Pathetic Vista download performance

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Performance' started by Guest, Sep 27, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the same file
    with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at 50KB/s and Vista at
    8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result. I suspect its because of all
    the extra security. It makes Vista unuseable for me so I'll have to
    investigate further. Apart from that, Vista seems fine. Colin
     
    Guest, Sep 27, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Guest

    Robert Moir Guest

    Spirefm wrote:
    > I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the
    > same file with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at
    > 50KB/s and Vista at 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result.
    > I suspect its because of all the extra security. It makes Vista
    > unuseable for me so I'll have to investigate further. Apart from
    > that, Vista seems fine. Colin


    I really don't think the extra security will affect download performance
    like that, but I do agree that network performance does seem slower than in
    XP. If it were a security issue, I would expect it to take longer to start
    an operation (due to negociation of various security layers, etc) but then
    to perform fine once the operation had commenced.
     
    Robert Moir, Sep 27, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Yes. I turned off everythink I could think off, including AV but it is still
    useless. I'm hoping that someone has a better Vista knowledge than I,
    otherwise Vista is no good to me at all. I've gone back to XP for the time
    being.

    "Robert Moir" wrote:

    > Spirefm wrote:
    > > I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the
    > > same file with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at
    > > 50KB/s and Vista at 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result.
    > > I suspect its because of all the extra security. It makes Vista
    > > unuseable for me so I'll have to investigate further. Apart from
    > > that, Vista seems fine. Colin

    >
    > I really don't think the extra security will affect download performance
    > like that, but I do agree that network performance does seem slower than in
    > XP. If it were a security issue, I would expect it to take longer to start
    > an operation (due to negociation of various security layers, etc) but then
    > to perform fine once the operation had commenced.
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Guest, Sep 27, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    Conor Guest

    In article <>,
    Spirefm says...
    > I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the same file
    > with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at 50KB/s and Vistaat
    > 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result. I suspect its because ofall
    > the extra security. It makes Vista unuseable for me so I'll have to
    > investigate further. Apart from that, Vista seems fine. Colin
    >

    Makes zero difference to me.

    --
    Conor

    I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.

    Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
    http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
     
    Conor, Sep 27, 2006
    #4
  5. Guest

    Conor Guest

    In article <>,
    Spirefm says...
    > Yes. I turned off everythink I could think off, including AV but it is still
    > useless. I'm hoping that someone has a better Vista knowledge than I,
    > otherwise Vista is no good to me at all. I've gone back to XP for the time
    > being.
    >

    Turn off IPv6.


    --
    Conor

    I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.

    Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
    http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
     
    Conor, Sep 27, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    Guest Guest

    No luck with turning off IPv6 either, but thanks for trying. Colin

    "Conor" wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Spirefm says...
    > > Yes. I turned off everythink I could think off, including AV but it is still
    > > useless. I'm hoping that someone has a better Vista knowledge than I,
    > > otherwise Vista is no good to me at all. I've gone back to XP for the time
    > > being.
    > >

    > Turn off IPv6.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Conor
    >
    > I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.
    >
    > Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
    > http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
    >
     
    Guest, Sep 27, 2006
    #6
  7. http://www.dslreports.com download Dr.TCP.. run their tweak test... enter in
    the suggested values and restart networking.

    Windows does *not* come optimized for broadband connections out of the
    box... this step must be taken to squeeze as much speed out of your
    connection as possible... for me, the difference was noticeable!!

    "Spirefm" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the same
    >file
    > with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at 50KB/s and Vista
    > at
    > 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result. I suspect its because of
    > all
    > the extra security. It makes Vista unuseable for me so I'll have to
    > investigate further. Apart from that, Vista seems fine. Colin
     
    Bryan Handfield, Sep 28, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    The tweak test wouldn't run and, without it Dr TCp is no good. HOWEVER I've
    cleared the slow downloads (and 'LowID in Emule P2P) by disabling 'Protected
    Mode' in Internet Explorer/ security settings. Speeds now match XP byte for
    byte.
    Thanks anyway! Colin

    "Bryan Handfield" wrote:

    > http://www.dslreports.com download Dr.TCP.. run their tweak test... enter in
    > the suggested values and restart networking.
    >
    > Windows does *not* come optimized for broadband connections out of the
    > box... this step must be taken to squeeze as much speed out of your
    > connection as possible... for me, the difference was noticeable!!
    >
    > "Spirefm" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the same
    > >file
    > > with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at 50KB/s and Vista
    > > at
    > > 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result. I suspect its because of
    > > all
    > > the extra security. It makes Vista unuseable for me so I'll have to
    > > investigate further. Apart from that, Vista seems fine. Colin

    >
     
    Guest, Sep 28, 2006
    #8
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    "Bryan Handfield" wrote:

    > http://www.dslreports.com download Dr.TCP.. run their tweak test... enter in
    > the suggested values and restart networking.
    >
    > Windows does *not* come optimized for broadband connections out of the
    > box...


    Windows Vista TCP/IP parameters are dynamically adjusted i.e you don't need
    Dr. TCP or other similar utilities
     
    Guest, Sep 30, 2006
    #9
  10. Guest

    Guest Guest

    That's strange. I seem to have better download speeds with Vista. I am
    clocing downloads up to 100 and 150k through my Cable internet. My downloads
    acre cruising.

    "Spirefm" wrote:

    > I ran a comparison last night between XP and Vista downloading the same file
    > with the same .exe file and the same settings. XP ran at 50KB/s and Vista at
    > 8KB/s. I repeated the test with the same result. I suspect its because of all
    > the extra security. It makes Vista unuseable for me so I'll have to
    > investigate further. Apart from that, Vista seems fine. Colin
     
    Guest, Oct 5, 2006
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Christian

    Vista 5808 performance bad

    Christian, Mar 7, 2006, in forum: Windows Vista Performance
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    673
  2. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    472
    Guest
    Jul 24, 2006
  3. Guest

    Windows Vista Performance

    Guest, Sep 27, 2006, in forum: Windows Vista Performance
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    436
    Guest
    Sep 30, 2006
  4. Guest

    Horrible Windows Vista download/browsing performance

    Guest, Aug 25, 2007, in forum: Windows Vista Performance
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    235
  5. HAL9000

    performance monitor: low performance on windows aero

    HAL9000, Nov 23, 2007, in forum: Windows Vista Performance
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    543
    Mike Hall - MVP
    Nov 26, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page