Slowvista is sloooooooow

Dec 10, 2007 17:31

Even on a:
- AMD 64 x2 4400+
- 2GB DDR RAM
- GeForce 6800 Ultra
- Windows partition on 2x 80GB WD Caviar SE (RAID0)

Not a bad computer by any means, but it's slow as hell. Scrolling down image heavy pages in firefox renders at <2fps. Programs take a long time to boot. I'm still getting graphical glitches ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 14

thunderbird8 December 11 2007, 04:43:34 UTC
I run Vista on the following spec system:
AMD Athlon 64 x2 (1.7GHz)
1GB DDR2 RAM (shared video memory takes 64MB)
ATI Radeon Xpress 1100
160GB HDD split into two partitions

And I don't have any of the issues you seem to be having.

Mine's a laptop, if that makes any difference. But from what I can tell, it's a weaker system than yours (though I don't know how the video card compares).

Reply


brainfoodlunch December 11 2007, 05:59:41 UTC
did you remember to install video drivers? :P

Reply

cynic573 December 11 2007, 17:47:12 UTC
⌐_⌐;

Yeah, newest nVidia drivers and the latest non-DX10 update.

Reply


metsubosnap December 11 2007, 07:01:04 UTC
Yeah, my computer is a peice of shit compared to that and it runs Vista just fine...

Reply


lhet December 11 2007, 09:49:26 UTC
AMD 5600+ Dual core
1.5G ram
Geforce 7600GT
Images scroll by at normal speed, but these specs are better than what you posted, (and I'm running XP).
Is this slow speed because of vista (has it been good with XP)? I'm not sure if you're complaining about slow images or vista being lame.

Reply


kieferskunk December 11 2007, 16:28:26 UTC
I agree with what's been said above - this does not seem like normal behavior. If you've installed all the drivers and it's still behaving like this, it might be time to perform some diagnostics. If you do the "Windows Experience Index" test, what sorts of numbers does it give you? You should have individual scores for the CPU, RAM, hard drive, and two numbers for the graphics subsystem. It's a pretty accurate (if somewhat vague) benchmark.

Rumor has it that Vista SP1 is just around the corner, and it supposedly fixes a number of things. You might try holding out for that.

Reply

cynic573 December 11 2007, 17:45:42 UTC
My RAM and CPU are a 3.9, GPU 5.0, and everything else is 5.9.

What kind of diagnostics would you suggest? I've already disabled all of the extras and services that I don't use. (and I left vital/helper services) I've also downloaded all of the windows updates... and it's still slow.

ps> It's Vista Ultimate x64 if that makes a difference. *shrug*

Reply

kieferskunk December 11 2007, 18:17:09 UTC
Ah, there's your problem. Vista X64 has some significant issues that 32-bit doesn't. If it's not too big of a hassle for you at this point, I'd recommend installing the 32-bit version - it does work much better. Generally, you're not going to get a whole lot out of 64-bit right now, since there are relatively few programs that can really take advantage of it (most programs will run in 32-bit compatibility/emulation mode). The only major advantage to having a 64-bit system is that it can support more than 4 GB of RAM, which you don't have at the moment anyway.

This is something that I think they're addressing in SP1 (the performance issues in AMD64) - I use the 64-bit version at work for specific reasons, but I really hate the performance problems. :P Installed it at home and promptly reinstalled with 32-bit when I saw how badly it performed.

Hope that helps.

Reply

cynic573 December 11 2007, 18:48:59 UTC
Hmm... all right, I'll give it a shot before downgrading. I didn't know x64 had many performance issues.

Thanks! :D

Reply


Leave a comment

Up