Multiprocessor Initialization Delay at Desktop?

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

Andrew:

Thanks for the quick reply!

In fact, I am not swapping the CPU between sessions with the two images. The
single-core image built on a uniprocessor machine is being run on the same
dual-core unit interchangeably with the dual-core version. The hardware
remains the same; only the software changes, and it is the dual-core image
running on the dual-core hardware that is taking longer to initialize. That's
what I'm trying to understand. There seems to be some "overhead" associated
with setting up the session environment for multiple cores. I'm hoping
someone can either confirm this, or point out some other configuration
options I need to adjust to eliminate the additional delay.

Bill Allen






"Andrew E." wrote:

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

Andrew:

Thanks for the quick reply!

In fact, I am not swapping the CPU between sessions with the two images. The
single-core image built on a uniprocessor machine is being run on the same
dual-core unit interchangeably with the dual-core version. The hardware
remains the same; only the software changes, and it is the dual-core image
running on the dual-core hardware that is taking longer to initialize. That's
what I'm trying to understand. There seems to be some "overhead" associated
with setting up the session environment for multiple cores. I'm hoping
someone can either confirm this, or point out some other configuration
options I need to adjust to eliminate the additional delay.

Bill Allen






"Andrew E." wrote:

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

Your problem is that a dual-core CPU is not the same as having more than one
processor. The delay is probably coming from the multi-processor OS looking
for another CPU and not finding one. The uniprocessor image is the one you
should be using for your set-up.

SC Tom

"Bill Allen" wrote in message
...
Andrew:

Thanks for the quick reply!

In fact, I am not swapping the CPU between sessions with the two images.
The
single-core image built on a uniprocessor machine is being run on the same
dual-core unit interchangeably with the dual-core version. The hardware
remains the same; only the software changes, and it is the dual-core image
running on the dual-core hardware that is taking longer to initialize.
That's
what I'm trying to understand. There seems to be some "overhead"
associated
with setting up the session environment for multiple cores. I'm hoping
someone can either confirm this, or point out some other configuration
options I need to adjust to eliminate the additional delay.

Bill Allen






"Andrew E." wrote:

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have
you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor
machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am
experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver
after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a
5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being
tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the
multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support
after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

Your problem is that a dual-core CPU is not the same as having more than one
processor. The delay is probably coming from the multi-processor OS looking
for another CPU and not finding one. The uniprocessor image is the one you
should be using for your set-up.

SC Tom

"Bill Allen" wrote in message
...
Andrew:

Thanks for the quick reply!

In fact, I am not swapping the CPU between sessions with the two images.
The
single-core image built on a uniprocessor machine is being run on the same
dual-core unit interchangeably with the dual-core version. The hardware
remains the same; only the software changes, and it is the dual-core image
running on the dual-core hardware that is taking longer to initialize.
That's
what I'm trying to understand. There seems to be some "overhead"
associated
with setting up the session environment for multiple cores. I'm hoping
someone can either confirm this, or point out some other configuration
options I need to adjust to eliminate the additional delay.

Bill Allen






"Andrew E." wrote:

The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have
you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor
machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am
experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver
after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a
5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being
tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the
multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support
after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

"The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation..."

is utterly false, and another example of Andrew giving advice he knows
nothing about.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Andrew E. wrote:
The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

"The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation..."

is utterly false, and another example of Andrew giving advice he knows
nothing about.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Andrew E. wrote:
The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor machine
and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am experiencing
an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a touchscreen driver after
the appearance of the XP Desktop on the dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10
second delay on the uniprocessor unit. In fact, both images are being tested
on the same machine, so the only difference should be the multiprocessor
support present in the second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support after
the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of other
peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize the
additional delay?

Actually, he is correct to a certain extent this time. If you swap out a
2GHz CPU with a 2.6GHz one, some of the BIOS settings will change
accordingly- the multiplier, frequency (if different), etc.

SC Tom


"Leonard Grey" wrote in message
...
"The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation..."

is utterly false, and another example of Andrew giving advice he knows
nothing about.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Andrew E. wrote:
The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have
you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor
machine and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am
experiencing an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a
touchscreen driver after the appearance of the XP Desktop on the
dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10 second delay on the uniprocessor
unit. In fact, both images are being tested on the same machine, so the
only difference should be the multiprocessor support present in the
second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support
after the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of
other peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize
the additional delay?

Actually, he is correct to a certain extent this time. If you swap out a
2GHz CPU with a 2.6GHz one, some of the BIOS settings will change
accordingly- the multiplier, frequency (if different), etc.

SC Tom


"Leonard Grey" wrote in message
...
"The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation..."

is utterly false, and another example of Andrew giving advice he knows
nothing about.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Andrew E. wrote:
The BIOS settings get changed with every processor installation,have
you
monitored the settings at every change.

"Bill Allen" wrote:

In comparing two XP Pro installations, one built for a uniprocessor
machine and the other for a dual-core version of the same machine, I am
experiencing an annoying 40-60 second delay in the loading of a
touchscreen driver after the appearance of the XP Desktop on the
dual-core unit, compared to a 5-10 second delay on the uniprocessor
unit. In fact, both images are being tested on the same machine, so the
only difference should be the multiprocessor support present in the
second image.

Does XP require additional time to initialize multiprocessor support
after the appearance of the Desktop before completing the loading of
other peripheral drivers? Is there anything that can be done to minimize
the additional delay?