 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 10
I'm about to build a couple of PCs for my sis .. I'm hoping to have Windows fully loaded in about 16 seconds!Originally Posted by Cage
....
Happy camper.
(although it's unlikely considering the amount of software that these PCs need to run at the same time at bootup)
Kev, I'm curious. Did the upgrade in RAM actually help at all?
That is, if you replace it now with the original RAM(4G, I think) .. does the lappy still boot up in about 40s?
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
"Fordy seccunds?!"If it's Asus and has Instant On activated, and (now) has an SSD, it should do 10 seconds - like mine.
CC, Image editing OK.
Threadstarter
Hi Arthur,
Had a bit of a hiccup with the new RAM as I couldn't boot. Put the old RAM back in with the SSD and from memory it booted a bit quicker. I downloaded a clean copy of W10 from MS with the original RAM and was up and running in about 30 minutes.
I then swapped the new 8GB RAM stick to the other slot and 'Bingo', booted up and recognised.
I turned it on this morning and it all seems to have bedded in as I had an accessible computer in 13 secs. The only programs showing in the start-up folder are ETD ControlCentre (for the mousepad) and OneDrive.
In answer to your question, yes, I believe it's made a huge difference.
Cheers
Kev
Nikon D810: D600 (Astro Modded): D7200 and 'stuff', lots of 'stuff'
Gidday Am"Fordy seccunds?!"
The first of the desktops I inherited boots up from a cold boot in 39 seconds. It is a 6 y.o. PC with a new Kingston 240GB SSD (the more expensive one with the Seagate management chip) and 4GB RAM. Running Win7 Pro 32 bit OS.
That 39 seconds includes a couple of start up processes, including proper time server s/w (MS has stopped supporting their own time server!!), antivirus s/w, etc.
The SSD certainly makes a huge difference.
One caveat, if the OS thinks that there is a driver problem, the computer becomes all but impossible to start. Yesterday I finally got this one to start by inserting another SSD with the same OS and configuration on it, booting to that, running Windows Repair, running CHKDSK on the original SSD, then shutting the computer down and rebooting with the original SSD only. What a performance for a 'found' file folder with 0 bytes in it!
BTW, that found file folder has to have ownership taken of it plus security changed to the current user in order for one to access it. Really bloody useful!
Methinks that MS is seriously losing the plot.
Threadstarter
Hi Am,"Fordy seccunds?!"
As I said to Arthur, this morning I had a usable laptop in 13 secs, and I don't mean just seeing the desktop, I mean logged in and fully accessible. Happy Camper.
Just ran ChrisPC again and got the following, with the old scores in brackets:
Processor: 6.1 (6.1)
Memory: 7.0 (5.5)
Graphics: 4.9 (4.9)
Gaming Graphics: 9.9 (9.9)
Hard Disk 8.1 (5.9)
So, as expected, significant improvement in the RAM and Hard Disk scores.
FYI, Kingston make Toshiba's RAM with personalised model #'s which are not traceable on Kingston's memory search. I guess that's why the greedy buggers at Toshiba think that they can ask $230.00 for the 8GB ram stick that I bought for $47.96 delivered.
All in all, very happy with the upgrade.
Well, there a couple of JUMPS there. In all what did it cost like that?
One thing to keep in mind with SSD's - You shouldn't perform your traditional defragmentation as that will shorten the life of your SSD. It doesn't have spinning parts so doesn't have the latency issues that defragmentation addresses.
John Blackburn
"Life is like a camera! Focus on what is important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives, and if things don't work out take another shot."
Threadstarter
Not quite sure what you're askingbut if you mean total $ cost, the notebook was $349.00, the 8GB of RAM $47.96 and the 120GB SSD $63.20, for an all-up cost of $460.16.
Ta. That was it
Threadstarter
The only real slug in the system now is the onboard GPU, and not a lot I can do about it.Ta. That was it
It apparently has 1Gb of built-in memory, and according to W10 performance tool it can access half of the RAM. I've only tried it with ViewNX-2 to date, and it is no slower than my desktop. I'm thinking about putting CS6 via CC on it, and I'll see how it goes then for very basic PP I may do when away from home.
And it's raining here. YeeHaaaaaa, we really need it.
Threadstarter
FWIW, I just installed CC 's Photoshop on the Notebook and it is not all that slower.
From a NEF file to opening it in the Camera Raw plug-in, about 5secs, as opposed to about 2 seconds on the desktop. Once the file is opened in PS, speeds seems just a tad slower, but really much of a muchness. Certainly a hell of a lot faster than I anticipated.
Checking the System Info in PS is says it has 6GB of RAM available so it is obviously harnessing a fair whack of the RAM when required.
Once more, I'm delighted with my upgrade, 'cos I'm absobloodylutely positive I wouldn't have got those results with 2GB of RAM and a 5400rpm spindle drive.
This is not going to make you feel any better but a few years ago I bought a high-spec Toshiba satellite.
It's a complete PITA and i would NEVER buy another Toshiba. Never ever.
I haven't had any computer shut itself down and restart so often for updates - and smack in the middle of doing things!
Have tried updating to Windows 10 both by 'upgrade' and clean install and no luck. It just hates it and won't play - display stops entirely all sorts of stuff.
No amount of assistance sought from Toshiba (not very helpful) and from knowledgeable people on various IT forums has helped - other than the fact I have come across many others with Toshiba Satellite laptops with exactly the same, apparently unsolvable, issues.
Sigh.
/end rant mode
Gear: Panasonic Lumix FZ200 / Huawei Mate 20 / LR 5, PSE 12, Da Vinci resolve
"I may be crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."
Hmm! Not the 3 brand new, high-specced T Sats I recently updated (not clean installed) to Win 10. They go very well, thank you very much
(Pass the cake, please! Yes, thanks, another champagne would be nice)
ViewNX2 'doesn't use' the graphics card/chip for any performance benefit.
I use quotation marks for the term doesn't use as it obviously needs it to render some graphics, but the speed and size of the graphics subsystem has no bearing on how well(or not) ViewNX2 operates.
Only performance boosts you can do for VNX2 is faster media where the files are located to speed up image loading times, and more/faster RAM(if your system benefits from faster ram too tho) for batching job lots.
Sounds like you're probably at the peak of what the laptop can do in terms of HDD speed.
Adobe products are different tho. They have some internal programming that not only uses the CPU to effect processing, but any idle GPU power gets used up by Adobe's hunger for power.
ViewNX2 is not programmed in this manner.
So if you use CC/CS regularly and intensively, you may want to try diverting some more RAM space to the GPU as well to see if that helps in any way.
if you do try that, you should find that VNX2 will not be affected in any way.
I'm kind'a in the same boat ATM with my desktop, in that I originally had a graphics card for the PC, but had to donate it to another machine a while back.
So my desktop had to revert from a 2 gig u-bute graphics card with reasonable power, down to the onboard graphics chip in the motherboard.
Made no difference at all to either VNX2 or CNX2's operation speed at all.
I upped RAM from 4G to 16G, and the only difference I noted in their speeds was when doing batch jobs .. just little faster .. not immensely faster.
But! .... what makes a major difference is HDD speed.
Not long ago my fastest drive died. That drive could sustain 100+Mb/s read/write rates easily over the long haul(hundreds of gigs to 1+tb) .. so not just a short burst rate.
It's burst rate was in the order of 180-ish Mb/s.
The drive I now use in it's place is a tad slower, 70-ish Mb/s for large transfers and just over 100Mb/s bursts(if I'm lucky).
CNX feels more sluggish, and VNX2 just a little less zippy if I had lots of images in a folder.
But in saying that, they're still more than usable for me. No real holdups or waiting for something to happen.
I tried CS something(cant' remember) and it took wayyyyyyyyyyyy to long for anything to happen, and Lr is almost as slow to use as is that painful CNX-D!!
Oh! and the only reason I still persist with (the glacier that is) CNX-D, is because it's now stopped crashing every time I try to use it
Threadstarter
I have neighbours who bough a top end Satellite about five years back and their two kids belted the living daylights out of it.
It's still going strong.
Sorry to hear you got the bad apple in the barrel.
When you say you tried a clean install did you try it on a clean disk, or over the top of an existing installation.
I used this link..... https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/soft...load/windows10 to do mine and it went without a hitch.
Last edited by Cage; 18-03-2016 at 5:59pm.
I do all my photo stuff on a six year old Satellite. CS6 PPs fast and no problems. Until people start to tell my my bird photos look like crap I'll continue to think the Satellite is doing a reasonable job.
Does it matter that something takes 10, 13, 60 seconds to bootup. Go and have a cuppa.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
