10 is still smaller by default than 7. Not that it means anything with 32GB RAM and Core i7 CPUs these days.
10 is still smaller by default than 7. Not that it means anything with 32GB RAM and Core i7 CPUs these days.
“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
Yes am running a pretty quick i7-4ghz rig. Never adopted neither Win 8 or 8.1 & will continue to mod win 10 to my liking in a VM till I changeover to it.
Sure I use to have PC crashes in the early days when I didn't know what parts worked with each other but after sourcing parts & building PC's from scratchOn desktops things aren't quite so rosy. Crashes aplenty......
have really only had secondary hard drives fail in that time. Never had a BSOD as I rebuild my source OS at least twice a year & reload windows.
With the newer SSD's now I don't expect them to fail readily.
Oops! I obviously hadn't engaged my brain fully on my previous post(s)..........
As a matter of interest I did a comparison between my 3 drives and OSs. All three OSs were only recently installed and have about the same amount of files, as can be judged by the Norton scans. Norton 360 allows delayed starts on selected programs so I went in and made all pre-loaded programs start without delay to make it easier to judge. Even so, the boot up times were difficult to judge exactly as I waited till both the disk activity light had gone out for a sec or longer and the 4 cores activity percentages according to Cacheman were all between 0 and 3 (rarely if ever see all 4 at 0).
Basically according to those results my 1TB SSD (Transcend, not Kingston!) the SSD is 3 to 4 times faster than my 1TB 7200rpm HD and 4 to 5 times faster than my 2 TB 5900rpm HD.
1 TB SSD with Win 10 (Transcend SSD370)
To fully boot = 45s & 46s
to scan 7,790 files (Norton) = 45s
to scan 7,744 files (Norton) = 47s
1 TB HD with Win 10 (Seagate Barracuda ST31000528AS @ 7200rpm)
To fully boot = 2m 50s & 2m58s
to scan 7,704 files (Norton) = 2m 17s
to scan 7,589 files (Norton) = 2m 04s
2 TB HD with Win 8.1 (Seagate Barracuda ST2000DL003 @ 5900 RPM)
To fully boot = 3m 52s & 3m38
to scan 7,290 files (Norton) = 2m 38s
to scan 7,570 files (Norton) = 2m 43s
Same to you thanks Mick.
Maybe I'm strange but I like Win10 better than 7/8/8.1. It seems slightly quicker (may be imagination) and I like using it better. I don't remember having any BSOD with it except after I'd done something to cause it/them and have been using it for a while now.![]()
Good comparisons there GazYes the std wims from MS are around 4gb a fully updated image is about 700mb more. My Iso that install from usb with all silent apps is around 5.5gb.
I will changeover to Win 10 soon just want to tweak with package manager & dism to remove excess bloat & internal programs that are not required.
Ugh. Norton.
“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
Agree Norton products used to be resource hogs but nowadays they're much better. In fact I read a review of quite a number of anti virus products a year or so ago and Norton is now one of the fastest and most efficient of them all. I use Norton 360 (5 user) and it also has additional features I make use of, especially Identity Safe and its password vault. I'm very happy with it!
Try ESET Wonks ... The ONLY AV product I use personally and recommend (it used to be Nod32).
“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
Speaking of SSDs - I went to JB today and picked up another external 1TB Samsung T1 - $513.00 with the sales on.
“Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.”
Thanks Kurt but I like Norton 360 for the extras - particularly its password manager, plus a few other features. I typically pick up a 5 user version for around $50 and use it on my 3 installations here, my wife's laptop and my phone. It's never intrusive and I haven't had a virus in years, though it has caught a few on certain sites (not always the sort of sites you'd expect).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)