Superfetch

WITH MY REQUIREMENTS IN MIND, should 'Superfetch' be:

  • Enabled

    Votes: 66 91.7%

  • Disabled

    Votes: 6 8.3%
  • Total voters
    72
TechieSooner said:
Which makes sense... Purpose of SuperFetch is to take advantage of faster RAM due to the slow nature of hardware-driven disk drives... Get rid of the disk drive and... The advantage goes away.
Click to expand...

Hardware-driven? You mean spinning disks? Even with an SSD installed, the advantages of Superfetch aren't eliminated as modern memory subsystems are still orders of magnitude faster than the best of the SSDs.
 
rflcptr said:
Hardware-driven? You mean spinning disks? Even with an SSD installed, the advantages of Superfetch aren't eliminated as modern memory subsystems are still orders of magnitude faster than the best of the SSDs.
Click to expand...

I didn't clarify that for a reason, hoping someone would say this...

But, Exactly. The huge advantage is gone, but there might still be advantage gained depending on how the system is designed.

Just like Superfetch on Servers.
 
imajeanius said:
why not try each for a defined period and see which one works better?
Click to expand...

OP really hasn't defined what he's talking about but obviously the best use is on Win 7...

And

I already know which works better :D

Photoshop CS4 opening in 2 seconds = heck yeah
 
bigdogchris said:
And by the way, if you want to disable services to save system resources (Black Viper :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...

Yes lets :rolleyes: at disabling worthless services that plague XP/Vista/7 and improve the amount of free memory we have. Black Vipers site is an excellent resource for finding out what services do and then making the informed decision as what to do with that information not to mention neat tools like custom service bat files and reg files.
 
TechieSooner said:
I won't disagree. But again, it won't HURT anything so....


It uses a ton, sure. Not ALL unused RAM as was claimed.


Wouldn't disagree, but then again, the thing is: nobody has proven Superfetch has a noticeable hit on performance.
Click to expand...

Exchange is dynamic in RAM consumption, for performance purposes..it wants to take as much as it can get. After all, since it's a business app, optimal performance is usually desired.

Taking the time to prove superfetch has a performance hit on servers would be a daunting task. I'd assume Microsoft knows their own stuff. Look at the huge number of LOB apps out there running on servers..who wants to take the time to see what performs better w/o superfetch. There's a lifetime of benchmarks and comparisons ahead of them.
 
KayossZero said:
Yes lets :rolleyes: at disabling worthless services that plague XP/Vista/7 and improve the amount of free memory we have. Black Vipers site is an excellent resource for finding out what services do and then making the informed decision as what to do with that information not to mention neat tools like custom service bat files and reg files.
Click to expand...

BV is a joke around here... I don't know if you didn't spend much time in the OS forums during Vista's release but: people reading his stuff screwed their machines up so bad it's ridiculous.
All for no noticible increase in performance.
 
TechieSooner said:
BV is a joke around here... I don't know if you didn't spend much time in the OS forums during Vista's release but: people reading his stuff screwed their machines up so bad it's ridiculous.
All for no increase in performance whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Fixed.

The beauty of Windows Service is that it only executes a service when it's called on. Disabling unnecessary services does nothing whatsoever. So you never fax, and you decide to disable the fax service. Why? You gain nothing doing so. Fax service just sits there doing absolutely nada until you use it.

Too many people don't realize this. They think that because a service is enabled, it's consuming system resources.

BlackViper might be ok when you need to know what each services do, but they fail utterly when they make the recommendations on which ones to disable.
 
He had some credibility in the XP days but nowadays it's a joke. You spend more time disabling the services and components he suggests than you'll ever gain back.

Microsoft took notice of the people optimizing their systems and learned from it... That's why these people wanting to "tune" Superfetch are just off their rocker... You really think if Microsoft could've made Superfetch FASTER they wouldn't have done it??

All that said there's a level of "ease of use" versus "speed". Microsoft has actually found a good balance. Let the system predict what the user will do (ease of use), but only if it doesn't interfere with what the user is doing (speed).

The #1 rule of thumb when it comes to Vista and Windows 7 is to leave it alone.
 
TechieSooner said:
He had some credibility in the XP days but nowadays it's a joke. You spend more time disabling the services and components he suggests than you'll ever gain back.

Microsoft took notice of the people optimizing their systems and learned from it... That's why these people wanting to "tune" Superfetch are just off their rocker... You really think if Microsoft could've made Superfetch FASTER they wouldn't have done it??

All that said there's a level of "ease of use" versus "speed". Microsoft has actually found a good balance. Let the system predict what the user will do (ease of use), but only if it doesn't interfere with what the user is doing (speed).

The #1 rule of thumb when it comes to Vista and Windows 7 is to leave it alone.
Click to expand...

+1,000,000

It's sad to see some people still adopt the XP-mentality of tweaking every little detail to the max to gain performance. In the XP days, this made a lot more sense. But with Vista and now 7, it's entirely wrong. 7 is an extremely sophisticated OS (compared to XP, and in general) that can adapt to your needs and can easily manage itself without your involvement.
 
TechieSooner said:
He had some credibility in the XP days but nowadays it's a joke. You spend more time disabling the services and components he suggests than you'll ever gain back.

Microsoft took notice of the people optimizing their systems and learned from it... That's why these people wanting to "tune" Superfetch are just off their rocker... You really think if Microsoft could've made Superfetch FASTER they wouldn't have done it??

All that said there's a level of "ease of use" versus "speed". Microsoft has actually found a good balance. Let the system predict what the user will do (ease of use), but only if it doesn't interfere with what the user is doing (speed).

The #1 rule of thumb when it comes to Vista and Windows 7 is to leave it alone.
Click to expand...
You always seem to do such a good job at explaining what I'm thinking better than I can myself. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top