celeron beats core 2 duo?

me and my gf have 2 computers, hers an inspiron 1100 with a celeron, mine a ifl-90s with a T7500. both run XP home, with the exact same installation (programs, etc). her computer BOOTS FASTER than mine. by like 2 seconds. is this possibly because my bios takes longer to load? it does take a couple more seconds for my bios screen to show up. this is embarrassing!

 

Maybe your laptop is full of some pre-installed bloatware and hers is a recent clean install? Just some thoughts =P

 

BIOS load times have nothing to do with bloatware.

Load times are a combination of processor speed and HDD speed. Could very well be her hard-drive is less fragmented or faster.

 

activate the other core by going on microsoft.com and its an XP hotfix, it will activate the other core, ill find it

EDIT: Here is the thread XP hotfix

 

Apart from disbelief that you would actually figure this out, you actually care and then claim this is a Celeron beating a C2D. How long do you use your computer for on average? Find the ratio b/w that and the 2 seconds lost and you can see how insignificant this oh so embarrassing issue is. And get rid of that stupid avatar! If this is still too important to not attend to, take videos of the 2 boot procedures so we can see where the problem is.

 

who died and made you ruler? let him do what he wants, if its slow, its because only one core is activated

 

can i subtract rep? nice, reply krt. thanks, you're a real help.

i have recently redone both computers. xp home clean install. defragged. same programs/services running. same everything. i have thought of all of your suggestions already, except for the insightful start the other core comment. i may give that a try. any other ideas BESIDES the usual suspects like defrag/virus/programs/os/etc?

keep in mind- the ifl-90s is superior to the dell in every way. better processor (T7500 vs celeron), 3 gb vs. 512 mb ram, 7200 vs. 5400 rpm hard drive. they have been reformatted and clean installed the exact same way, with the same programs. what gives? i am running AHCI on the ifl90. is there an issue with ACHI and version 112 of the bios? hmmm...

 

yes, her celeron is superior to your c2d. she pwnts you now.

 

Your GF's laptop and your laptop isn't exactly the same. You're comparing a Inspiron with IFL90. Even though you load the same apps, I doubt all the drivers are exactly the same.

For example, does she have a 8600GT? Santa Rosa platform? etc, etc...

Your GF's laptop probably have LESS hardware to initialize compared to your IFL90. Also, different hardware takes different times to initialize. Take all that to account.

2 second difference isn't much when booting up. What really matters is after the boot up and actually using the computer. Unless the Inspiron is benchmarking faster than your IFL90, I wouldn't worry about the 2 second "lag" in boot time.

If you're into cars, think 1/4 mile drag race vs lap times. Just because your car can go fast in a straight line, doesn't make it fast on a real track. You can't take one aspect of a benchmark to say something is faster.

 

hahaha... no doubt savage.

good points naddie.

maybe i should upgrade to an 1100? lol. well, tried the hotfix suggested by crimsonman. no diff. now, my bios takes several seconds more to load. maybe if her computer had this compal bios, it would take longer for her computer to boot. i think the culprit here is a longer bios load time, maybe version 113 is better... any ideas? i'm getting pwned! i'm not really 'worried' about this. it's just something fun to think about. let's not get all crazy and start dissing avatars or anything.

 

Guess it was a tad over the top but I think it was taken out of proportion Maybe I was annoyed seeing another typical title that has little to do with the issue (and let's not forget your avatar ). Nothing in the post was me acting like a ruler (@Crimsonman), I proposed that this is not an issue to worry about and offered a way to be of further help because at the moment we can only take guesses at the moment like naddie done - e.g. hardware that has to be init'ed, boot sequence etc.

 

ok, people. i am not really asking this question to have you tell me not to 'worry' about it. i'm not worried about it. i'm interested in an answer. if you have one- please offer it. or just tell me not to worry about it again.

maybe i should rephrase the queston; intel celeron boots faster than core 2 duo- should i worry about it? hahahahahaha... funny.

 

heh ( )
with booting times u maybe can compare harddrives but not processors.
take wprime , superpi or pcmark to compare CPUs or overall speed of laptop.

ur c2d will overrun that celeron in every test.

 

yes. i know the T7500 will rule the celeron in benchmarks. i am not trying to compare overall speed. i am asking why you guys think the celeron boots the same OS faster? i suppose drivers is one good explanation. also, the bios screen takes 3-5 more seconds to show on the ifl90 than on the dell. it's practically instantaneous on the dell. hmmm...

 

Here's a free chapter from a great book that conveniently covers the boot procedures and is specifically about speeding up boot times:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1785996,00.asp

 

i'm not at all a notebook specialist or something like that.
but it might be your 3gigs RAM, why don't you try to use the same 512 RAM.
this is just a suggestion pop into my mind.

 

If your bios is taking several seconds longer to load and your computer is only 2 seconds behind hers, then I would say your computer is faster then hers.
Ensure that your bios is set to boot from the hd first. Nothing else you can change bios wise to make it faster, there is probably more hardware to initialize/test on your machine then hers.
Run Tune XP 1.5 and select "ultra fast booting" and that will make both computers boot even faster.

Oh, and don't change the avatar, I think its funny.

 

AMI bioses have an option to boot faster than usual BIOSes (not the common bios feature that skips certain memory tests to speed up the boot process). Check if the Inspiron has an AMI bios.

Afaik, all Compals ship with a customized Phoenix BIOS that lets us make a limited number of configuration settings.

 

Comparing boot up speed between 2 laptops is pretty pointless to me as long as they're in tolerable level. Of course one can do as much configuration to shorten boot up time. In the Tweaking guide of Asus Eee, Eee boots up in XP a few seconds faster than Toshiba Terca A9 http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4062
Sure they are different OS but we can expect a $1749 laptop boot up faster or at least equal to $399 laptop?

 

You have to enable it at boot it's in Windows but, I forgot how you can PM Calvin-another NBR Member who was in that discussion & it may also be a Vista tweak.....

Ow naddie celerons don't have Santa Rosa, & were not around at any time during the 8600GT's(or any 8xxx series card at all) life cycle.

EDIT: To hirush, That is a very small & basic version of linux of course it boots faster think: PDA vs. Laptop.

 

ThomasH if you read carefully in the line the author has a section "Windows XP: A Whole New Ball of Hacks" and later in the comparisom it is "Here is an example of the Eee PC ($399) booting into Windows XP versus a Toshiba Tecra A9 ($1,749) booting into Windows Vista."

 

Yee are they the same OS though?
no
Its proven Vista loads slower except it.

 

My point is not to argue vista loads slower but an indication after some serious optimization a $399 laptop can still boot up quicker than people can expect. Looking at Asus Eee in video posted by author it loads faster than my Sager book, therefore I merely point out comparing boot up speed between 2 laptops is irrelevent as long as it's acceptable speed, I.E if a laptop takes 1 min+ to boot up then maybe the anti virus program or something in background is taking long to boot up.

 

Yes maybe but, considering no one probably will run a crippled version of Xp on it or any kind of Windows its not to help ful(meaning that may have been XP starter)..
Now, back on topic.

 

yo. good suggestions, i have already done them! both are set to boot from HD. i have the bios of both set for a quick boot. i have used tune xp ultra fast booting on both. hers is just booting too fast... hehe. i realize that there is more hardware/ram/drivers to load on the T7500 ifl-90s than the dell inspiron 1100, but i would STILL think it should boot faster. we can make it happen. more suggestions! woot!

 

ThomasH - I know that her Celeron doesn't havea 8600GT and the Santa Rosa platform. It was to make my point that her hardware wasn't the same as his.

Also, the boot process BEFORE the boot strap gets loaded (before the OS loads) is not dependent on the CPU speed, so it's no use to say "it's pathetic that my uber CPU laptop is getting trumped by a 2 year old Celeron".

My server takes forever to boot because it has to initialize all of the HD controllers and it has a Pentium Dual-Core E2140. My HTPC has a slower Celeron 420, but it boots faster because it does not have to initialize any 3rd party HD controllers.

Now, for your question - you should not worry about the boot time difference at all.

The time it takes the firmware to initialize your hardware (as well as test your gobs and gobs of RAM) is coded into your firmware so there isn't much you can do about it (short of above advice of making HD the first to boot and reducing memory). Even so, all things being equal (same amount of memory for example), hers will be faster.

Do you really want to boot faster than her? Then slow her down! Set hers to boot from the CD-ROM drive first. Lower the amount of memory on your machine to 1GB.

In short, just deal with it. Boot up process differs from one machine to the next. Think of it as DNA. Can't do anything to a short person tall, but they can still do great things a tall person can.

 

hmm... i do not believe i have said this.

for the umpteenth time- i'm not asking whether or not you think i should worry. i'm asking why it boots slower. i think it may be because the bios boots slower. all of these posts telling me not to worry is like a doctor telling me i have a virus, it's what you do when you don't know a good answer...

it's just a fun and funny thing to try to figure out. i like to tweak, and i thought why not try to tweak to beat her boot. no biggie. sabotoging her computer is totally hilarious. good suggestion- not going to use it but awesome nonetheless.

 

If you PM calvin he may know the thread that talked about enabling both cores in the processer @ boot.

 

i don't know if it's the same thing, but i installed the microsoft patch for 2 processors suggested earlier in the thread no dif. bootvis also shows both processors being used!!!

 

It's the same thing and no, it won't make a difference because the bottleneck is not the processor speed.

Did you have a look at the link I posted earlier, I thought it covered everything (that is practical).

It might help to view it in another perspective, your computer takes longer to boot because it has more/better cool stuff on it.

Made up for my first post yet? Friends?

 

yeah, looked at the article. i thought it was a very good. i realize of course that the ifl-90 takes longer- likely because the bios may have to scan/load more- but the inspiron bios screen loads in about 1 second. the ifl-90 takes about ten. which means the operating system on the ifl-90 is, in fact, loading much faster than the dell... i would just like to find a way to get the ifl-90 bios to load faster!!!

no worries about the earlier post. friends. do you know anything about the pheonix bios? is it known for a slow load time? i wonder, for instance, if a new dell 1520 with the same specs as my ifl-90 loads the bios slower or faster. hmmm...

 

Short of modifying your own firmware, the short answer is "no, you can't speed up your BIOS boot process".

Phoenix BIOS differs from one model to the next as well, so you really can't say something as general as "Phoenix BIOSes are slow to boot".

I really don't know what else you want any of us to say. "Yes, you can speed up your BIOS POST?"

 

well, i don't want you to say anything. i think a poll may be a good way to find out how fast different bios versions are posting (across manufacturers as well). but with the, uh, negativity evident in many responses to this thread, i'm not sure if people will react badly to another.

what i am thinking, is that if i/we were to find out that the phoenix bios is significantly slower to post than the bios used for comparable machines, we could find a way to get the manufacturer to mod it or mod it ourselves...

for instance- if the bios in a dell 1520 with equal hardware/settings posts in 2 seconds instead of my 10 i would think my bios version is slow. make sense?

 

If you're really curious, take out one stick of memory and see if the bios posts faster...