I recently purchased an AMD X2 3800+ and an ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe. Here's my problem:
When I use windows explorer to browse the contents of my hard drive, I'm finding that it is lagging as I work my way into the directory tree. I'll click on "C:" for example, and it will take about 1 second for it to display the contents, then I'll click on "Program Files" and once again it lags and takes about 1-2 seconds to display the contents. I've never had this problem before and I've tried everything from over and underlocking my CPU/GPU/RAM and even switching my DMA Transfer Mode from DMA to PIO. I also thought maybe it had something to do with my RAID driver so I messed with that a few times to no avail.
Nothing seemed to work. HOWEVER, today I got the idea to set explorer.exe's affinity to use only one core. And when I do that, EVERYTHING is fixed and I can fly through windows explorer at the normal lightning speed I'm used to. So, my question are:
1) Does anyone else have this problem where Windows Explorer is laggy if allowed to run on both cores? If so, how do you fix it?
2) Is there anything I'm overlooking that will let explorer.exe utilize both cores without this annoying performance loss when file browsing?
3) If I absolutely HAVE to force explorer.exe into using one core in order to speed things up, Is there a way to have the affinity set automatically with each startup? It never seems to remember my settings once I restart; it always defaults back allowing it to use CPU0 & CPU1. And, well, that can get annoying to have to set with each boot if you know what I mean
4) When explorer.exe's affinity is set to only use a single core, what kind of applications will be restricted to this core? Will all of my other third party programs (Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Virus Scan, etc) and games be able to use both cores or does it all run under the explorer umbrella so-to-speak and inherit the single core limitation? Any explanation of what kind of hinderences I'd be inflicting by going this route would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot guys. I know one of you out there has an answer. I've already looked everywhere I could think of for an answer and I'm afraid that I couldn't find a single similar case
So, the [H] to the rescue to is!
Anxiously awaiting a response,
Doug
When I use windows explorer to browse the contents of my hard drive, I'm finding that it is lagging as I work my way into the directory tree. I'll click on "C:" for example, and it will take about 1 second for it to display the contents, then I'll click on "Program Files" and once again it lags and takes about 1-2 seconds to display the contents. I've never had this problem before and I've tried everything from over and underlocking my CPU/GPU/RAM and even switching my DMA Transfer Mode from DMA to PIO. I also thought maybe it had something to do with my RAID driver so I messed with that a few times to no avail.
Nothing seemed to work. HOWEVER, today I got the idea to set explorer.exe's affinity to use only one core. And when I do that, EVERYTHING is fixed and I can fly through windows explorer at the normal lightning speed I'm used to. So, my question are:
1) Does anyone else have this problem where Windows Explorer is laggy if allowed to run on both cores? If so, how do you fix it?
2) Is there anything I'm overlooking that will let explorer.exe utilize both cores without this annoying performance loss when file browsing?
3) If I absolutely HAVE to force explorer.exe into using one core in order to speed things up, Is there a way to have the affinity set automatically with each startup? It never seems to remember my settings once I restart; it always defaults back allowing it to use CPU0 & CPU1. And, well, that can get annoying to have to set with each boot if you know what I mean
4) When explorer.exe's affinity is set to only use a single core, what kind of applications will be restricted to this core? Will all of my other third party programs (Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Virus Scan, etc) and games be able to use both cores or does it all run under the explorer umbrella so-to-speak and inherit the single core limitation? Any explanation of what kind of hinderences I'd be inflicting by going this route would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot guys. I know one of you out there has an answer. I've already looked everywhere I could think of for an answer and I'm afraid that I couldn't find a single similar case
Anxiously awaiting a response,
Doug