Windows XP SP3 Available

[Robin Hood]

So, as usual (and specifically with RouterOS) I wonder, is it worth it? What bothered you without SP3 being installed, or is it just the fact that you have 78 less updates to install after a fresh install?

Youre talking about the patch or SP3? If its the patch, well, i have hundereds of pc's that i do upgradings, installations etc etc...So to manually do the settings is a big hassle...thats why i did the patch...the SP3?...Well...thats just out of curiosity

 

[Praeses]

v3300 is working fine so far so did the previous versions since RC1 though

 

[Robin Hood]

v3300 is working fine so far so did the previous versions since RC1 though

Have you tried the patch in the beginning of the thread?

 

[Praeses]

Have you tried the patch in the beginning of the thread?

Not yet...will give it a shot in a min

 

[HavocXphere]

There a some decent tweaks in there, but loads of BS too. Also why did you copy+paste the same tweaks twice?

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Executive]
"AdditionalCriticalWorkerThreads"=dword:00000010
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Executive]
"AdditionalDelayedWorkerThreads"=dword:00000010

Not suitable for single core CPUs. Nice for quads, possibly duals. All 32 extra threads need a slice of the CPU.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\PriorityControl]
"Win32PrioritySeparation"=dword:00000026

The bitmask has different effects on Pro and Server editions of XP.

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management]
"SecondLevelDataCache"=dword:00000100

Doesn't apply to XP and would set a completely incorrect L2 amount under NT. (PCs don't have 100kb L2 cache. More like 4mb) Better to let it detect the correct amount of L2 than to override it with an incorrect amount. The last CPU where this made any sense were the Pentium 2s.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management]
"DisablePagingExecutive"=dword:00000001

Not applicable to XP. No effect.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer]
"AlwaysUnloadDll"="1"

Unless you have <256mb memory this is completely counterproductive.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\PrefetchParameters]
"EnablePrefetcher"=dword:00000003

"ClearPageFileAtShutdown"=dword:00000000

"PowerDownAfterShutdown"="1"

Default setting on XP installations anyway.

Anyway, I would advise against random tweaks, especially if one does not know what they actually do.

 

[Robin Hood]

There a some decent tweaks in there, but loads of BS too. Also why did you copy+paste the same tweaks twice?


Not suitable for single core CPUs. Nice for quads, possibly duals. All 32 extra threads need a slice of the CPU.


The bitmask has different effects on Pro and Server editions of XP.


Doesn't apply to XP and would set a completely incorrect L2 amount under NT. (PCs don't have 100kb L2 cache. More like 4mb) Better to let it detect the correct amount of L2 than to override it with an incorrect amount. The last CPU where this made any sense were the Pentium 2s.


Not applicable to XP. No effect.

Unless you have <256mb memory this is completely counterproductive.




Default setting on XP installations anyway.

Anyway, I would advise against random tweaks, especially if one does not know what they actually do.

...wont hurt anything
btw a lot of ppl stuff around with their tweaks...thats why default tweaks are also added
Better still seeing youre so good...How about making us some patches and stuff?

 

[Robin Hood]

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Se ssion Manager\Memory Management]
"SecondLevelDataCache"=dword:00000100

Btw....thats HEX...not DEC...100 = 256

 

[Praeses]

System definitely felt less responsive (e.g. open start menu, my computer) although 3dmark06 cpu score stayed the same after running the registry file. Reverted back to old registry.

 

[Robin Hood]

System definitely felt less responsive (e.g. open start menu, my computer) although 3dmark06 cpu score stayed the same after running the registry file. Reverted back to old registry.

What machine have you got? ie cpu, memory, etc

 

[HavocXphere]

btw a lot of ppl stuff around with their tweaks...thats why default tweaks are also added

Interesting approach.

Btw....thats HEX...not DEC...100 = 256

Your 100% right. Its still wrong though.

Better still seeing youre so good...How about making us some patches and stuff?

If there were any surefire/catchall tweaks, Microsoft would have included them. They designed it and (hopefull) know more about the internal workings of it than you or I.

System definitely felt less responsive

You sure thats not a placebo effect after my above rather harsh post? Shouldn't speed-up or slow-down XP much either way.

 

[Robin Hood]

Interesting approach.


Your 100% right. Its still wrong though.


If there were any surefire/catchall tweaks, Microsoft would have included them. They designed it and (hopefull) know more about the internal workings of it than you or I.

Well, i never ASKED you to download it, now did I?..Was trying to help some ppl here with slow machines as ( believe it or not ) did huge improvements on other machines...Havnt you ever downloaded patches from MS that works on one machine, and not on another??..This stuff happens...Also, if i had 2 make patches for all the machines, ill sit with 100's of patches...this is a default patch

 

[Praeses]

What machine have you got? ie cpu, memory, etc

Core2Duo E6550 @ 2.8GHz
2x1GB Mushkin EM2 @ 850MHz 4-5-4-12
160GB SATAII Seagate HDD
GeForce 8800GTS 640MB with 171.16 drivers. (these drivers are great for crysis btw)

And yes, I can notice speed differences in XP with my rig! I'm very sensitive to any lag

I am running loads of programs in the background though...

 

[Robin Hood]

Core2Duo E6550 @ 2.8GHz
2x1GB Mushkin EM2 @ 850MHz 4-5-4-12
160GB SATAII Seagate HDD
GeForce 8800GTS 640MB with 171.16 drivers. (these drivers are great for crysis btw)

And yes, I can notice speed differences in XP with my rig! I'm very sensitive to any lag

I am running loads of programs in the background though...

But you DID reboot after patching, not?

 

[Praeses]

But you DID reboot after patching, not?

yup

 

[Robin Hood]

yup

In that case sorry bud...I did an "ammendment" in the first thread though telling guys if it didnt work, just to do a system restore...

 

[HavocXphere]

Well, i never ASKED you to download it, now did I?

No, but others will. And since half of them are for Windows NT/2k, incorrect and/or counterproductive I pointed them out.

this is a default patch

If there were any surefire/catchall tweaks, Microsoft would have included them somewhere in the last 5 years of *constant* patching and service packs.

Was trying to help some ppl here with slow machines as ( believe it or not ) did huge improvements on other machines

I'm glad they work for you. I just can't just stay quiet about the BS parts just to avoid bruising your ego.

 

[Praeses]

In that case sorry bud...I did an "ammendment" in the first thread though telling guys if it didnt work, just to do a system restore...

Don't worry about it. Just backed up my registry with Wise Registry Cleaner before I applied it so it was easy enough to restore
Just because it doesn't work for me doesn't mean it won't for other people

 

[Robin Hood]

Don't worry about it. Just backed up my registry with Wise Registry Cleaner before I applied it so it was easy enough to restore
Just because it doesn't work for me doesn't mean it won't for other people

Yeah...Now i know why MS brings out patches to actually OVERITE some of their OWN patches....really...its true...lol

 

[Robin Hood]

I'm glad they work for you. I just can't just stay quiet about the BS parts just to avoid bruising your ego.

Actually thanks for mentioning it Ive ammended the Start thread so ppl can know it wont work on all machines..Like i say...Its for the ppl to decide if they want it or not....not so? Ego has nothing 2 do with it

 

[HavocXphere]

Sounds reasonable. I apologize for the unnecessary harshness of my above posts.