How Long Is Your PC Boot Time ?

[Бојан 0]

Wow levimage, you surprised me with you recommending You can be sure that i was thinking about new CPU, but i said wtf this is not a junk CPU. 3.40GHz with HT is like Dual Core and the rest is done by the 2MB L2 Cache.My budget is not very big so i can't afford CPU from 200$ :S I must be pleased with the current CPU and enjoying with that. ;)I'm going to buy new motherboard because the mobo i have has been broken. Two pins from the LGA775 socket are broken even i don't know how that happend. But sh*t happens! I gave it to the store where i bought it because i had 1 year guarantee and they will change my motherboard or maybe they will offer me to buy another motherboard with paying smaller price or something like that... Greetings and thank's for the tips.

[levimage 0]

3.40GHz with HT is like Dual Core and the rest is done by the 2MB L2 Cache

I'm running an intel E6600 - 2.4GHz Core2 Duo @ 4MB cache (it was about $300 when it came out, but I think it is cheaper now, or more cost effective to go with a new technology processor)

The new technology will allow for more future customization, low power usage (lower bills), and low temperature (which means cooler system and better gaming)

Also it would help on that last recommendation about temperature to go with a 3rd party cooler. This should allow for a cooler CPU. I just recently changed my case and power supply, it made a world of difference with it's 3 fans and the PSU not using the air from the case.

[jimmo12 0]

my system is a Intel I7 Extreme on a RoG Mobo qith a triple SLI GTX480so my pc boot time is 10 secs to improve your boot time try defragmentation or to clean up your registery, It will surely help Jim Out

[yordan 10]

today my PC boot time is stupidely long.Because I still did not solve my nvlddmkm.sys crash at cold start, I first have a dump time, than a second boot with a fully blurred display. Then I have a warm system with bad graphics, and I can perform a hot restart and have a correctly working system.The whole thing needs about ten minutes, which is completely stupid for a quad pentium. Once it worked correctly after installing a Microsoft Efix, and then the boot was some tens of seconds. And after some crosoft updates it went bad again.I can't know if it's a general compatibily problem between my NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GS and Microsoft Vista when used with a Samsung SyncMaster display, or if I have a faulty adapter or a bad display. If I were rather rich I would try buying a new graphic adapter and see if works well, but if it's a crosoft bug this would be a simple waste of money. So, I simply know that I have a very fast PC which currently boots very slowly, and I try to feel happy.

[grim reaper1666 0]

mine take less than 10 seconds to boot up, i have a amd athlon 64 x2 6000+ 3.1 ghz processor and i am also running windows 7 which also decreases the boot time. a effective way of increasing your boot time is to make sure that your computer is cooling efficently so that there is no heat decreases to be made when booting up.

[mahesh2k 0]

I think it's less than a minute with 1.25 GB RAM but it takes more than minute when it gets into desktop. It tries to load all those crappy programs and services which can't be disabled from the task manager or such utilties. these programs just dependent on each other and hog dekstop loading time. duh, not sure how to start those services only when needed. :/

[grim reaper1666 0]

change which programs load at startup believe me when you do it certainly speeds up the time t get the desktop loaded. my desktop loads in 10- 25 seconds simply because i have 4 gb, a 6.2 ghz processor (3.1ghz per core). i also have a nvidia geforce 9600 gt 512 mb graphics card. which by the way games run less laggy when my system is cooling effectivly. at first when i used to play grand theft auto 4 with it the game would lag. then i installed a case fan and on the same settings with no game updates it didn't lag. cooling can make all the difference in the world.

[yordan 10]

Huh ? Do you mean that the boot time you are talking about is not the full time until the end of the desktop start?Because, effectiveley, when I boot my PC under ms-dos or under Linux without the desktop, the boot time is really a couple of seconds. The long-lasting part of the boot time is the startup of the desktop, the antivirus, and all the tools usually started.

[8ennett 0]

I'm running a laptop with vista, amd dual core, 1gb ram, ati radeon, can't be bothered lookin up the full specs and the stickers worn off from my hand leaning on it lol this loads in about a minute and a half, this includes the vista desktop as well but not including the bios password (more secure than a windows password, unless the infiltrator knows how to press the bios reset button lol) however the only software that loads up on startup is AVG virus scanner and daemon tools, the rest of the rubbish I got rid of because i just didn't need it. Disabling user account control is another good idea, it's just a pointless drain on your system and is really designed for people who are computer illiterate and don't know the difference between a virus, spyware and a genuine piece of clean software.If I boot Linux BackTrack4 off my USB key on a USB2 port on the laptop it takes about a minute to load, that's without the KDE desktop, however KDE only takes seconds to load anyway. Surprisingly Slitaz takes longer to load than backtrack yet it's a fraction of the size. Slitaz uses the 2.2 kernel though where as backtrack uses 2.6My PC is a 1.2ghz pentium 4, 768mb RAM, 32mb graphics (lol I kept downgrading from spare parts as they broke), 3 hdd's (30gb, 20gb, 10gb) and this takes a good five minutes from switching on to full desktop functionality, however because of the number of hdd's and the fact i use it as a server more than anything this accounts for the slowness. The software that loads is AVG, Apache, PHP, MySQL, Synchronet (Telnet, FTP and SMTP) and TVersity (although I don't need this anymore as I don't have a 360). So yeah, a lot of open ports on my PC lol

[mahesh2k 0]

Ermm, i'm talking about first time upto the login screen appears. After that it takes more than minute to let that mouse to get me working with start menu. it's getting slow after i login to desktop but before that speed is fast. I guess this is because of the some programs loading and enabling some services. I have sony erricson gprs service which enables 5 more services and is taking much time on the desktop. other than that USB service is also taking time to load. That's why i think i've limited things to do in my hand.

[yordan 10]

OK, now I understand the difference. In my opinion, a PC finished booting when you entered your username and password, and have seen the desktop coming with all it's tools, including the network and the antivirus, and task manager says that the cpu usage is back to zero. Same thing with Linux, all drivers have to have been loaded and the sar command should say "idle 99%".Before that, you cannot say that your PC is booted, it's ready to boot or it's booting and is partly usable, but it's not fully booted.For instance, as long as your wifi drivers are not set up, you cannot go surfing on Internet, so your system is almost unusable.

[8ennett 0]

as long as your wifi drivers are not set up, you cannot go surfing on Internet, so your system is almost unusable.

lol i think somebody spends a little too much time surfing the web hey yordan? lol

[mahesh2k 0]

Hmm in that case my booting time is way too much. cause once i log in it is taking time. though i can get browser to work immediately but explorer and drives take to appear on explorer so it's taking more time to load. other programs can load immediately and run as well but typical windows program take more time to load. i think this has something to do with services and some programs installed on the system.

[The Simpleton1405241582 0]

I use Ubuntu 9.10 on my 8-year old PC with 512MB RAM and it boots up in about fifty seconds. Fifty seconds and I'm ready to play. I heard that the version 10.04 boots much faster, but my old system isn't supporting that one so for now I'm content with this. I have Windows 7 on dual boot and it takes, well....after three minutes I stopped counting! I guess it's so slow due to my old system, but it could have been much better if only the startup programs weren't so heavy.

[mahesh2k 0]

Thing about windows 7 is it is stripped down vista. or maybe more. i think most of the whistles and issues of the vista are removed from windows 7 and there is nothing more they offered in the release. In anycase, it boots up much better than vista. I'm not sure about old system though. It works fine with 700+MB ram on most of the machines. 1GB RAM for the windows 7 is recommended so i think upgrading is good option for you.