OPTIONS WILL IMPROVE <strong>BANDWIDTH </strong>AND <strong>WEB PERFORMANCE</strong></p>
<p>The theory goes that you should disable any service you aren’t using, and that turning off <strong>IPv6 </strong>and <strong>QoS </strong>Packet Scheduling options in your <strong>NIC </strong>properties will boost browsing speed. One absurb legend holds that <strong>QoS </strong>alone actually “reserves” 20 percent of your <strong>bandwidth</strong>. Microsoft has formally debunked this tip, and our test back that up: We found zero difference at all in file-transfer speeds whether <strong>QoS </strong>and <strong>IPv6 </strong>options were on or off, on both <strong>XP </strong>and <strong>Vista </strong>systems.</p>
<p><strong>DON’T DO IT</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1934131245?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=revivproje-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=1934131245">Mastering Windows Made Easy Training Tutorial v. Vista &amp; XP &#8211; How to use Microsoft Windows Video e Book Manual Guide. Even dummies can learn from this &#8230; through Advanced material from Professor Joe</a><img style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=revivproje-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=1934131245" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/25/tips-3-vistaxp/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tips Vista/XP</title>
		<link>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/24/tips-vistaxp/</link>
		<comments>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/24/tips-vistaxp/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 03:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tutorial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benchmark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CACHE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[memory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NETWORK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PERFORMANCE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RAM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TWEAK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vista]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[XP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chip.revivalx.com/?p=117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISABLING UNUSED NETWORK CONNECTIONS WILL IMPROVE BOOT TIME
Say you set up a network drive for a network drive for a computer you had months ago but is no longer on your network: When Windows boot, it spends at least some time reconnecting to that drive, wasting precious seconds you could be spending on Facebook. While [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p align="center">DISABLING UNUSED <strong>NETWORK </strong>CONNECTIONS WILL IMPROVE BOOT TIME</p>
<p>Say you set up a <strong>network drive </strong>for a <strong>network drive</strong> for a <strong>computer </strong>you had months ago but is no longer on your network: When <strong>Windows </strong>boot, it spends at least some time reconnecting to that drive, wasting precious seconds you could be spending on <strong>Facebook</strong>. While <strong>XP </strong>and Vista are better than older versions of <strong>Windows </strong>about<strong> network connections</strong> [who can forget those interminable “Connecting…’ messages?] it still makes sense to disconnect from <strong>network </strong>shares you no longer need. You won’t actually boot noticeably faster without those extra <strong>drive </strong>letters, but Explorer will become usable more quickly after launch. This is especially noticeable in <strong>Vista</strong>, which has a helpful “loading” progress indicator that overlays the address bar: Having any number of network shares will cause it to take any extra 10 to 20 seconds to fully load.</p>
<p><span id="more-117"></span></p>
<p><strong>DO IT </strong>Right-click each shared folder in Explorer and select Disconnect. This will permanently remove them from your drive list unless you map them again.</p>
<p align="center">YOU CAN <strong>TWEAK VIRTUAL MEMORY </strong>SETTINGS FOR IMPROVED <strong>PERFORMANCE</strong></p>
<p>In the <strong>Windows 95/98</strong> era, conventional wisdom held that you should manually set your <strong>virtual memory </strong>[i.e., <strong>pagefile</strong>] size to at least 1.5 times the amount of <strong>RAM </strong>in order to optimize <strong>performance</strong>. [By default, <strong>Windows </strong>will manage <strong>pagefile </strong>on its own: You will likely find the initial <strong>pagefile </strong>size set to 0.5x or 1x the amount of <strong>RAM </strong>you have]. We were skeptical about this tip, but our <strong>benchmarks </strong>surprised us: Some systems showed no change at all, but some(particularly older machines) showed substantial improvement beyond the usual random noise we see in <strong>benchmark </strong>results. We got at least a 10 percent jump after we upped the initial <strong>pagefile </strong>size to 2x amount or <strong>RAM </strong>on two separate machines. It won’t work for all computers, so the jury’s still out on this one, but because it’s so easy to do and there are no negative consequences, it’s worth a shot just to see if it has any effect.</p>
<p><strong>DO IT </strong>In the <strong>XP </strong>System Control Panel, click Advanced, then [under Performance] click Settings, Advanced. In the <strong>Virtual Memory </strong>module, click Change. Click Custom size then up both initial and Maximum size to roughly double your amount of <strong>RAM</strong>. Click Set [important!], then OK out of all windows. In <strong>Vista</strong>’s, click “Advanced system settings” in the System Control Panel and follow the same instructions.</p>
<p align="center">CLEARING THE PREFETCH DIRECTORY [OR <strong>CACHE</strong>] WILL IMPROVE STARTUP TIME</p>
<p>One of the most notorious <strong>Windows </strong>tips ever is that deleting all the files in the Windows/Prefetch directory will cause your system to boot faster. We tested the tip by repeatedly measuring boot times on a trio of both <strong>XP </strong>and <strong>Vista</strong> machines with overstuffed Prefetch folders, then running the same test after clearing the folders out. The result: No improvement in boot time in any of the cases. Some testers have reported that clearing the Prefetch cache actually <em>lengthens </em>boot time, though we didn’t experience this either.</p>
<p><strong>DON’T DO IT</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0596527624?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=revivproje-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=0596527624">Windows Vista Annoyances: Tips, Secrets, and Hacks</a><img style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=revivproje-20&amp;l=as2&amp;o=1&amp;a=0596527624" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://chip.revivalx.com/2009/08/24/tips-vistaxp/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
