Services and pagefile tweaking worthwhile?

Hello all!

I found Performance-oriented Windows tweaking, an interesting topic at AnandTech. It tests and discusses tweaks according to BlackViper and I quote the conclusions of the tests (I haven't read the discussion):

On the Services tweaks (three different systems):

This would leave us with security considerations. Services labeled as a "security risk" could/should be changed to a "less vulnerable" setting.

On the pagefile tweaks:

The setting for the pagefile that I have on my system is the default setting by the installer, with a minimum of 1.5 x RAM and a maximum of 3.0 x RAM, which is not even mentioned by BlackViper. I have 512 MB RAM and a pagefile of 768-1536 MB. Monitoring its size and usage, not on a single occasion have I noticed a resizing to occur. That would negate the "lessen fragmentation" advantage of moving it to a different partition.

Christer

 

I fully agree!

Best tweak: ADD RAM!!!

 

Remember that BV only deals with the Services installed by Windows itself. Different programs install their own services which may be worthwhile looking into from a performance perspective (unnecessary startups) and from a security perspective (phoning home).

Christer

 

What was not mentioned ny the author of the article;

1. setting certain services to manual or disabled makes a system "cleaner" in that there are less processes running that can potentially interfere with:
a. software installs
b. troubleshooting hardware iissues
c. troubleshooting networking
d. malware removal
e. boot time

To me, performance = overall amount of time consumed when performing a any task. This can be achieved by upgrading hardware and by removing software that I do not need or want, including MS software such as services, MSN, etc., and controlling security risk services.

Performance also includes "user habits ". We don't all do things the same way when we use computers. Some never use a mouse at all while others utterly depend on a mouse for almost everything. Some use the rt click context menus while others do not even know it exists.

It also equates to "how the desktop & folders look ", e.g. navigation is much much quicker using Windows Classic or default XP theme w/out common tasks & background images in folder view.

Bottom line, a computer's performance can only perform as well as the user performs HIS tasks. MS knows this 100%. The overall goal of MS has been to make it easier for the end user to use his computer and as for security, MS has been seeking to attain a higher level of confidence and trust for the end user. With increased confidence, the end user can perform his tasks better and faster.

note: the author of that article ommitted many things that reflect performance.

 

TonyT,

The simplest "measurement" is boot time and I used that to see if the SAFE settings according to BV had any effect and it had. I don't remember the exact figures but an approximate reduction of 10 seconds from ~70 to ~60 seconds until the process "userinit.exe" disappeared from TaskManager. (I don't remember the effect on Memory Usage.)

Recent additions to my running processes (previously 28) are nvsvc32.exe which was added by the new NVIDIA drivers that I am currently testing and gcasDtServ.exe + gcasServ.exe added by letting Microsoft AntiSpyWare run in the background (now 31 processes). That increased boot time to ~70 seconds (userinit.exe gone) and another 15-20 seconds until all of them had "talked to daddy ".

This indicates to me that limiting startups is more important than tweaking default Windows Services but with the new additions up and running, I don't perceive any performance loss. (Memory Usage with XP idling was increased from ~145 MB to ~165 MB.)

Christer

 

agreed, boot time is noticablby different after adjusting services.
per my task manager, I have 14 processes running there at boot.
it changes when I'm on the road because I disable the lan and enable the wireless when travling.

 

I'm sure that you know (but others may not) that we have more services/processes running than indicated in TaskManager. I have five instances of svchost.exe running and some of them host a number of services/processes.

For those who want to know what is running, go to Start > Run > type: cmd > OK
In the window that opens, type: tasklist /svc > Enter

Christer

 

Hello guys!

Hmm ...... ...... I have it on XP-pro. Could XP-home differ in not having tasklist.exe?

McTavish will probably shoot a hole in my theory by telling that he runs XP-pro ...... ...... !

Christer

 

Jim,

Nope, I'm 100% sure that I have not installed tasklist.exe separately. If I had, it would be archived in my "D:\Installation\Programs\System Tools" folder and it's not.

It was Newt who taught me to use it and it was there when I tried the first time.

Christer

 

I searched Microsoft.com for tasklist.exe and the resulting articles indicate that it is included in XP-pro but not in XP-home (no reference to that OS version mentioned).

Christer

 

A Google search for "tasklist xp home" lead to Information and help with Windows svchost.exe. which also indicates that tasklist.exe is included in XP-pro but not in XP-home.

Good to know when advicing people to use the tool ...... ...... !

Christer

 

Hi Charles!

I reread that thread from june 2005 and it seems like we are following the same lines again. There may be two sides (and an edge) on this coin too:

Heads - security: Some settings improve security and I believe those are the important ones. If you don't need a service which can be regarded as a "security hole ", then close it.

Tails - performance: It is a fact that a computer with BV-SAFE settings boot faster but when up and running, it is difficult to perceive any difference. Since installed programs often are starting components at startup, controlling those applications is more important since they have a greater impact on performance.

The edge - remembering the "tweaks" and connecting them with any future problem that may arize.

On my own system, I run BV-SAFE but on systems that I have built or reinstalled for friends, I only tweak a few services. The reason for that is the edge of the coin - my friends can not remember what services have been tweaked and if some day, they would like to network their desktop with their laptop ...... ...... !

I will compare BlackViper with the ElderGeek and the end result may be that I come to the conclusion ...... ...... that I know too little to make an "informed decision ".

Christer