Quick Vista Question

[sonicstorm]

Ijust got a copy of Vista Buisness edition and installed it and everything but when it booted up for the first time it was ridiculously slow, and it would take hours to boot. This was happening over and over again so i decided to restore my computer back to its original XP Media Center Edition... I was wondering is it my specs? They shold be fine but are these enough?

Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.06GHz, 960mb's of RAM and yea thats all my sistem properties said.

Sorry its a newb question i check the site but it wasnt much of a help so i thought id ask my fellow tempers.

 

[hankchill]

Ijust got a copy of Vista Buisness edition and installed it and everything but when it booted up for the first time it was ridiculously slow, and it would take hours to boot. This was happening over and over again so i decided to restore my computer back to its original XP Media Center Edition... I was wondering is it my specs? They shold be fine but are these enough?

Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.06GHz, 960mb's of RAM and yea thats all my sistem properties said.

Sorry its a newb question i check the site but it wasnt much of a help so i thought id ask my fellow tempers.

Buddy, all I can say is 'There's Vista for ya!'

Stay far, far away. Maybe for the next 7 years or so.

--Henry

 

[sonicstorm]

Thanks for your help. I really apreciate you answering my question

 

[DSGamer64]

Vista is a power hog and runs best on at least 2 GB's of RAM and a dual core processor. Although I managed to run Vista Business in college on a computer that had a 2.5 Ghz P4, 1 GB of RAM and a 64 MB Nvidia integrated graphics card, and only took a couple of minutes to boot up so it could be a lot of things, mainly a bad install is your issue or there are hardware compatibility problems and Vista cannot recognize all your drivers.

Btw, hey Henry

 

[MrKuenning]

Its your ram... min 2gb, preferd 4gb. you have less than 1.

Plus you didnt mintion your gpu.

 

[DSGamer64]

Yes, I think the GPU also impacts the performance. If you turn off Aero though, it becomes like XP in most ways, although I have found it to be completely useless. If you have an integrated graphics card that only has 32 MB's of RAM like most laptop graphics cards, of course it is going to run slow. My brother has an HP laptop with Vista Home Premium which is almost exactly like the Business version aside from a few different features, but the general features that are on all versions still exist, his computer has a 2.0 Ghz AMD Turion Mobile X2 processor, 2 GB's of RAM and an integrated Nvidia 7700LE (which sadly takes off RAM from your processing time which sucks but whatever) and Vista runs just fine, not fast enough for my liking but when you start loading background programs like antivirus and whatnot, of course it runs slower.

 

[cenotaph]

RAM is usually the main bottleneck. Running Vista with anything less than 2G RAM is a futile effort. I'd recommend 4G or more if you're serious about using it, as 2G will leave you with about 1G to use for whatever, which isn't sufficient for most.

 

[fenthwick]

Guys cut the crap. You truly know nothing. OMG at the response above me! 1GB is all he needs. 4GB is overkill, are you fucking serious...
Vista uses superfetch so even if you have 4GB RAM it will look like it's using everything. It uses the un used RAM for applications you use often so you can start them faster.

Vista should run pretty good on your computer(it runs weell on my laptop with 1.7GHz and 1GB RAM). Did you use the tool/application to see if your hardware is vista compatible? Maybe something is too old.

See if there are programs at startup that aren't needed.
Start>Accessories>Run>type "msconfig"> un check programs in the autostart tab

 

[kellyan95]

It ran fine on my system when I had 512mb of ram, you just have to tweak it

I would say you have a different issue, for some reason Vista hates my other HDD (which has boot files from many vista and XP instalations that I haven't deleted yet) and it will take hours to start, if at all

Try taking out your card readers, other hdds, and DVD drives and booting Vista

 

[BoneMonkey]

its your ram dude you need at least 2 gb of ram

 

[Osaka]

its your ram dude you need at least 2 gb of ram

I only have 1GB of ram and I have no problems with ram at all. so no, you dont need 2gb or ram.

 

[cenotaph]

Edit: nevermind, this isn't going anywhere. I think my idea of how superfetch is implemented is off too, so...

 

[kellyan95]

You obviously don't know what superfetch does then

My PC idling, with superfetch, uses 35% of 2GB. Which is 700mb.

 

[cenotaph]

You obviously don't know what superfetch does then

My PC idling, with superfetch, uses 35% of 2GB. Which is 700mb.

I realized my mistake. I had the idea that memory usage as displayed in the task manager excluded the amount of memory used for cache by superfetch, but this was off. I figured 900M couldn't be the amount used by all the running processes + superfetch because I've seen a similar implementation on another OS where it would allocate all but a few hundred megabytes of RAM (most for cache) and thought this would be along the same lines, but I guess that was off too.

Oh well. Sorry for the misinformation.

 

[Lukeage]

I run a 32Bit Vista Business edition on my single core, 1GB RAM laptop without any issues.

Fenthwick is correct in that Vista caches files that it considers to be useful to have loaded, which is why it says that there is less memory available. If you show the extra memory columns in Task Manager, you can start to see how the memory is actually allocated.

When something that requires a large amount of memory comes along, Vista checks what is cached and unneeded and instantly can mark it to be overwritten with minimal overhead, probably no more than allocating to unused memory anyhow. (Extremely simplified explaination for those without Computer Science backgrounds).

Most of the memory FUD is from the uneducated masses who seem to think that unused memory is more useful than precached memory (or don't even know about precaching). I believe that OSX supports similar features, however Linux currently does not have any precaching mechanisms.

 

[cubin']

It's not your ram. Some people are stupid and like hating on vista for no reason.

Maybe a bad install. Tweak some settings and you should be able to get it going fine or reinstall.

Again, It should run fine on your computer..you may just have to turn down some graphic settings and disk caching.

MrKuenning: wtf. you recommend 4GB for vista? insanity

 

[Mangofett]

I think its an issue with Vista business, my biology teacher with a P4 has it installed, and it boots up slooow

 

[sonicstorm]

Thanks guys, yea it should be fine to run I'll try another installation but i think a second gig of ram would be better.

 

[hankchill]

Vista is a power hog and runs best on at least 2 GB's of RAM and a dual core processor. Although I managed to run Vista Business in college on a computer that had a 2.5 Ghz P4, 1 GB of RAM and a 64 MB Nvidia integrated graphics card, and only took a couple of minutes to boot up so it could be a lot of things, mainly a bad install is your issue or there are hardware compatibility problems and Vista cannot recognize all your drivers.

Btw, hey Henry

Steve, don't you EVER call me by my first name again, or else I'll get my wife to take pictures of us playing Guitar Hero 3 this weekend and I'll post them up here!

...

--Henry

 

[Prime]

Get 1GB RAM.

Vista runs fine on my sisters laptop which has 1GB ram.