Performance-oriented Windows tweaking debunked

[Fresh Daemon]

I wouldn't expect BV's tweaks to make up for almost -100 mb of ram, load up 98 or Linux on that machine. That's like putting a economy car beside a mustang at a drag strip, Hmmm. That machine wasn't made for XP, like an economy car wasn't made for the dragstrip.

<Sigh>

From the original post:

This system is not really capable of being a useable XP box. We'll see if BV can help make it into one.

Onward and... upward?

So, if you crap out your XP install, just pop the disk in and Re-install again. How are you harming anything?

Because no back-up system is fool-proof, and the general idea is that you try and test it as little as possible. In other words, you don't go doing things that could break your install when you have nothing to gain from them.

Intresting that the tests you ran on the second machine, did show some small improvements... What I'm saying is BV's tweaks were free and you did show a very slight performance boost in some cases.

Interesting that you decry artificial benchmarks as invalid and useless, and yet you trot them out as evidence when it sorta proves your point.

Interesting also that the "real-world tests" which you claimed to prefer show the opposite of what you think, and yet you are silent about them.

I don't think you're interested in proving or contributing anything. You just want to have an argument. Basically, you're trolling. Stop it and go away.

I've had two set of memory now, matched pairs they call them. Speed binned at the factory to ensure consistancy. Yet one stick always overclocked just a bit higher than the other. If this is true then it must be the same for cpu's and motherboard and every other component in a computer. What does this prove? No two systems are the same, even if you use the same brand name components.

<sigh>

If you clocked them differently then the systems would be different. Jeez. The systems would be identical if you used the exact same timings and speed. What something is capable of doing is not the same as what it is doing at any given time.

This is an analogy:

Me: All oranges look alike.
You: This apple doesn't look like an orange. Therefore all oranges don't look alike at all!

I would like to see your tests done on newer equipment, just to see if the finings would be the same.

Once again, if performance increase is 0, then by scaling everything up, you multiply by 0. 0*X=0.

Hell the human eye can even benift from 200 fps? No, but it sure sells $700 vid cards

<sigh>

The point of $700 video cards is not to run games at 200fps. It is to run them at perhaps 50fps, but at a very high resolution and with anti-aliasing, visual complexity, particle effects and more, which the human eye very definitely can detect.

Are you done now? I posted all of this after a lot of effort, and all you have brought in is nonsensical comments and baseless detractions. If that's all you have I would appreciate it if you'd just stay out of the discussion. Unless you have something better to offer this will be my last reply to you. I find it disrespectful that you would treat what represents a lot of work in such a way.

 

[snapmando]

Windows XP was supposed to be built around AMD's XP models, would that change your benchmarks?

All I brought to this thread was my opinions and so did others who have used Bv's tweaks and they were shot down by you. I didn't start the flaming.......

What your testing shows to me is that either way, performance increases or decreases are at a minimal. I wasn't expecting much of an incease by using BV's tweaks. I seem to have felt something after the tweaks, which you call a sugar pill. So be it!

I wasn't pounding my chest in victory, that BV's tweaks won a round or two. You seem to think I am, and this angers you. Why?

How I see your results is, you either get a small increase or decrease depending on the test. How much was your margin of error?

Also running a current graphics driver on an old machine, running a older game would that not effect your results in the +/- ?

For you next test, real world style you should load some stuff on the HDD instead of just testing with a fresh install. Maybe do some testing on a AMD machine,they run different than Intel so you might have different results there too.

To me, individual results may vary. Both in your results and BV's tweaks.

Why don't you email your findings to BV instead of instructing others to do it for you. He has retracted statements about AMD, maybe he'll do the same with his tweaks.

Why has there been no other benchmark sites that have done what you have, as his tweaks have been online now for quite sometime?

Both you and BV have experienced the same thing, critisizm. Did you actually think everyone would agree with you ?

 

[habbajabba]

I appreciate an honest if not extremely thorough thread on what not to waste your time on. I really only noticed what? 2 or 3 things you disagreed with? The rest being so negligible as to be not worthwile? I actually agree with the intent of the thread for the most part. I'm not sure which is worse, (me), the guy who is constantly tweaking everything & knows his way around the OS, & the pc; or the guy who does nothing but wants the fastest pc & plays games all day.
System restore is about as worthless as it gets when your pc will not boot, for starters. Unless you are one of the few who just surf & check your email, having a good backup program and using it is the most important thing to learn when owning a pc. I don't know how many times I have seen a question regarding how to fix something & the first thing I think of is not system restore but HD backup. I've tried to use windows backup & it is a rediculous affair. I don't know anyone who ever uses it period.
Services: All kinds of stuff going on here with absolutely no clear understanding from your pc or MS (unless you want to surf & make phone calls for a $). Most people will never use nor ever need half the junk in there. Pc's are greatly controlled by one user & said user wants his pc customized in some fashion or other; whether it be software, gui, or both This being said, knowing which services are unnecessary or redundant or whatever is a good thing. Considering all of the issues that xp & windows in general has had, tweaking is a good thing. It allows the user to get comfortable & familiar, & most importantly in control, of his (or her) pc. If your going to spend a $1000 & usually more on something you should know how it works.
Unfortunately lots of people do not want to be bothered by a pc; they just want it to be simple & work. MS doesn't make a simple OS, & pc's are not simple devices. That's one hell of a conflict of interest.
In short, until pc's are made in a universal architecture for universal goals, get your tweak on! Did anyone overlook the fact that this website is called Overclocker's? If that ain't about tweaking I don't know what is.

 

[EternalX]

interesting stuff here folks