Way to wake up faster from Hibernate?

I had XP and I loved being able to put it on hibernate and wake up within 10-12 seconds. Now with Vista it takes like a minute! Are there any tweaks to wake up faster from Hibernate? I don't want to keep it on Standby all the time, that seems to still drain batteries quite a lot.

 

Yeah any tips,i usually but on comp on hibernate and takes long as well..

 

Mine takes forever too (although it's an old Dell P4) but I still use it instead of Sleep; much lower power state.

 

Windows 7, 7 seconds.

 

Windows XP 5 seconds, windows xp, vista, 7 in virutal machine in 2 seconds.

anyways:
Tips: optimize hdd, put the hibernation file in the outer section of the hdd. Use readyboost, or eboostr for XP.

 

take out your ram? i guess you have 2 to 4 times the amount of ram you had in xp? => as much more time to save/load the ram to/from disk.

i hope in win7 it does compress.

 

increase the ram of the laptop so that the hibernate process will increase.
remove some unwanted programs from the laptop.

so that it will take less time.

 

Hibernate does a full POST and then loads from the disc. Sleep just wakes up in a few seconds, make sure you dont mix them up. A faster disc or less ram will make it resume quicker but for really fast resumes use S3 Sleep as the system information stays in memory and does not need to be reloaded from the HDD.

My Vista PC wakes up in about 4 seconds from sleep but takes alot longer to wake from hibernate as it has to read all 4GB of info from the HDD and then start to wake itself back up.

 

if you get an intel ssd (just for calculations), then you would be able to read 1gb from file to ram in 4 seconds, that means a 4gb system would be back to running in 16 seconds after bios post (so in around 20 sec).

if you have an ordinary hdd with say 60MB/s read speed, it would take 17 seconds per gb, so you're at 68sec. +4sec post at around 1min and 12seconds.

i still don't know why hibernate doesn't use basic compression (like not writing down ram that isn't in use). possibly in win7 it does? could be a first real reason for the switch (not really, no).


edit: if you switch to two gb ram, it will resume in half the time.

 

My laptop takes less than 30 secs to wake from Hibernation.
I am running Vista HP with 2 GB RAM.

 

so you have close to 70MB/s read speed on your hdd (at the part where the hibernate file is). nice. back in 8 secs would be the best you can have..

 

I have a a vista 64 bit 4GB ram and takes about 40 seconds or more.How do i make it faster??..

 

I have 3gigs of ram so don't feel I need readyboost. How would I go about placing the hibernation file in the outer section of the HDD?

 

Do you have SP1 installed? SP1 speeds up resuming from hibernate.

Getting a faster hard drive will help too, if you don't already have a fast one. (And it has other benefits too.) See the hardware forum for more info about that.

 

The best way to speed up hibernation and return from hibernation is to get rid of RAM. The bottleneck is the Hard Drive, so if you have less RAM you have less to write out to the HD, and on resume less to read in.

 

Readyboost can speed up the hibernation process. But if you don't want to use readyboost, feel free not to.

JKDefrag puts system files in the outer section of the harddrive. I think the defrag too which comes with vista does this also.

 

Exactly how does readyboost speed up hibernation?

Gary

 

I don't believe it does. The hibernation file is stored on the system partition. Readyboost only stores a copy of the pagefile, where reads are cached.

 

I am certain it doesn't, but wanted to see what jackluo923 thought he was talking about.

Gary

 

If the hibernation file is fragmented... it's much faster to access it through a flashdrive. HDD is only able to achieve about 5MB/s throughput on random read while a flashdrive can get about 10-30MB/s depending on the quality.

Also, data on flashdrive is compressed by half.. so the throughtput is almost doubled.

This "increase" in speed can be more significant in netbook where almost any SD card or flashdrive can outperform the internal SSD.

Your speed gain might vary. If you have a optimized hdd, then it'll not show any improvement at all. If you have a very slow hdd with all of it filled up and fragmented, your result will be substantial.


To SURFASB: That's the whole point of readyboost. It caches the reads. If the flash medium is faster than the internal hdd, you'll notice a speedboost.

 

LOL........

 

LOL.......

 

But readyboost doesn't cache the hibernation file, it caches the pagefile. Your description is spot on, if you substitute the pagefile for the hibernation file.

Gary

 

Except readyboost doesn't substute page file neither. It's totally different from pagefile. Readyboost feature breaks it into about 4KB parts to make it more effective. Readyboost is only a cache. If you delete it, it has no effect on system stability. Where as in page file, if you delete it, you're pretty much screwed. So... Readyboost file is similar to, but not the same as page file. Even the information stored on the readyboost memory is different from the page file.

"The point of ReadyBoost is to make things faster when you run out of memory, but it is Turbo Memory any faster/better than simply using and external USB drive? The one advantage of Turbo Memory has for ReadyBoost over an external USB drive is that the data stored in the ReadyBoost partition remains persistent through hibernation. In a normal system with a USB drive being used for ReadyBoost, if you hibernate the machine, the ReadyBoost data on the USB drive is invalidated because the USB drive could have been removed/tampered with and Vista can no longer count on the integrity of that data. Turbo Memory does not have that problem as the flash is on the motherboard and can’t easily be removed on the fly, thus Vista will keep ReadyBoost data persistent in its flash when coming out of hibernate. The benefit, being that any data cached via ReadyBoost will be accessible coming out of hibernate, which simply isn’t true when not using Turbo Memory. This is the only advantage of Turbo Memory with respect to ReadyBoost, and understanding that will help you understand when/where it will make an impact on system usage."
http://www.computerarticle.net/TurboRam.html

I found out that some of the above statement are true. If I don't remove the readyboost device, it wakes up faster. If i remove it, and then plugs it back in, vista will "invalidate" it.

Readyboost feature is almost the 99% same as "turbo memory".

I suggestion is to just try it yourself. In my situation, it worked. It might not work on your computer.

BTW... I used an SD card for readyboost. The internal cardreader is PCI-E based, not USB based, (the same as turbo memory), so that's probably why. I'm not sure. You can test it out if it works on your computer. I have also tested this under vmware, but it's through an emulated usb port so that probably also messed things up.

 

But readyboost doesn't cache the hibernation file, it caches the pagefile. Your description is spot on, if you substitute the pagefile for the hibernation file. Readyboost is only a cache. If you delete it, it has no effect on system stability. Where as in page file, if you delete it, you're pretty much screwed. So... Readyboost file is similar to, but not the same as page file.

Sorry for Double post. Edit function doesn't really work right now. I've ran into a bug.

 

Actually you're not that screwed if you delete the page file. I deleted/removed mine and I'm using my laptop without PF. The computer is more responsive because everything is in the RAM. If I play a game for example, exiting a game is a matter of seconds because the game is completely loaded in memory, not on the PF which is on the HDD.

Of course, you can do that only if you know that you have enough memory. But I must say that you're not screwed and comuter is not less stable, it work perfectly, no slowdowns in any case.

 

well, if your system is using a pagefile, you can't remove it just while running. you can do so during a reboot. the readyboost can be taken out while running, no problem.

i guess that was what he ment.

but i'm curious about the readyboost helping hibernate restore..

 

Running the computer without page file is not recommened. It decrease reliability and you risk crashing when you run out of ram.

Instead, you can tell Xp or Vista to use every last drop of ram before paging to page file through registry tweak or through customizing system.ini file. That's a better way to go.

And I meant you're screwed if you delete the page file while the computer is actively using it. PageFile ususally have non-used portion of the ram stored on hdds whereas Readyboost only stores cache files in about 4kb chunks.

 

Oh man, don't start beating your head against THAT brick wall. There are too many folks here who are self proclaimed operating systems experts who just know it is perfectly fine to run without a pagefile. All the real information in the world isn't about to dissuade them from that either.

Been there, done that, got the tire tracks on my back to prove it.

BTW I read your reply re: readyboost and hibernation restart. I still can't see how it will really improve restarts from hibernation, since the entire contents of memory are written to the hard drive prior to shutdown and then read back on restart. I understand the differentiation between TurboMemory and USB based memory when used for this cache and how in some circumstances an SD card MIGHT be considered more permanent and not subject to needing to be refreshed on restart. But again I don't see how readyboost can speed up the recovery of the memory image from the hard drive or any subsequent housecleaning that is done after that before turning the system back over to the user.

I do see that for folks who ARE using readyboost that a hibernation restart for those using turbomemory or non USB based memory might see improvements over those who are using USB based memory, since the latter requires a refresh on hibernation or even sleep restarts. But for someone who is not using readyboost in the first place, I can't see how their hibernation restarts will be ANY slower.

Gary

 

Let me just correct myself ansd say that I didn't deleted the PF, of course I did it through options and a restart. I tried with these tweaks that you speak of and none of them wroks like a "no page file".

 

ever heard of raid0?

on startup, the system may in parallel read the data from cache and disk, thus (if, say, readyboost reads are half as fast as your hdd) you could read a 3gb hibernation file as fast as a 2gb hibernation file without readyboost.

this could be possible. i don't find documentation from microsoft if readyboost can do that. but it could help at startup.

 

Yep, I've used just about all forms of raid over the years. And while you idea is definitely plausible, I don't think that the hibernation file is ever cached via readyboost. I've been reading a lot about readyboost since it was first announced and have never read anything about it in reference to the hibernation file.

Gary

 

Standby FTW. Screw writing crap to the harddrive when you can just store it in RAM. If anything, just have it hibernate after being on standby for more than four hours. That way, it only hibernates when you are asleep. Otherwise its ready to go during the day.

It is odd that someone's computer would use so much battery on standby. I recall on vacation that I didnt' touch my laptop for three days and it was still at 98% when I opened it up.

I don't see the point of Microsoft working to put the hibernation file onto a flashdrive. Its too much work for not enough benefit. I'd rather they work on stuff that matters, like speech recognition. Or a bigger badder version of Outlook.

 

It's not like microsoft can't work on more than one thing at a time (outlook should get much faster in the next sp)

and ScuderiaConchiglia: while it doesn't reference it (and i don't believe it DOES raid0 style reading), it is just another file which it _can_ cache. but yes, no special mentoyning of it == i don't trust it until i test it, and why should i test it? i don't really care too much

 

Readyboost does infact cache the hibernation file according to the "robinson memory, or intel turbocache."