# Someone beat this if you can



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

http://www.sevenforums.com/attachments/tutorials/1099d1227815166-restart-time-restart-time.zip


Weeeee!


----------



## cdawall (Feb 14, 2011)

i beat it a while back 18 sec (iirc) using a pair of Supertalent 32GB SSD's in raid 0 and a phenom II X4@4ghz will look for the SS its on these forums somewere


----------



## freaksavior (Feb 14, 2011)

im not sure what we are suppose to be beating...


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

cdawall said:


> i beat it a while back 18 sec (iirc) using a pair of Supertalent 32GB SSD's in raid 0 and a phenom II X4@4ghz will look for the SS its on these forums somewere



That would be wicked!


----------



## scaminatrix (Feb 14, 2011)

How much difference would a UEFI BIOS make? That's the question I want answered.

EDIT: freaksavior: Restart time.


----------



## BinaryMage (Feb 14, 2011)

I think it would speed it up - see this article. I don't know how much, though. My BIOS only takes about 5 seconds or so.


----------



## scaminatrix (Feb 14, 2011)

My C4F takes aaaages to post... Anyone who owns one of these boards knows what I mean. Would be nice to see a UEFI BIOS for my board, but I doubt that would happen


----------



## cdawall (Feb 14, 2011)

scaminatrix said:


> My C4F takes aaaages to post... Anyone who own one of these boards knows what I mean. Would be nice to see a UEFI BIOS for my board, but I doubt that would happen



your BIOS is set up wrong i have one of those boards it does not take forever


----------



## scaminatrix (Feb 14, 2011)

You don't have a CD drive in your C4F, your board has one less thing to post - I've got a CD drive in the Marvell/J-Micron (can't remember) port, so that's another whole controller. I've also got 5 HDD's so it's all gotta add up.

EDIT: It's not that mine's set up wrong, it's that yours is set up better


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

Hold on - I almost have a Raid 0 up and running.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)




----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

^ Wrong program...

My Raid is one second slower...


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 14, 2011)

Will play your sick games sometime this week, got ssd coming.

Should be fun


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

I see, anyway I got 52 seconds with your app.

What do you get with BootRacer?


----------



## BinaryMage (Feb 14, 2011)

scaminatrix said:


> You don't have a CD drive in your C4F, your board has one less thing to post - I've got a CD drive in the Marvell/J-Micron (can't remember) port, so that's another whole controller. I've also got 5 HDD's so it's all gotta add up.
> 
> EDIT: It's not that mine's set up wrong, it's that yours is set up better



Check your BIOS settings and make sure "Additional HDD Detect Delay" or whatever is set to 0. That can cause delays. Also just poke around in the BIOS. Even if you have some drives, it shouldn't take too long.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> I see, anyway I got 52 seconds with your app.
> 
> What do you get with BootRacer?



For Arctucas...


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

^^^Nice.^^^

I got this after disabling AV, soundcard drivers and such.

If eVGA ever gets around to updating the RAID ROM in this BIOS, I might do a little better.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

RAID = Suckage

Workin on it...


----------



## adrianx (Feb 14, 2011)

rickss69.... look like VM


----------



## de.das.dude (Feb 14, 2011)

freaksavior said:


> im not sure what we are suppose to be beating...



lets beat rickssssss69


----------



## freaksavior (Feb 14, 2011)

de.das.dude said:


> lets beat rickssssss69



i'm likely getting two 128gb c300's so i'm sure I could.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

freaksavior said:


> i'm likely getting two 128gb c300's so i'm sure I could.



When I tried RAID 0 it slowed for me.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

freaksavior said:


> i'm likely getting two 128gb c300's so i'm sure I could.



Will that make a great difference?


----------



## n-ster (Feb 14, 2011)

depends on mobo etc. It is slower because it takes time to recognize your SSDs on boot in BIOS and also the RAID controller has to load


----------



## n-ster (Feb 14, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> Will that make a great difference?



I approximate 800+ read speeds


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

n-ster said:


> depends on mobo etc. It is slower because it takes time to recognize your SSDs on boot in BIOS and also the RAID controller has to load



That is what I wondering about; even with fast drives and RAID, a lot is dependent on the other hardware and even the OS, correct?


----------



## n-ster (Feb 14, 2011)

The best would probably be the simplest fast system possible. A very fast single SSD (ie: 500mb+) with a strong processor and fast RAM, nothing else connected to SATA  ports and all unused controllers disabled. I'm guessing fastest boot-up would be a stripped version of XP (ie: Micro XP). Even better would be to have a bootable RAMDisk XD

Is UEFI BIOS implemented in some mobos already? If so I wonder about their boot-up times


----------



## scaminatrix (Feb 14, 2011)

n-ster said:


> Is UEFI BIOS implemented in some mobos already? If so I wonder about their boot-up times



I thought it was - in some 1156 boards - I'd be very interested in seeing the results of that.


----------



## 20mmrain (Feb 14, 2011)

Ahh the best I got right now is 41 seconds. I do have an SSD but it is not AHCI Mode.... SO I don't get the extra performance boost admittedly! I know my drive is faster when I have it in AHCI Mode.... I used to do it when I had my EVGA P55 SLI Motherboard. BUt since switching... I forgot to load it that way.

I also did not disable my AV, Or ATI CCC, Or my Sound Card Station when trying for my score. I am sure that would shave an extra few seconds.

Well Hey if I get board on a Saturday I will reformat and change it back.

Nice score though bud....22 sec


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)




----------



## 20mmrain (Feb 14, 2011)

Man O Man getting better Boss!!! Nice run 17 seconds!!!


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

We are all such noobs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpGSk5mWL7k


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> http://i434.photobucket.com/albums/qq69/rickss69/Boot17.jpg



This is your sig rig, or the SB you posted in the first screenshot?


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> We are all such noobs... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpGSk5mWL7k



???


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> This is your sig rig, or the SB you posted in the first screenshot?





Arctucas said:


> ???



This is the SB - Watch the YouTube video...


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 14, 2011)

am I missing something???

I assumed this timer took a count from the reset and kept time until the reboot. The guy in that video took 35 seconds to reboot, not 8, so I assume this is just a timer from the windows logo to a usable desktop?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

I see 7.83 seconds...I don't know where you see 35 seconds.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 14, 2011)

count the time in the video from when he clicks the "go" button on the app at 1:12 in the vid, then at 1:47 in the vid the timer pops up with an 8 second result. So what is being timed, just the time from the windows logo to desktop?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

No idea - I am just on desktop when I click on the app...I don't know what he is doing different.


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 14, 2011)

I might be able to, I keep a pretty lean system. If I had to guess I would say 20-30 seconds, but I've never tested it or anything.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

sneekypeet said:


> am I missing something???
> 
> I assumed this timer took a count from the reset and kept time until the reboot. The guy in that video took 35 seconds to reboot, not 8, so I assume this is just a timer from the windows logo to a usable desktop?



I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

I see what you are saying now Pete - The time between when I click on the app to the result is less than 20 seconds for me. The fellow in the video has about 35 seconds in between. I will be quizzing him on that point...

Latest run...


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 14, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> This is the SB - Watch the YouTube video...



I was referring to the video.


----------



## DaveK (Feb 14, 2011)

I'd try, but I hate rebooting.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

DaveK said:


> I'd try, but I hate rebooting.



Only takes 16 seconds...

I have asked the fellow in the video about this...awaiting a response. This is the quickest rig I have ever seen for sure. I noticed it right away and is the reason I began testing this one.

Biostar TH67B+ mb
Intel 2600K cpu
OCZ Vertex 2 60GB ssd


----------



## trickson (Feb 14, 2011)

Man mine is slow but I don't mind


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

trickson said:


> Man mine is slow but I don't mind



Use this tricks... http://www.sevenforums.com/attachments/tutorials/1099d1227815166-restart-time-restart-time.zip


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 14, 2011)

I claim BS on this, it keeps telling me 60-70 seconds, but the wall clock usually stays in the same minute. WTF?


----------



## trickson (Feb 14, 2011)

ok giving it a try now .

Man this is brutal !


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

Poorly done with a camera but you get the idea...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ln0PeIk6EY


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 14, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Poorly done with a camera but you get the idea...
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ln0PeIk6EY
> 
> http://i434.photobucket.com/albums/qq69/rickss69/Boot16.jpg



nicely done, but your times match, his were just grossly out of the realm of reasonable


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 14, 2011)

sneekypeet said:


> nicely done, but your times match, his were just grossly out of the realm of reasonable



Kinda what I am thinking as well, but he has not answered me yet. I have to say this thing is blazing tho...


----------



## n-ster (Feb 15, 2011)

sneekypeet said:


> nicely done, but your times match, his were just grossly out of the realm of reasonable



I calculated 18~19 seconds


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

Well I shaved some off by changing the Jmicron from detecting as there was nothing there at all any way .
but still this thing is slow !!!!!!


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

n-ster said:


> I calculated 18~19 seconds



Haha! There is a clock on the bottom of the video...calculate from the time I clicked on the app to the result.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

trickson said:


> Well I shaved some off by changing the Jmicron from detecting as there was nothing there at all any way .
> but still this thing is slow !!!!!!



If you could get away from the RAID it would be a huge difference.


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> If you could get away from the RAID it would be a huge difference.



No the raid setup is fine . I wouldn't get rid of it unless I had some thing like an SSD to replace it with LOL . I don't care it is an aged setup and getting slow any way even at 4.1Ghz ! I need an i7 super CPU !


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

trickson said:


> No the raid setup is fine . I wouldn't get rid of it unless I had some thing like an SSD to replace it with LOL . I don't care it is an aged setup and getting slow any way even at 4.1Ghz ! I need an i7 super CPU !



Sorry - I thought you had a ssd in your specs. Cpu does not matter...my second fastest times came from a Sempron 140 sometime back. Overclock does nothing for it either.


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Sorry - I thought you had a ssd in your specs. Cpu does not matter...my second fastest times came from a Sempron 140 sometime back. Overclock does nothing for it either.



Yeah I do not have that SSD any more I forgot to change my specs . I will now . Thanks for reminding me  . I plan a new set up some day soon with SSD as the main drives !


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Sorry - I thought you had a ssd in your specs. Cpu does not matter...my second fastest times came from a Sempron 140 sometime back. Overclock does nothing for it either.



OK then, what are the determining factors?


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Feb 15, 2011)

I think i have the longest boot time here yet. I come in with a staggering 91 seconds. XD


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> OK then, what are the determining factors?



I am no expert in these matters but it seems to be more related to how one initially loads the OS and bios settings.


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> I think i have the longest boot time here yet. I come in with a staggering 91 seconds. XD



no I do 92 seconds .


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Feb 15, 2011)

Now im obsessed with trying to get it to 30 seconds.


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Now im obsessed with trying to get it to 30 seconds.



LOL , I am not all that obsessed about it . I can live with mine just fine . If I get a chance maybe some day to have a supper fast set up then cool but just think of this , in 6 months it will be as slow as the one you have now ! It is getting almost to much for me to keep up with all this stuff does is cost tons of cash and you never get what you think you want ! It is a good game they have us all scrambling for the fastest bestest setup only to find in a month or 2 it will be the slowest POS out as they will have a much faster SSD driver , Ram , CPU , video card and even a NEW DVD/CD-RW that is faster than any thing you have now ! Hell when I got this setup it was not 2 months later the i7 came out and just killed me ! what a joke .


----------



## n-ster (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Haha! There is a clock on the bottom of the video...calculate from the time I clicked on the app to the result.



what clock?


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Feb 15, 2011)

SSD's need to come down in price. I cant see spending 200 on a 128GB SSD. They dont really last that long either do they?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

n-ster said:


> what clock?



Bottom bar on the video.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ln0PeIk6EY  (elapsed time)


----------



## trickson (Feb 15, 2011)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> SSD's need to come down in price. I cant see spending 200 on a 128GB SSD. They dont really last that long either do they?



I don't think they last as long as a Hard drive does but I think they are supposed to last up to 5 years 3 would be more like it though . But Like I said before they will have faster and faster ones coming out every 2 months so what would really be the point ? They have pretty much taped all they can out of the mechanical hard drives so they are as fast as they are and that is about all there is for them . but with new tech changing as fast as it is the SSD drives will be moving forward so fast that it would be hard to keep up . Hell sandforce came out and I had just bought what I though was the fastest one out there from Intel ! Boy was I surprised I took it back and bought a monitor ! I was really that pissed off !


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> I am no expert in these matters but it seems to be more related to how one initially loads the OS and bios settings.



Meaning...?

No offense, but could you be a little more specific, please?

'Initially loads the OS' as in installs the OS?

'BIOS settings', for example...?

Thanks


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> Meaning...?
> 
> No offense, but could you be a little more specific, please?
> 
> ...



When you load OS configure sata as AHCI, not IDE for a ssd. Enable quick boot in your bios settings. (Disable anything that would hinder you from getting to desktop rapidly)

You can also shave a second or two by running it in selective or diagnostic mode.


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> OK then, what are the determining factors?



Hard drive, BIOS, mobo, and boot manager. I spend a decent amount of time waiting for GRUB to come up.

Tips:
Disable unused on-board stuff (in BIOS)
Disable unused ports, maybe a hard drive dedicated to Linux (in Device Manager)
Unplug unnecessary drives (CD, DVD, USB drive)
Defrag & optimize
Go to device manager, open Primary IDE channel, Advanced Settings tab, on device that doesn't have "Device Type" greyed out select "None" instead of auto. Repeat for Secondary IDE channel.
Go to your BIOS and make sure your SATA ports are on IDE type (or whatever it's called) instead of SATA.

EDIT:
These have only been tested on Windows XP.


----------



## de.das.dude (Feb 15, 2011)

freaksavior said:


> i'm likely getting two 128gb c300's so i'm sure I could.



i meant beat him up.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> When you load OS configure sata as AHCI, not IDE for a ssd. Enable quick boot in your bios settings. (Disable anything that would hinder you from getting to desktop rapidly)
> 
> You can also shave a second or two by running it in selective or diagnostic mode.



OK.

I have 4 G2 64GB SSD in RAID 0

DVD drive is AHCI

I do not believe I have a quick boot option in BIOS, but I will check later

I did try disabling all startup items except those required for Windows to load.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

hellrazor said:


> Hard drive, BIOS, mobo, and boot manager. I spend a decent amount of time waiting for GRUB to come up.
> 
> Tips:
> Disable unused on-board stuff (in BIOS)
> ...



I will look through the BIOS to see what I can disable

No IDE devices present in PC

I suppose I could try unplugging the DVD drive for one reboot

SSD drives are RAID 0

Windows 7 x64.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

I got slower boot times when I tried Raid 0...


----------



## n-ster (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> I got slower boot times when I tried Raid 0...



I think we understood that and even established why 

reminder: 1 more HDD to find+ RAID controller loading


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

n-ster said:


> I think we understood that and even established why
> 
> reminder: 1 more HDD to find+ RAID controller loading



That was for Acrtucas...

Check this out... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BucIjXZVxXo


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)




----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> That was for Acrtucas...
> 
> Check this out... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BucIjXZVxXo



Thanks, I am beginning to get a better grasp of what is going on.

So far, it appears that minimal hardware, minimal software, BIOS tweaks are the main keys to fast boot times, correct?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

http://www.techyard.net/improve-windows7-bootup-time/


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> http://www.techyard.net/improve-windows7-bootup-time/



And I still get 52 seconds?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Here you can clearly see someone using BootTimer for Win 7...I still have not been able to get it to work -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbt6KQrr_2M


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Here you can clearly see someone using BootTimer for Win 7...I still have not been able to get it to work -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbt6KQrr_2M



Obviously it works, I have done it four times now, but I cannot seem to get close to your speed?


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> Obviously it works, I have done it four times now, but I cannot seem to get close to your speed?



You have BootTimer working on Win 7? Post a screenshot of your results please.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> You have BootTimer working on Win 7? Post a screenshot of your results please.



My apologies, I see you were referring to a different application than the one you initially posted.

Nonetheless:







Presumably this screenshot is of the application you are now referring to, or is it something else?


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 15, 2011)

rick I was running your timer in W7...no need^^ guess I should look closer at the screen shot


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> My apologies, I see you were referring to a different application than the one you initially posted.
> 
> Nonetheless:
> 
> ...



That looks like BootTimer - Have a link where you got it? None of mine will run for me.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> That looks like BootTimer - Have a link where you got it? None of mine will run for me.



I simply Googled 'BootTimer'.

http://www.planetsoft.org/


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

I have tried it from that source and it still will give me no result.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> I have tried it from that source and it still will give me no result.



Hmm...all I can say is; it works for me.

Maybe you tweaked your Windows a little too much?


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 15, 2011)

From ArcTucas' link...

Did find it strange, it started fine and reboots my lappy, but when it returns to windows I have to allow the utility to run again after boot, but then it showed me my time.

W7 64 Ult. Lenovo Y530 lappy.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

Let me try it on the laptop...


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

sneekypeet said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/110215/boottimer.png
> 
> From ArcTucas' link...
> 
> ...



I presumed that is the proper operation of the application?

And, I am ashamed my rig gets beaten by a laptop.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

It works on the laptop but not the desktop. I will try another OS install tonight.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> I am ashamed my rig gets beaten by a laptop.



It is on a 120GB X25-M SSD, dont feel so bad

Something I found helps boot times is to restet the PC before the test, the reboot and run it right away. Most times the shut down is what kills times


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 15, 2011)

I guess I should be proud then as my laptop has a conventional 500GB hdd.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 15, 2011)

Gotta consider this is very un-optimized. Literally no changes from install other than mandatory SSD changes and 45 processes showing in task manager. Still on a mechanical drive, thats very snappy.


----------



## Arctucas (Feb 15, 2011)

sneekypeet said:


> It is on a 120GB X25-M SSD, dont feel so bad
> 
> Something I found helps boot times is to restet the PC before the test, the reboot and run it right away. Most times the shut down is what kills times



And here I thought my G2s were fast. But I suppose the RAID0 is slowing them down?


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 15, 2011)

Arctucas said:


> And here I thought my G2s were fast. But I suppose the RAID0 is slowing them down?



I actually just cloned the 320GB Hitachi 5400 RPM drive to this (was only using about 50-60GB). but I assume with less checks, it should be a bit faster. 

As for if it is correct, IDK. I got 30 seconds from the app in the OP last night, ran your link and thats what I got, it was repeatable two other times. Still not saying tis right, but its at least wrong the same 3 times...lol


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 15, 2011)

Decided to play with just the boot up one first run.







now how do I go about making this quicker?

Updating system specs now to include my ssd.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 16, 2011)

Panther - Do some checking on bios updates for Asrock...some of their boards support a utility that allows a 4 second boot.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 16, 2011)

Fresh OS install - Win 7 64


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 16, 2011)

rickss69 said:


> Panther - Do some checking on bios updates for Asrock...some of their boards support a utility that allows a 4 second boot.



Ahhh you see that's just asrock being incredibly cheaky monkeys.

You can tell this from reading the warnings when choosing which "special" boot option you prefer.

Essentially 4 second boot is sleep. 

The computer HAS to remain attached the mains. 

The other quick boot they have is hybernate. ( infact this one is worse than normal windows, it has to restart the computer load windows and then shutdown to do this, often it won't load up again as well)

Both of these are already built into the operating system and have done for a long time.

I think it's just a way for Asrock to rope in sukas who don't know about sleep mode


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 16, 2011)

Give me a bit - I'm still looking for more tweaks. 

EDIT: I have been unable to get it any lower...must research some more.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 16, 2011)

No luck yet getting the desktop quicker but I did improve the laptop some.


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 16, 2011)

Also, make sure you're hard drive is the first boot device (if you haven't already).


----------

