How much more superior is SuperFetch Vs. PreFetch?

How much better is SuperFetch on Vista comparing to XP's Prefetch?
I am think about moving back to Vista, I had some problems with it, but since SP1 is around the corner, I am going to give it another try.

 

Well...it loads applications faster and occupies the left RAM. A great idea I might add. Without it there is a noticeable lag between opening an application and actually being able to use it.
I have noticed that without Superfetch and Prefetch the HDD doesn't make as much noise. Not much noise, but noticeable from time to time.

 

Superfetch is better than Prefetch, but it's evolutionary. It's not like it's going to double your framerates in games or anything, but it'll just keep things acting snappier. And if you turn off Aero, Vista might even use less power.

 

Look horrid, be a bit more responsive (at least that's what I felt), but use a bit less power.

 

http://windowsup.blogspot.com/2007/09/superfetch-enhanced-prefetch.html

 

I'm pretty sure SuperFetch impacts startup times for programs the most. Almost all of my programs fire up within a second or two. I'm not sure if this is where Turbomemory (Robson) comes into play, but my hard disk actually shuts off for short amounts of time when I'm on battery power, and runs close to silent.

 

Cool, sounds like Superfetch will be an improvement from XP's prefetch. Another quick question, do I have to have a 40 GB partition in order for Vista to be installed? Because XP takes whatever size you give it as long as it has enough space for updates, PageFile, and the installation itself. More Info, I had the drive set up with 2 partitions 10 Gb for windows, and the other 134 gb for others.

 

I have a 35 GB partition for C:\ and all I've installed on it is Vista and Office Ultimate 2007, and I currently have 14.4 GB free on that partition.

 

Cool, Thank you, I will set my at 35 GB as well.

Reps+

 

I have a partition of 16GB, installed Server 08 and Office Enterprise and I have 4GB of free space.

 

Thanks for the rep.

I found 35GB to be a good size to accommodate Vista, Office, future Vista updates (service packs, updates, etc), and still have leftover space for Vista to do its thing.

 

I'd also like to thank you.
|crash|, as a piece of advice: never install any games on your Windows partition. It keeps it empty .
Otherwise, I do fine with my 16GB.

 

My D:\ partition is reserved for games and other media. With 160 GB, I'm not close to running out of space.. yet. I could have made my Windows partition a little smaller, but for me it's fine the way it is.

 

Oops. I had to expand my Windows partition from 65GB to 75GB to accommodate the 44GB of games I have, with 100GB for my data.

 

Anyway, I can manage with 16GB and the rest of the stuff on D. This way whenever I want to format I don't have to move lots of data. Even the Documents folder is located on D.

 

Glad to hear it's working out for you Fade To Black.

I don't mind losing some space for insurance, besides as clumsy as I am, I will need it.Let's just say, the original 10 gb space I left for XP ,before I reinstall Vista, didn't work out very well.

Anyways, I have got Vista installed again, this time it's Ultimate, and so far so good. It's on par with XP in terms of speed, but it looks much prettier now! I was using Vista Basic, and there wasn't much different about it with XP imo, so I guess that's why I disliked it so much before.

 

Same here It makes formatting easier.

 

I can do it without even thinking...makes reinstalling so easy.