Ill try later..

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by _Mark_, Jun 5, 2005.

  1. _Mark_

    _Mark_ Guest

    Installed XP 64 and then installed all drivers except printer. While
    everything installed fine Internet browsing is very slow. It takes usually
    10 seconds to load a page, while XP Home is immediate... Any ideas..
    _Mark_, Jun 5, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. _Mark_ <> wrote:
    > Installed XP 64 and then installed all drivers except printer. While
    > everything installed fine Internet browsing is very slow. It takes
    > usually 10 seconds to load a page, while XP Home is immediate... Any
    > ideas..


    Hi Mark

    Maybe:

    If you have the nVidia Firewall enable
    If you're using the quiet and cool if your mobo is an Asus.
    We really need more info about your configuration to able to assist you.

    Cheers


    --
    Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
    Johannesburg - South Africa
    http://msmvps.com/xpditif
    Christian Hougardy, Jun 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. _Mark_

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    "Christian Hougardy" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > _Mark_ <> wrote:
    >> Installed XP 64 and then installed all drivers except printer. While
    >> everything installed fine Internet browsing is very slow. It takes
    >> usually 10 seconds to load a page, while XP Home is immediate... Any
    >> ideas..

    >
    > Hi Mark
    >
    > Maybe:
    >
    > If you have the nVidia Firewall enable
    > If you're using the quiet and cool if your mobo is an Asus.
    > We really need more info about your configuration to able to assist you.
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    >
    > --
    > Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
    > Johannesburg - South Africa
    > http://msmvps.com/xpditif
    >

    Cool n' Quiet has no effect on web browsing....

    Bobby
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 5, 2005
    #3
  4. _Mark_

    _Mark_ Guest

    Sorry. ASUS K8N. No firewall installed, nor is the cool and quiet
    installed. 1.0 megs of memory with 2 WD SATA 120 drives..

    "Christian Hougardy" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > _Mark_ <> wrote:
    >> Installed XP 64 and then installed all drivers except printer. While
    >> everything installed fine Internet browsing is very slow. It takes
    >> usually 10 seconds to load a page, while XP Home is immediate... Any
    >> ideas..

    >
    > Hi Mark
    >
    > Maybe:
    >
    > If you have the nVidia Firewall enable
    > If you're using the quiet and cool if your mobo is an Asus.
    > We really need more info about your configuration to able to assist you.
    >
    > Cheers
    >
    >
    > --
    > Christian Hougardy (MS XP MVP)
    > Johannesburg - South Africa
    > http://msmvps.com/xpditif
    >
    _Mark_, Jun 5, 2005
    #4
  5. _Mark_ wrote:
    > Sorry. ASUS K8N. No firewall installed, nor is the cool and quiet
    > installed. 1.0 megs of memory with 2 WD SATA 120 drives..
    >


    Why doesn't anyone want to use EIDE drives? They are just as good, imo. :)
    That is the number one problem people are having, is related to SATA
    drivers.


    Wayne
    Wayne Wastier, Jun 5, 2005
    #5
  6. _Mark_

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Obviously, you have not done your homework. SATA drives are faster than
    EIDE, and can be set up for maximum data security. However, with the
    introduction of NCQ on the IDE side, demand for SATA may well fall. NCQ
    enabled drives, when teamed with NCQ enabled motherboards, gives better
    *SUSTAINED* throughput than SATA, so will give better performance in the
    real world. SATA drives can deliver large amounts of data in BURST mode (up
    to 150MBps in SATA I and up to 300 MBps in SATA II), but are generally not
    faster than EIDE in sustained reads. However, SATA RAID configurations do
    offer advantages over an IDE array. Many who wish to play games, edit
    video, or use other disk intensive apps, may choose SATA. Those who need to
    ensure that their data is protected (by redundant "striping") will choose
    SATA.

    Bobby

    "Wayne Wastier" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > _Mark_ wrote:
    >> Sorry. ASUS K8N. No firewall installed, nor is the cool and quiet
    >> installed. 1.0 megs of memory with 2 WD SATA 120 drives..
    >>

    >
    > Why doesn't anyone want to use EIDE drives? They are just as good, imo. :)
    > That is the number one problem people are having, is related to SATA
    > drivers.
    >
    >
    > Wayne
    >
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 5, 2005
    #6
  7. NoNoBadDog! wrote:
    > Obviously, you have not done your homework. SATA drives are faster
    > than EIDE, and can be set up for maximum data security. However,
    > with the introduction of NCQ on the IDE side, demand for SATA may
    > well fall. NCQ enabled drives, when teamed with NCQ enabled
    > motherboards, gives better *SUSTAINED* throughput than SATA, so will
    > give better performance in the real world. SATA drives can deliver
    > large amounts of data in BURST mode (up to 150MBps in SATA I and up
    > to 300 MBps in SATA II), but are generally not faster than EIDE in
    > sustained reads. However, SATA RAID configurations do offer
    > advantages over an IDE array. Many who wish to play games, edit
    > video, or use other disk intensive apps, may choose SATA. Those who
    > need to ensure that their data is protected (by redundant "striping")
    > will choose SATA.
    > Bobby
    >


    I own a SATA drive, and for what I do, I see no difference. I work with
    large files too, say 4gb. Of course, it is a SATA I drive, and is only 80GB.


    Wayne
    Wayne Wastier, Jun 6, 2005
    #7
  8. Brand Western Digital
    Series Caviar SE
    Model WD800JD
    Performance
    Capacity 80GB
    Cache 8MB
    RPM 7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time 8.9ms
    Average Write Time 10.9ms
    Average Latency 4.2ms
    Interface Serial ATA150




    Brand Maxtor
    Series DiamondMax Plus 9
    Model 6Y200P0
    Performance
    Capacity 200GB
    Cache 8MB
    RPM 7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time 9.3ms
    Average Latency 4.2ms
    Interface IDE Ultra ATA133
    Physical Spec
    Form Factor 3.5"
    Features
    Features Shock Protection and Data Protection System
    Warranty
    Manufacturer Warranty 3 Years



    Those are my two main drives. As you can see, there is little differences in speed between the two.




    Wayne
    Wayne Wastier, Jun 6, 2005
    #8
  9. _Mark_

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    You do not see any difference because you are using a single SATA drive. To get the speed benefit, you need two matched drives in a RAID array. Plus, the seek times do not indicate drive speed/throughput. If you had a properly configured RAID array, you would notice an increase in how fast the large files load. Of course, there are other variables we have not even mentioned, such as amount of RAM, type of processor, etc.

    Bobby

    "Wayne Wastier" <> wrote in message news:...
    Brand Western Digital
    Series Caviar SE
    Model WD800JD
    Performance
    Capacity 80GB
    Cache 8MB
    RPM 7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time 8.9ms
    Average Write Time 10.9ms
    Average Latency 4.2ms
    Interface Serial ATA150




    Brand Maxtor
    Series DiamondMax Plus 9
    Model 6Y200P0
    Performance
    Capacity 200GB
    Cache 8MB
    RPM 7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time 9.3ms
    Average Latency 4.2ms
    Interface IDE Ultra ATA133
    Physical Spec
    Form Factor 3.5"
    Features
    Features Shock Protection and Data Protection System
    Warranty
    Manufacturer Warranty 3 Years



    Those are my two main drives. As you can see, there is little differences in speed between the two.




    Wayne
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 6, 2005
    #9
  10. Naw, don't need to bother with a RAID array. Overkill is the operative word
    here, for me that is. But thanks anyway.



    Wayne
    Wayne Wastier, Jun 6, 2005
    #10
  11. _Mark_

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Okay. But you do need to understand that a singe SATA drive is "useless".
    A single SATA drive is no faster than an IDE drive. You seem to dismiss
    SATA as "worthless", but you cannot see the advantage of SATA unless you
    have two drives. Therefore you have dismissed SATA without ever having
    tried it.

    Bobby


    "Wayne Wastier" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Naw, don't need to bother with a RAID array. Overkill is the operative
    > word here, for me that is. But thanks anyway.
    >
    >
    >
    > Wayne
    >
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 6, 2005
    #11
  12. I hope the Windows Team offers more support in terms of RAID support for the
    average user in the next version of Windows. Better disk management setup
    and performance tuning for such configurations would be great.
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

    "NoNoBadDog!" <no_bsledge@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
    news:O6$...
    You do not see any difference because you are using a single SATA drive. To
    get the speed benefit, you need two matched drives in a RAID array. Plus,
    the seek times do not indicate drive speed/throughput. If you had a
    properly configured RAID array, you would notice an increase in how fast the
    large files load. Of course, there are other variables we have not even
    mentioned, such as amount of RAM, type of processor, etc.

    Bobby

    "Wayne Wastier" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    BrandWestern Digital
    SeriesCaviar SE
    ModelWD800JD
    Performance
    Capacity80GB
    Cache8MB
    RPM7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time8.9ms
    Average Write Time10.9ms
    Average Latency4.2ms
    InterfaceSerial ATA150




    BrandMaxtor
    SeriesDiamondMax Plus 9
    Model6Y200P0
    Performance
    Capacity200GB
    Cache8MB
    RPM7200 RPM
    Average Seek Time9.3ms
    Average Latency4.2ms
    InterfaceIDE Ultra ATA133
    Physical Spec
    Form Factor3.5"
    Features
    FeaturesShock Protection and Data Protection System
    Warranty
    Manufacturer Warranty3 Years



    Those are my two main drives. As you can see, there is little differences
    in speed between the two.




    Wayne
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Jun 6, 2005
    #12
  13. NoNoBadDog! wrote:
    > Okay. But you do need to understand that a singe SATA drive is
    > "useless". A single SATA drive is no faster than an IDE drive. You
    > seem to dismiss SATA as "worthless", but you cannot see the advantage
    > of SATA unless you have two drives. Therefore you have dismissed
    > SATA without ever having tried it.
    >
    > Bobby
    >
    >


    No, I haven't dismissed it. I just don't need it.

    I think you are taking this personally. Time to back off, ok?



    Wayne
    Wayne Wastier, Jun 6, 2005
    #13
  14. "NoNoBadDog!" <no_bsledge@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Okay. But you do need to understand that a singe SATA drive is "useless".
    > A single SATA drive is no faster than an IDE drive. You seem to dismiss
    > SATA as "worthless", but you cannot see the advantage of SATA unless you
    > have two drives. Therefore you have dismissed SATA without ever having
    > tried it.


    It's a free country. If he wanted to dismiss it instead of merely not
    needing it, he could do so.. to each their own.
    Morituri-|-Max, Jun 6, 2005
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Fred  Evans
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    477
    Fred Evans
    Jul 14, 2003
  2. Phil-on-a-hill

    Is my computer making me ill?

    Phil-on-a-hill, Sep 21, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,080
    Patrick
    Sep 21, 2003
  3. Try, Try, Try, again...

    , Jan 29, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    619
  4. mistuh
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    10,660
    Plato
    May 1, 2005
  5. ?nevillenevilleson?

    ILL TRY AGAIN

    ?nevillenevilleson?, Nov 14, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    362
    ®nevillenevilleson®
    Nov 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page