Reinstall XP: "How could I keep WinXP really fast & stable for 2 years ?"

[dale5605]

Use this program to make your windows cd.
http://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html

You can remove a lot of the crap you don't need, integrate service pack 2, and integrate some of your drivers. All of this will reduce the likelyhood of you running into problems as your operating system will be slimmed down and ready to go.
However, do not integrate creative drivers into your windows installation beforehand. For some reason they do not integrate well. So just install them after you install windows.

 

[1badtech]

Your checklist looks good. As long as your parents won't be installing anything and will keep their data files on d:, you'll be OK. I've had my computer for 2 years now and it still runs the same as when I first got it. I don't install unneccessary programs on my computer, don't use Internet Explorer, and I don't save anything on the C: drive.

I agree with Blitze105 about using diskeeper. You can either set it to do smart scheduling where it determines when the drive needs to be defrag and does it on the fly or you can set it to defrag automatically every 2 weeks.

The recommended swap file size is 1.5 times your RAM size.

 

[uzi9mm]

Hi,

I need to reinstall Windows XP on my computer. I would like to keep Windows running on my system without doing a reinstall or having problems for 2 years (stable and fast). I could only maintain the computer 1 time a month because I don't have the time to do it every day/week, my parents will be working on the computer every day (1 hour a day).

So I was wondering how I have to set up my system to keep it running without a reinstall for 2 years.

This is the list that I have made:

-Partitions
Maxtor 80 GB HDD,
C: NTFS 20 GB (WINDOWS)
D: NTFS 60 GB (DATA)

C: Windows and Program Files will be here. I have chosen for NTFS because it was made for the NT kernel, and it will give good system performance (I hope).
D: I will place the "My Documents" folder from C to D, so a system crash won't mess the Word Documents up. There will be DATA like zip,setupfiles,software,backups,information,.. on this partition.

Software:

Security
1. Mozilla Firefox (Build P4 + Tweaks) (Secure browser)
2. AntiVirus (=NOD32) (Prevent Viruses)
3. Zone Alarm (Firewall)
4. SpywareBlockList (BlockList)
- Maintain -
1. CrapCleaner (Reg-&TempClean)
2. HitMan Pro (Spyware remove)
3. Microsoft Spyware (Spyware Prevention)
- Drivers -
1. NVIDIA (Graphic Card)
2. Sound Blaster (Soundcard)
3. LiteOn (Monitor)
5. Intel Application Accelerator (Faster hardware communication)

Endusers
- Basic -
1. Microsoft Office 2003 (Word-Excel-PowerPoint)
2. MSN7 (MSN Chat)
3. WinRAR (Unrar/unzip/..)
4. Mozilla Thunderbird (Mail Checker)
- Usage: Sometimes -
1. LeechGET (Download Manager)
2. K-Lite Codec Pack (Codecs)
3. mIRC (IRC Chat Client)
4. Nero 6 (CD/DVD's burning)
5. Van Dale Woordenboek DU/NL/EN (Dictionary's)

- Usage: Not often -
1.Alcohol 120% (CD/DVD Emulation)
2.DreamWeaver PACK (Webdesign)
3. Acrobat Reader Pro (Open PDF Files)


-Auto Logon XP on GuestAccount
-Services.msc Safe Patch of BlackViper.COM
-Turn off Visual Effects
-Placing Swapfile on 512-512
-Clean up swapfile when shutting down
-Turn off Thumbs.db
-Turn off "Documents" history

Each month I will:
Update all software
Software: "Maintain"
Windows Defragment C and D
Do a Virusscan & Spyware scan
Make a backup of Windows and a backup of the most important files.

Do you guys have more suggestions to keep Windows clean & fast?
And also, do you think my system is able to work for 2 years without a reinstall? (P4T-E 2GHz, 512 MB RAM)

Thank you,

Rayen

Damn, that is alot of "un-needed software"

To keep your machine running lean and efficent.
I would get a 3rd party browser like Opera or Firefox(properly configured) to dodge any spyware issues. I would also get a copy of Bazooka Scanner, it is a lite and very efficent program that scans your system for spyware (very low chance that you will get spyware with a 3rd party browser)

I would get an older A/V program that has an updated engine and virus defs. The reason you want an older A/V is because they use less resources but they work just as good or better than the new ones today.

And a HD imaging program to restore images. I would make an image of your HD as soon as you boot the machine from a clean install...........

 

[dale5605]

The recommended swap file size is 1.5 times your RAM size.

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Let me quote from Koroush Ghazi's Windows XP Tweaking Companion.

I understand that for most people accurately working out which is the most memory intensive application or
game, and more importantly predicting the amount of memory future software will require is tedious if not
impossible. Therefore follow my general recommendation below to set a fixed pagefile that should be
sufficient for all your needs. Since the total memory available to Windows XP is a combination of your
Virtual Memory plus your ʹReal Memoryʹ (System RAM), you should ensure that the sum of these two is
sufficiently large to prevent Windows from running out of memory. In general, I suggest a minimum of 2GB
(2048MB) for your Virtual Memory + RAM:
Example: If you have 256MB of RAM set the Initial and Maximum pagefile sizes to 1792MB each.
Example: If you have 512MB of RAM, set the Initial and Maximum pagefile sizes to 1536MB each.
Example: If you have 1024MB (1GB) of RAM, set the Initial and Maximum pagefile sizes to 1024MB each.
Example: If you have 2GB of RAM or more, set the Initial and Maximum pagefile sizes to 200MB each.

Note that the common myth about the pagefile being ʹ1.5 x RAMʹ or some other multiple is quite clearly
counterintuitive. Consider the situation where you only have 128MB of RAM: setting the maximum pagefile
size to 1.5 x 128MB = 192MB + 128MB = 320MB of total available memory for Windows XP which is
obviously not going to give you enough memory for modern games and applications. Remember, it is about
how much total memory (RAM + Pagefile) that should be made available for Windows to operate efficiently.

 

[solaris]

well dunno bout all that, microsofts site knowledge base is where the 1.5x's recommendation comes from, thier not considering enthusiasts who wastefully use more than 512 mb ram
i have a pagefile monitor, after playing through farcry and doom3 as well as all the other apps i used the most pagefile i ever used was 383 megabytes.
also it should be noted that all tweaking sites have slightly different recommendations, some say that static pagefiles are unecessary and one i know of says performance benifits from static are a myth but all i have read do agree that pagefile size has no impact on performance based by percantage of drive size. i use 800mb static and its alwyas been more than enough and i have alot of games and do video editing

before anyone comments on my term "wastefull use more than 512mb" i only say that as i have a nice gaming rig 3.4 p4 with 6800 overclocked, using 512 i played hl2/doom3/painkiller and farcry all with ultra detail settings flawlessly, i once added 256 and i had no increase in fps, 3dmark 05 and 03 were exactly the same, other pc's ive had inthe past were the same, so thats just my experience

 

[dale5605]

Well prior to that part of the guide he suggests you could use task manager while running your game or whatever to determine peak usage and then calculate from there. So for you that is probably appropriate. He just suggests for those not wanting to do that that 2gb of total memory (page file + ram) is a safe guideline. This way most people won't run out of memory.

As far as RAM goes the best choice right now seems to be 1 gig of ram on dual channel. Obviously you can run a game just fine on 512mb. Quite recently I was gaming on a computer with 256mb non dual channel. But that depends on what you are running. If you make sure you have very little running in memory then you can play a game on little ram no prob. But if you are like me and have many com programs, antispy, antivirus, monitors, and other utilities running in the backround then 1gb is preferred over 512.
And of course you won't see a difference in benchmarks. I had 2 gigs at one point and 3dmarks were no different. That's because for the test you probably disable all processes possible to achieve the highest score and hench are not maxing out your ram.

Point being though is that the 1.5 rule IS NOT TRUE. Like he said 128MB of RAM: setting the maximum pagefile
size to 1.5 x 128MB = 192MB + 128MB = 320MB of total available memory.
Anyone knows that if you are running windows xp and gaming on it you are going to need more than 320mb of total memory. This is why the 1.5 rule is false. It is counterintuitive and makes no sense. What makes more sense is more page file if you have less ram and less page file if you have more ram.
I don't care what other websites say or what microsoft has to say on the topic which I don't believe they would say that, I think you are lieing, you would still have to be a moron to use the 1.5 rule.

 

[1badtech]

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Let me quote from Koroush Ghazi's Windows XP Tweaking Companion.

You obviously don't know your stuff that you have to listen to what Koroush or people on the internet have to say. You know that anything can be posted on the internet and it doesn't necessarily mean that they are correct. Even though Microsoft doesn't have much credibility, I would believe them over Koroush. I'm not saying thath Koroush is wrong either but 1.5 times the RAM is a good benchmark. If you want to follow Koroush, go ahead but don't be telling people that they don't know shit.

 

[1badtech]

Well prior to that part of the guide he suggests you could use task manager while running your game or whatever to determine peak usage and then calculate from there. So for you that is probably appropriate. He just suggests for those not wanting to do that that 2gb of total memory (page file + ram) is a safe guideline. This way most people won't run out of memory.

As far as RAM goes the best choice right now seems to be 1 gig of ram on dual channel. Obviously you can run a game just fine on 512mb. Quite recently I was gaming on a computer with 256mb non dual channel. But that depends on what you are running. If you make sure you have very little running in memory then you can play a game on little ram no prob. But if you are like me and have many com programs, antispy, antivirus, monitors, and other utilities running in the backround then 1gb is preferred over 512.
And of course you won't see a difference in benchmarks. I had 2 gigs at one point and 3dmarks were no different. That's because for the test you probably disable all processes possible to achieve the highest score and hench are not maxing out your ram.

Point being though is that the 1.5 rule IS NOT TRUE. Like he said 128MB of RAM: setting the maximum pagefile
size to 1.5 x 128MB = 192MB + 128MB = 320MB of total available memory.
Anyone knows that if you are running windows xp and gaming on it you are going to need more than 320mb of total memory. This is why the 1.5 rule is false. It is counterintuitive and makes no sense. What makes more sense is more page file if you have less ram and less page file if you have more ram.
I don't care what other websites say or what microsoft has to say on the topic which I don't believe they would say that, I think you are lieing, you would still have to be a moron to use the 1.5 rule.

I didn't say it was the rule or you have to follow it. It's simply the recommended setting and you can do whatever you want. This is not a gaming or a tweaking thread and 1.5 times physical RAM is sufficient enough. This computer has 512 RAM and is not a gaming computer and 1.5x512 is plenty enough for its usage. You want to preach your Koroush principle, go to the gaming and tweak section.

I hope you realize that the 1.5xRAM is the setting for minimum swap file. You can make your maximum as big as your head can take and as long as you have enough space. I think Koroush is talking about the maximum. Before you start calling people moron, I suggest you do your research so you don't sound like an idiot.

 

[dale5605]

The point isn't who said it. The guy is right. The 1.5 rule is counterintuitive and a bad model because it is progressive while actually it should be regressive since more ram means more memory and less need in the paging file and vice versa. I don't care if the guy that said it is named Koroush, if you think he's some stupid foreigner you are wrong. You have to realize that he's right and 1.5x is not.
Also you say 1.5x ram is the setting for the minimum swap file which again is not true. Basically you are saying that if I had 4 gigs of ram that my MINIMUM paging file should be 6 GIGs?!? Are you some kind of computer-illiterate moron or what? Get the stupid 1.5 rule out of your mind and think outside the box for once. Koroush will pwn you at knowing about computers any day, maybe you should take a listen to him.

 

[furtivefelon]

well.. you think your going to play any "modern" games on 128 mb your sorely mistaken i'm sorry to say, but i agree with 1.5 times rule.. why? well, depends on what you buy your computer for, if you buy a 128 mb ram computer now, you obviously not going to play much new releases.. to understand that, you have to know what is swap space used for.. and where the swap file is stored in.. The reason for RAM is to have a place to store and retrieve files FAST.. harddrive can be 10+ times slower in I/O than RAM.. when your playing DOOM 3 on a 128 mb pc, no matter how much swap you give it, you can't play it, you just can't.

if your system RAM is 32000 that means it should be able to be accessed at about 3200 MB/s where as that virtual memory cannot even acheive 200 MB/s, even on a super fast harddrive (but seriously, if your going to spend money on 10,000 RPM harddrive, might as well get some more RAM no?)

when you say 1.5 times is not a good min guideline, i still have to disagree with you.. An example of 4 gig ram and 6 gig page file is NOT a good case for you.. it all depends on what you use your RAM for.. when your getting 4 gig of ram, your obviously living in the future, so when shelling out that much money for 4 gig of ram, i assume whoever does that have a pretty demanding app.. such as intensive webservers, which demands whatever memory it can get it's hands on, so yah, they ARE probably going to use 6 gig of page files This is the same as telling me 4 years ago that when i have 512 mb of ram, i don't need 1.5 times page files.. which i very much do right now

now why do you need virtual space? well, it's that if you occasional use a massive program (such as editing a huge TIFF image), or when you sometimes opens alot of program.. if you regularly tax your virtual memory, then your surely better off getting some more RAM

so to conclude, how much RAM you have determines what program you use, it doesn't matter if you have 2 gig of virtual memory, you won't be running DOOM 3 anytime soon on 128 RAM