PDA

View Full Version : XP Pro performance


Daniel(Tech Student)
July 22nd 04, 04:05 PM
Im not as impressed with Window XP Pro or any of them. For systems with brand new processors with a gigahertz or more it's great but for those with 800 - 333 mhz processors it's very sluggish. I had Windows 2000 Pro and had better performance from it than
I have now with XP. Is there any good tweaks that can make a significant difference in my performance. Ive looked on the net and the tweaks offer minimal performance help and a few registry tweaks. The best registry tweak i found was for old processors wit
h external cache because XP by default is set up for 256kb cache for processors you have 2 change the registry 2 utilize the full extent of your cache. It has helped a lil bit but Im still unsatisfied. I payed for a bigger better and got a bigger slower. A
ny positive input would be much appreciated.

Carey Frisch [MVP]
July 22nd 04, 04:05 PM
Upgrade your RAM to 512MB.

How to Set Performance Options in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;308417&Product=winxp

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Daniel(Tech Student)" <Daniel(Tech > wrote in message:
...

| Im not as impressed with Window XP Pro or any of them. For systems with brand new processors with a
gigahertz or more it's great but for those with 800 - 333 mhz processors it's very sluggish. I had Windows
2000 Pro and had better performance from it than I have now with XP. Is there any good tweaks that can make a
significant difference in my performance. Ive looked on the net and the tweaks offer minimal performance help
and a few registry tweaks. The best registry tweak i found was for old processors with external cache because
XP by default is set up for 256kb cache for processors you have 2 change the registry 2 utilize the full
extent of your cache. It has helped a lil bit but Im still unsatisfied. I payed for a bigger better and got a
bigger slower. Any positive input would be much appreciated.

Google