Windows takes three days to install on 1.33ghz Thunderbird...

[Supratik]

Hi guys,

Recently, I reformatted a friend's Athlon 1.33ghz Thunderbird based system. Installing Windows took about two hours, and everything was running fine. Four days later, she calls me and tells me the computer is running incredibly slow, i.e. clicking Start takes 3-4 minutes, etc.

I check out Taskbar (which takes several minutes to load), and see that, despite nothing running the CPU is at 100%!

I reformat the computer, only this time the Windows installation takes 3 days! Following that, Windows was just as slow as before.

Tried new powersupply, same thing happened. Tried removing all PCI components, same thing happened.

Didn't have a new harddrive to test, so she bought one for me - Windows is installing right now, faster than 3 days but wayyy slower than 2 hours.

After reading the recent laptop review on HardOCP, the CPU at 100% constantly is apparently an indicator of the primary IDE channel running in PIO mode. Once Windows installation finishes here, I'm going to get into the BIOS and check that.

My question is, is this a PIO issue? Also, doesn't putting a new HD in negate that? And finally, how did it get into PIO to begin with?

Thanks!

 

[morningreis]

You should be able to change that in BIOS. How did it get like that? Windows set it like that automatically. I have had problems caused by Windows automatically turning off my USB ports in BIOS before. You should be able to get in there and change it.

 

[GreNME]

Windows takes three days to install on 1.33ghz Thunderbird...

And yet takes only an hour on a 233 mHz Pentium II. Funny, that.

Making weird references blaming the OS for what is obviously a hardware problem is not going to get the problem solved any faster. Changing out the CDROM and making sure the media you are using is clean will.

 

[JTY]

IDE devices will placed in PIO mode, if Windows detects read/write errors. I believe after 5 read errors, the device is placed into PIO mode. I would check the IDE cable, and the IDE devices.

 

[Supratik]

Hi guys,

This is interesting - being a really old HP, the BIOS didn't have much to offer. I did, however, "reset everything to default," and then magically the computer sped up again - I didn't see anything in the BIOS that was indicative of such a major speedup.

 

[Supratik]

And yet takes only an hour on a 233 mHz Pentium II. Funny, that.

Making weird references blaming the OS for what is obviously a hardware problem is not going to get the problem solved any faster. Changing out the CDROM and making sure the media you are using is clean will.

I am hardly blaming the OS, did you read the entire post? - I realize it's completely a hardware problem. The issue here is finding out *which* hardware is causing the problem, and I figured since Windows was directly affected somebody might know in this section.

 

[That_Sound_Guy]

Given the errors your getting. You could basically rule out PSU, CPU, Mobo (outside IDE controllers), and memory. If those were bad it would either never start the install, or crash. Slow response times are usually HD or IDE related. I would get a new HD and cables to start over.

 

[jstnomega]

Hi guys,

- being a really old HP

Errors due to CMOS battery failure can manifest in many mysterious ways, maybe even such as dropping to PIO mode - just a thought.

 

[HighwayAssassins]

Wow man, 3 days? Thats a story to tell your geeky kids

 

[Vertigo Acid]

Given the errors your getting. You could basically rule out PSU

Unfortunately, no. A bad PSU can manifest itself as problems in any component that is connected to it in your PC.....

 

[GreNME]

I am hardly blaming the OS, did you read the entire post? - I realize it's completely a hardware problem. The issue here is finding out *which* hardware is causing the problem, and I figured since Windows was directly affected somebody might know in this section.

And yet you post this in the "Operating Systems" forum.

There are nearly thirty other forums beside this one you could have put it on. This forum, this forum, or even this forum would have been a better shot and gotten you a much wider and more invovled response. Yet you post in the OS forum and blame the OS in the title. Regardless of the OS we're dealing with here, your thread is ridiculously out of place. My response reflected that.

Your problem had to do with the disk drive. Perhaps resetting in the BIOS changed whatever was set on it (possibly bad jumper setting, possibly something else), but regardless this had nothing to do with the OS. Threads like this, incorrectly posted in the wrong section and instead trying to use accusatory titles to get people to check it out, are exactly what clutters things and keeps threads that have real content and contributions by members here lower on the queue. Meanwhile, some kids who haven't even taken the time to bring their systems back to the basic defaults are blaming everything from the OS to the game they installed to the service packs, updates, the mailman, and sunspots for their machines giving them crappy performance. It's frustrating, it's forum crapping, and it belongs in a whole different section of the [H].

I realize I'm being a bit hard on you. You are just one person in a long line of others who have done the same. What I hope is that you don't take it too personally, and actually utilize the wide range of subjects in the other forums listed on the [H] here. You'll start to find that any given problem that could pop up on your systems can be mitigated easily just by surfing over to one of the appropriate forums, where it is often likely someone else has already been dealing with the same issue you have and has worked it out. The best case scenario is that this has a positive impact on you and you actually check out the other sections for problems that pop up not having to do with the OS as a cause. The worst case scenario is that this escalates into a flame-fest and nothing gets accomplished. For that reason I'll do my part to avoid the worst-case by removing this thread from my notifications by e-mail and not arguing any further on the subject.

Good luck with your buddy's system.

 

[Deadlierchair]

And yet you post this in the "Operating Systems" forum.

Cool your jets man, this guy is not blaming Windows for his problems. The title is actually very honest and fair to the topic at hand. Windows takes three days to install, meaning there could be problems with the hard disk, motherboard, or other various things. We all know Windows should take an hour or two to install (my system is probably 25 minutes not including the format), that is why this amount of time means there are problems.

I would have placed a problem like this under General Hardware myself, but since the interaction between Windows and the hard drive is possibly the problem there should be no question that this is a valid spot for this post. Anyhow, I don't have anything important to add to this thread other than to relax and think before assuming. Wouldn't want to scare the little kids off

(double check your BIOS, your problem probably lies there)

 

[mikeblas]

Given the errors your getting. You could basically rule out PSU, CPU, Mobo (outside IDE controllers), and memory. If those were bad it would either never start the install, or crash. Slow response times are usually HD or IDE related. I would get a new HD and cables to start over.

I agree; I'd expect this to be a disk I/O problem. Thing is, that doesn't explain is why CPU use is at 100%.

I'd work on figuring out what's taking the CPU time -- look at the processes tab in Task Manager and see exactly what processes are there.

If the drive is iffy, it might be recovering from it's own errors using ECC and not reporting higher level errors, but running slowly as it does the ECC work. Or, the drive might be making errors that are reported to the OS but the OS retries and then reads successfully. The prior aren't easy to diagnose though the throughput you'l lsee in a tool like HDTACH will be really low for the drive. The latter will show up in the system event log.

 

[Jerunk]

And yet takes only an hour on a 233 mHz Pentium II. Funny, that.

Making weird references blaming the OS for what is obviously a hardware problem is not going to get the problem solved any faster. Changing out the CDROM and making sure the media you are using is clean will.

Yes, the reason his friends programs are running slowly is because his CDROM doesn't work and his media is dirty! BRILLIANT!

Quit attacking him.

 

[Supratik]

And yet you post this in the "Operating Systems" forum.

There are nearly thirty other forums beside this one you could have put it on. This forum, this forum, or even this forum would have been a better shot and gotten you a much wider and more invovled response. Yet you post in the OS forum and blame the OS in the title. Regardless of the OS we're dealing with here, your thread is ridiculously out of place. My response reflected that.

Your problem had to do with the disk drive. Perhaps resetting in the BIOS changed whatever was set on it (possibly bad jumper setting, possibly something else), but regardless this had nothing to do with the OS. Threads like this, incorrectly posted in the wrong section and instead trying to use accusatory titles to get people to check it out, are exactly what clutters things and keeps threads that have real content and contributions by members here lower on the queue. Meanwhile, some kids who haven't even taken the time to bring their systems back to the basic defaults are blaming everything from the OS to the game they installed to the service packs, updates, the mailman, and sunspots for their machines giving them crappy performance. It's frustrating, it's forum crapping, and it belongs in a whole different section of the [H].

I realize I'm being a bit hard on you. You are just one person in a long line of others who have done the same. What I hope is that you don't take it too personally, and actually utilize the wide range of subjects in the other forums listed on the [H] here. You'll start to find that any given problem that could pop up on your systems can be mitigated easily just by surfing over to one of the appropriate forums, where it is often likely someone else has already been dealing with the same issue you have and has worked it out. The best case scenario is that this has a positive impact on you and you actually check out the other sections for problems that pop up not having to do with the OS as a cause. The worst case scenario is that this escalates into a flame-fest and nothing gets accomplished. For that reason I'll do my part to avoid the worst-case by removing this thread from my notifications by e-mail and not arguing any further on the subject.

Good luck with your buddy's system.

Firstly, thank you everybody for your advice - needless to say, the combination of motherboard, harddrive, and cmos battery seemed to be the problem.

Secondly, thanks to those that defended me.

...instead trying to use accusatory titles to get people to check it out...

I resent this greatly - that wasn't my intention at all. As Deadlierchair said, I made the topic with the interest of seeing if other people who have installed Windows (i.e. all of us), had seen the same problem and therefore knew the solution.

As for the other forums, to be fair, I have posted numerous things in the harddrive and videocard sections in the past, and gotten minimal, if any, help at all. By far, this thread has been the most responsive and helpful experience I've gotten at [H]ardforums, and it was partially this reasoning that led me to pick this section to post it in. Rather than the "clutter" you mention, it is filled with helpful tips and suggestions which will be able to further assist those who have the same problems in the future. Also, what's stopping somebody else in a different section (like the ones you suggested) from saying exactly what you're saying? I have to start somewhere.

Consider the following. I'm playing an intensely graphical game, but I'm getting lockups and glitches. Being me, I'd post this to the Video Games section. Odds are it's a videocard problem. By this reasoning, whether I know or not the problem is hardware-related is irrelevant.

Also, what if I was completely un-computer saavy (a complete "noob" as they say). I assemble a computer and go to install Windows, and it takes three days. How would I know it was hardware related?

I asked a legitimate question, got several legitimate responses, and fixed my problem. The administrator hasn't closed the thread, so one could assume I have done nothing incorrectly or inefficiently. Honestly, I feel you're overreacting just a tad here.

Thanks again to everyone!

 

[hity645]

I know how you feel, I posted a question in the Video Card forum about CSS crashes and a VPU crash error and got couple hundreds looks at the thread but no posts to help find a solution, Video Card thread seems to be about whos e-penis is bigger than whos and what company is coming out with what, there is no help there what so ever.

 

[CRaZYMoFo]

I know how you feel, I posted a question in the Video Card forum about CSS crashes and a VPU crash error and got couple hundreds looks at the thread but no posts to help find a solution, Video Card thread seems to be about whos e-penis is bigger than whos and what company is coming out with what, there is no help there what so ever.

Most likely there were some threads about that issue that you could have just searched for? The video card forum has quite a lot of solutions in it. Its not fair for you to say that it just about new releases and bragging

 

[drizzt81]

Wow man, 3 days? Thats a story to tell your geeky kids

lol.. when I was your age, it took us 3 days to install windows.. and it was snowing and raining at the same time and we were barefoot and had to keep turning a crank for power ...