|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
I have two PCs both running the same version of Me. The second system takes much longer to start up than the other and displays the little drummer symbol for updating at every boot, even when closed normally without any changes having been made.
The main system takes 1 minute 22 seconds to load and the other one about 2 minutes 27 seconds, the updating graphic is displayed for about six seconds. Both systems have the same programs running at start-up except that the faster one has one more to start, that being SpeedFan. The hardware differences are: PC 1 - Amd Athlon 1200 with 512 RAM PC 2 - Celeron 1300 with 128 RAM The question: Why the time difference in start-up and what might be causing the system update at each boot? Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mt Washington, KY
Posts: 4,927
|
I would guess that it is the amount of RAM that PC2 has. It is probably accessing the swap file a lot during boot. I think you would see a improvement if you boosted it to 256 or 384, even 512 at todays memory prices.
Chas
__________________
I may not be much, but I'm all I think about. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Marlow,N.H.
Posts: 1,273
|
I have noticed improvements in boot time with memory upgrades. I agree with Chas, you will notice a difference with more memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mt Washington, KY
Posts: 4,927
|
One more thing is onboard cache. I don't believe the Celeron has near the amount as the Athalon.
While more memory may help, because of the lower cache I don't think it will ever boot as fast as PC1. Chas |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Red-eyed Moderator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 17,576
|
It still shouldn't take that long to boot guys... not even close. I run a 1100Mhz Celeron in my wife's machine with only 128k cache compared to his 256k cache Celeron and it takes about one minute 15 seconds to complete booting and I have several things in the startup on that one.
What concerns me is the fact that he's always getting the "Updating" at the beginning of the boot sequence. I would be doing a full virus scan with the latest updates. If you for some reason don't have a scanner with the latest virus definitions, go to http://housecall.antivirus.com . Then I would be doing a spyware check. I like to use Spybot and Adaware 6.
__________________
-At Ford, quality is job #1, job #2 is making them explode. ~Norm MacDonald, SNL News -Switching to Glide..Balancing in my head..inside of me... taking the glide path instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Thanks guys, I'll run a few checks and load spyBot on that machine. I'll let you know the outcome.
Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,700
|
Hmm...that updating system settings implies to me that Me is having problems identifying a device and loading a suitable driver for it.
Anything flagged in Device Manager? Is all your hardware properly detected in Device Manager? |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Thanks for the suggestion Mike, but Device Manager looks fine. I have now run a full system scan on yesterday's virus defs - no problems. I have also downloaded and installed the latest version of SpyBot. That found quite a few things to get rid of, but nothing too much to worry about, and nothing has changed in the load time. The system settings update still goes on.
Sitting watching the boot progress, I did notice that there is a considerable wait between wallpaper/background being displayed and the drawing of desktop icons. It may be more noticeable because my wife has somehow managed to get two different backgrounds to display, one on boot up and then a different one (as set in display properties) just prior to the desktop being drawn. Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,700
|
Download the free Boot Log Analyzer program from
http://www.vision4.dial.pipex.com/ That might also help in identifying what is causing the slow bootup. HTH |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Thanks for the suggestion Mike, I did download it but I'm not convinced it would work with Win Me. There is certainly no Bootlog file on either of my machines.
Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Easthampton, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,633
|
Crispy
When you boot up the computer, press either F8 or F9 and you will be launched to a menu. Where you can select Normal Mode, Safe Mode, Create Boot Log, Last Known Configuration, and I believe Network Boot. Once you get to that menu, click on Create Boot Log, and I believe that will create a boot log in Windows. I am not so sure on this, because I never created a boot log before with that method. Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Thanks Matt, I'd never bothered to look beyond normal and safe modes, I'll give it a try.
Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
I ran the so-called bootlog option 3 times. The first time I got a blue screen; the second time the machine froze after it had loaded the background for the first time; after a ScanDisk etc. I tried again. That time everything seemed to work, but there appears to be no log file created anywhere. I did searches looking for combinations of 'boot' and 'log' but found nothing.
Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member (12 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Woodland Hills, CA (suburb of Los Angeles)
Posts: 4,014
|
I think the usual name is Bootlog.txt, but it's been a while since I looked at one. I think it's usually stored on the C: drive, not within any folder. . .
Are you using Internet Connection Sharing? That (as well as some network cards) can add considerable bootup time. Especially if you have a mixed Win2000/XP/98 home network, there's a "Master Browser" election process that goes on. [If you are using a hardware router, this shouldn't be the problem]. If you have a mixed environment or ICS, post again & I'll see if I can find the Registry tweaks that help speed up the Master Browser election process. Something's not right if your bluescreening just asking for a log to fill. Booting with the log option on usually doesn't add any extra time, or have any noticeable effects other than creating the file. I'd test the memory on the slower machine, just in case. http://www.simmtester.com Might also try fiddling with the Bios settings. If the memory tests out OK, you can try enabling the Quick Boot feature, usually found in the "Advanced" sections of most Bios Setup programs. And if the memory timings seem too agressive, you could set them to "By SPD" (or detected default - "serial presence detect"), and see if things improve. If you have non-Parity system memory and accidentally have Parity checking turned on the Bios, turning it off is a good idea. That's about all brain can think of at the moment = hope one of these (or one of the other tech's ideas) will help . . . Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Thanks for the tips Gary, I haven't had chance to try them yet but I'll let you know.
Regards, Chris P |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | ||
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Devon England
Posts: 170
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't have the time now to try the other points, but I'm sure the RAM chips were the correct ones when first put together. Thanks again for your help, Chris P |
||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|