Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: 7 faster than vista? - a tiny bit maybe

03 Oct 2009   #31
Antman

 

[quote=pparks1;293887]
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Tews View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Any machine is going to slow down if you neglect basic maintainence... If the average user would adopt a maintainence policy the way they do with security, the slowdown would be negligible..
Not true at all in my experience, I'm afraid. On my work laptop, which has Windows Vista Enterprise for work....this machine is way slower than it was the day it was given to me. And unfortunately, I'm not able to remove the software that I need to perform my job.

I've optimized the box the best I can, I've shut off anything unncessary in services, I've turned off startup things in msconfig which are unneeded at boot time, I've defragged the drive and deleted the things which I don't need to maximize free disk space, I've turned off some of the aero features like transparent windows....but regardless my boot times, my time to connect to wireless networks, and my time to shut down the box is significantly longer than they were with a clean install.
You will have to provide a detailed analysis before I could accept this as anything other than wrong.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
03 Oct 2009   #32
gzt7d8

Windows 7 Professional (64bit)
 
 

I'm running Windows 7 on a 5 year old machine and I definitely find it faster than Vista. I boots up faster, it loads programs faster and in general, is more responsive than Vista.

I've placed my order for the public release version, later this month. I'm installing in on October 22nd. I'm not waiting or being swayed by writers who people think are brave in writing the real truth. They are off base as far as I'm concerned.

gs
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #33
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
You will have to provide a detailed analysis before I could accept this as anything other than wrong.
What exactly would you like to see to help me prove my statements? I'd be glad to take some steps to help back up the statements that made.

I'm running on a Dell Latitude E6400, 2.33Ghz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, and 32-bit Vista Enterprise 32-bit.

I'm running some of the obvious things that were placed on this box by my company
  • Trend for Antivirus
  • Shoretell for integration into our phone system
  • CheckPoint VPN software for remote access
  • Microsoft Office 2007
  • KeePass for storing passwords
Over time, I have taken on new roles and so forth and have had to load additional software packages to support my responsibilities
  • VMware Server 2.0 for testing
  • VMWare Converter 4.0 for converting machines
  • Active Directory tools for maniging our domains
  • Exchange Server management tools for 2003 and 2007 Exchange servers.
  • Wireshark and WinPcap for troubleshooting network issues.
  • MySQL and MSSQL client side tools for managing databases
  • Apache Directory studio for managing various LDAP repositories
  • VisionApp for easy RDP access into our hundreds of Windows servers
  • WinSCP and Veaam FastSCP for getting files moved around to Linux
  • Blackberry software and network connects to use my cell phone as modem remotely when on call.
So, at the end of the day, this machine usually churns quite a bit at startup, eats up more resources, and shuts down more slowly than it did when I first got it.

When I set this machine up to dual boot Windows 7...my windows 7 booted in about 40 seconds versus my Vista which takes over 2 minutes. To the average person who is "used" to their machine taking this long to start-up and become functional, a new Install of Windows 7 without anything else loaded would make it seem like a brand new computer and super fast. When in reality, a clean Vista install may appear almost just as fast. Over time, given the apps and so forth that people are going to load...both will naturally slow down.

Lots of people see a computer crash as the most devastating thing possible. Personally, I find it a wonderful opportunity to reload and get it cleaned back up and get it back to running as fast as possible. Unfortunately with my work computer, my downtime and lack of productivity while I got everything set back up would not be justified by my time savings in boot ups and shutdowns.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

03 Oct 2009   #34
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
You will have to provide a detailed analysis before I could accept this as anything other than wrong.
What exactly would you like to see to help me prove my statements? I'd be glad to take some steps to help back up the statements that made.

I'm running on a Dell Latitude E6400, 2.33Ghz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, and 32-bit Vista Enterprise 32-bit.

I'm running some of the obvious things that were placed on this box by my company
  • Trend for Antivirus
  • Shoretell for integration into our phone system
  • CheckPoint VPN software for remote access
  • Microsoft Office 2007
  • KeePass for storing passwords
Over time, I have taken on new roles and so forth and have had to load additional software packages to support my responsibilities
  • VMware Server 2.0 for testing
  • VMWare Converter 4.0 for converting machines
  • Active Directory tools for maniging our domains
  • Exchange Server management tools for 2003 and 2007 Exchange servers.
  • Wireshark and WinPcap for troubleshooting network issues.
  • MySQL and MSSQL client side tools for managing databases
  • Apache Directory studio for managing various LDAP repositories
  • VisionApp for easy RDP access into our hundreds of Windows servers
  • WinSCP and Veaam FastSCP for getting files moved around to Linux
  • Blackberry software and network connects to use my cell phone as modem remotely when on call.
So, at the end of the day, this machine usually churns quite a bit at startup, eats up more resources, and shuts down more slowly than it did when I first got it.

When I set this machine up to dual boot Windows 7...my windows 7 booted in about 40 seconds versus my Vista which takes over 2 minutes. To the average person who is "used" to their machine taking this long to start-up and become functional, a new Install of Windows 7 without anything else loaded would make it seem like a brand new computer and super fast. When in reality, a clean Vista install may appear almost just as fast. Over time, given the apps and so forth that people are going to load...both will naturally slow down.

Lots of people see a computer crash as the most devastating thing possible. Personally, I find it a wonderful opportunity to reload and get it cleaned back up and get it back to running as fast as possible. Unfortunately with my work computer, my downtime and lack of productivity while I got everything set back up would not be justified by my time savings in boot ups and shutdowns.
So, what you are actually saying - A machine that does relatively nothing boots, connects and shuts down faster than a machine that is actually in productive use?

My well maintained production machine is as responsive today as it was the day that it reached it's current install state.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #35
SquonkSC

Win7 Build 7600 x86
 
 

Reading all the posts in this thread, it proves once more how subjective computing really is.

All I've seen is subjective opinions, comparisons between an OS that has been running for yrs, and one just freshly installed.

An none of it backed up with facts, measurements or benchmarks.

The OP at least gave us a link to people who actually did a fair comparison.
Clean installs on identical hardware, that's the only way to be objective.

And then you would still have deviations caused by drivers that are in their early stages of development for W7, and drivers in their later stages for Vista.

And if it will stay the same lean machine after two years of use and being polluted with trial-ware, unremoved regkeys, etc.. remains to be seen.

Vista has become quite a decent OS, but it's too late, W7 has arrived.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #36
jimbo45

Linux CENTOS 7 / various Windows OS'es and servers
 
 

Hi there

Things like AV software will by their nature slow your machine down due to the unalterable fact that the whole Virus data base contains many more entries (new virus definitions are being added almost daily and the checking to be done has to be far more sophisticated compared with that done several years ago). Attacks against an OS are far more sophisticated these days -- who had ever heard of things like "rootkits" until relatively recently.

Probably the same with corporate email systems -- these have AV built in which will slow down the end users response time as the amount of information to be checked grows and becomes more sophisticated. Same as Logging on to VPN's etc.

The best solution would actually be to have all the AV stuff done by a firewall on a totally separate machine -- this machine could be a low end older one that's connected to your router and simply acts as a "pass thru" type of gateway.

Ideally - Here's a good one for you to earn Big Bucks -- why can't all this be done in a small Linux / Unix type of OS actually embedded in the router. We have windows CE for small palmtop devices - some type of Windows CE could run as a minimal VM inside the router to detect Windows Viruses.

When at home I have an older box acting as a SUSE sever which is connected to the internet. My W7 box is connected to the Internet via the SUSE server.

This saves having to muck about with any AV software on the windows box -- saves quite a bit of "OS degradation" in performance.

So far since running W7 RTM and adding loads of apps I haven't noticed any "Slowdown" yet.

I'm sure 99% of OS slowdown is probably due to AV software followed by bad use of disk space.


Cheers
jimbo
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #37
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

[quote=pparks1;293887]
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Tews View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Any machine is going to slow down if you neglect basic maintainence... If the average user would adopt a maintainence policy the way they do with security, the slowdown would be negligible..
Not true at all in my experience, I'm afraid. On my work laptop, which has Windows Vista Enterprise for work....this machine is way slower than it was the day it was given to me. And unfortunately, I'm not able to remove the software that I need to perform my job.

I've optimized the box the best I can, I've shut off anything unncessary in services, I've turned off startup things in msconfig which are unneeded at boot time, I've defragged the drive and deleted the things which I don't need to maximize free disk space, I've turned off some of the aero features like transparent windows....but regardless my boot times, my time to connect to wireless networks, and my time to shut down the box is significantly longer than they were with a clean install.

I have made the same experience for boot and shutdown times - especially since I installed 2 virtual partitions. That resulted in an imaging footprint of about 60GBs. For the execution of programs, however, I did not notice any measurable impact. The system is a Quad core with 4GBs of RAM and 32bit Vista. There are 25.335 files in my Program Files folder. I suspect that the added time is resulting from additional HDD disk operations required.
Once I have the Win7 RTM, I will test that on my other system where I will install Win7 on an SSD. I suspect that the SSD would alleviate the problem.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #38
johnwillyums

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
 
 

Agreed Squonk.
I was fortunate in many ways. The first OS I ever used was XP Pro x86 on an old underpowered box someone gave to me.
After a few months with this I realised I was "into computers" and the internet.
So I blew all my money on a brand new much more powerful machine and, just by chance, plumped for Vistx64.
Even with the initial glitches and driver issues Vista x64 blew me away completely and I think it was really x64 that made the difference. Friends on x86 hated Vista
It seemed immediately faster and smoother and easier to use than XP to me.
W7 last December '08 had a similar effect but I still dual boot and, since SP2, I find very little difference between Vista and W7 in terms of speed.
That said I much prefer W7. It is quite simply the muts nuts.
As The Antman points out most of us don't really tax our machines at all but the tech addiction creeps up on you.
I'm going i7 soon and that will really be like buying a Ferrari to drive to the corner shop.

Hey ho, John
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #39
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by johnwillyums View Post
Agreed Squonk.
I was fortunate in many ways. The first OS I ever used was XP Pro x86 on an old underpowered box someone gave to me.
After a few months with this I realised I was "into computers" and the internet.
So I blew all my money on a brand new much more powerful machine and, just by chance, plumped for Vistx64.
Even with the initial glitches and driver issues Vista x64 blew me away completely and I think it was really x64 that made the difference. Friends on x86 hated Vista
It seemed immediately faster and smoother and easier to use than XP to me.
W7 last December '08 had a similar effect but I still dual boot and, since SP2, I find very little difference between Vista and W7 in terms of speed.
That said I much prefer W7. It is quite simply the muts nuts.
As The Antman points out most of us don't really tax our machines at all but the tech addiction creeps up on you.
I'm going i7 soon and that will really be like buying a Ferrari to drive to the corner shop.

Hey ho, John

With your I7 you should get an SSD which would be the perfect match with Win7. Then it would be a Bugatti. It is unbelievable how fast a system will get with an SSD. In my first tests (with an OCZ Vertex), Win7 booted in 10 seconds and when you click a program, it loads faster than you can lift the finger from the mouse. Admittedly the SSDs are still a little pricey. But I think there is nothing you can do for the same money which gives you a comparable performance improvement. Just make sure you get an SSD where the firmware supports Trim (which Win7 also supports).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2009   #40
AstaLaVista

Windows 7 x64 (Ultimate)
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
You will have to provide a detailed analysis before I could accept this as anything other than wrong.
Why is it so hard for some of us to accept a personal opinion or to easily disregard a statement made by someone else as wrong but comeback with a similar answer when is your turn to back it up?

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
My well maintained production machine is as responsive today as it was the day that it reached it's current install state.
I find this extremely funny, frustrating as well. I really couldn't care less as I have already stated in my previous post. I think that some of you need to chill out and leave life a little loose, because at the end of the day... it is a "Your Word Against Mine" sort of an argument
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Closed Thread

 7 faster than vista? - a tiny bit maybe




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Will my computer Be faster with vista sp2?
Hi, I am running windows 7 sp1 and im looking foward to "downgrade" to vista sp2 Processor: AMD A8-4500M APU with Radeon Hd Graphics 1.90 GHz 8.00 GB (7.48 usable) RAM 64-bit operating system
Hardware & Devices
programs load muich faster in vista than win7?
went to my second hd to boot vista for a change. win7 is on my first hd. was shocked to see programs booted up on vista in the snap of a finger while on win7 they take 30 seconds or so. wondering why vista is so fast.....
General Discussion
China raises tiny [Spec Ops] reserve army. Really tiny.
Behind The Wall - China raises tiny reserve army. Really tiny. Video: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619//vp/43612160#43612160
Chillout Room
Vaio SZ Laptop - Slow with Vista and 7 - faster HDD??
My 2 year old Vaio SZ laptop became fairly sluggish with Vista so I have recently tried Windows 7 - and I'm just not finding it much faster! Also due to no Sony driver support it also freezes at times. I think though I have identified the bottleneck, the HDD. The 5200Rpm Toshiba drive hits...
Performance & Maintenance
Windows 7 growing faster than Vista, overtakes Mac OS X
Source - Windows 7 growing faster than Vista, overtakes Mac OS X
News
Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista
Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista Though Windows 7 edged out Vista in our lab tests, you may not notice much of a difference. http://images.pcworld.com/news/graphics/164485-win7rcspeed_overall_original.png Read more ...
News


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:21.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App