XP Computer is now running slower than I ever dreamed it could. Help!

[wilby]

I have a desktop XP pro SP3 that has always run quite well for me. It
has a sata 80 GB drive and 2 GB of ddr2 ram. The cpu is Intel E-6300 duo
core 1.86.

It began running slow several weeks after I moved it to a desk where my
wife uses it. She uses MS Office 2003 and IE-8. That's about all she
ever uses.

I can watch HDTUNE run as it scans the timing of the hard drive and it
starts around 50 to 60 and that's fine however doing almost anything
else at the same time drops the rate to somewhere between 1 and 3.

If I start CCleaner, and click "analyze", I'll see the files go past me
on the screen so slowly that I can go make coffee, and drink some of it
before the analyze finishes. It was never at all like that when I had it
at my desk.

I've used Malwarebytes, Super Antispyware, and Norton 2010 on it looking
for malware, nothing ever is found.

I can watch the cpu use during the slow CCleaner analyze and the cpu use
never gets at all high.

I even tried a new hard drive that didn't make a bit of difference.

To me it feels like an old MFM drive that has it's interleave set to a
very inefficient setting. I'm getting closer to tossing it into the
dumpster every day.

Any suggestions?

Thanks, Wilby

 

[John Wunderlich]

I have a desktop XP pro SP3 that has always run quite well for me.
It has a sata 80 GB drive and 2 GB of ddr2 ram. The cpu is Intel
E-6300 duo core 1.86.

It began running slow several weeks after I moved it to a desk
where my wife uses it. She uses MS Office 2003 and IE-8. That's
about all she ever uses.

I can watch HDTUNE run as it scans the timing of the hard drive
and it starts around 50 to 60 and that's fine however doing almost
anything else at the same time drops the rate to somewhere between
1 and 3.

If I start CCleaner, and click "analyze", I'll see the files go
past me on the screen so slowly that I can go make coffee, and
drink some of it before the analyze finishes. It was never at all
like that when I had it at my desk.

I've used Malwarebytes, Super Antispyware, and Norton 2010 on it
looking for malware, nothing ever is found.

I can watch the cpu use during the slow CCleaner analyze and the
cpu use never gets at all high.

I even tried a new hard drive that didn't make a bit of
difference.

To me it feels like an old MFM drive that has it's interleave set
to a very inefficient setting. I'm getting closer to tossing it
into the dumpster every day.

Any suggestions?

Thanks, Wilby

This is reminiscent of the old problem where, if a disk started
having a few DMA errors, the disk would revert to PIO mode instead of
DMA, slowing it down considerably. This was supposedly corrected at
least to some extent in SP2:

"IDE ATA and ATAPI disks use PIO mode after multiple time-out or CRC
errors occur"
< http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=817472 >

There are other articles that talk to this problem. You might want
to check to see if your Disk has self-downgraded from DMA to PIO
mode...

"DMA reverts to PIO"
< http://winhlp.com/node/10 >

HTH,
John

 

[SC Tom]

I have a desktop XP pro SP3 that has always run quite well for me. It has a
sata 80 GB drive and 2 GB of ddr2 ram. The cpu is Intel E-6300 duo core
1.86.

It began running slow several weeks after I moved it to a desk where my
wife uses it. She uses MS Office 2003 and IE-8. That's about all she ever
uses.

I can watch HDTUNE run as it scans the timing of the hard drive and it
starts around 50 to 60 and that's fine however doing almost anything else
at the same time drops the rate to somewhere between 1 and 3.

If I start CCleaner, and click "analyze", I'll see the files go past me on
the screen so slowly that I can go make coffee, and drink some of it
before the analyze finishes. It was never at all like that when I had it
at my desk.

I've used Malwarebytes, Super Antispyware, and Norton 2010 on it looking
for malware, nothing ever is found.

I can watch the cpu use during the slow CCleaner analyze and the cpu use
never gets at all high.

I even tried a new hard drive that didn't make a bit of difference.

To me it feels like an old MFM drive that has it's interleave set to a
very inefficient setting. I'm getting closer to tossing it into the
dumpster every day.

Any suggestions?

Thanks, Wilby

After checking your DMA/PIO disk settings as per John's suggestion, here are
a couple of articles you may be interested in:

How to start in a "clean boot" state in XP
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310353

How to perform advanced clean-boot troubleshooting in Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316434

Of course, Office isn't going to work while testing it, along with numerous
other programs, but it's a place to start.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per John Wunderlich:

This is reminiscent of the old problem where, if a disk started
having a few DMA errors, the disk would revert to PIO mode instead of
DMA, slowing it down considerably.

+1.

Also, to help nail it down, install Process Explorer. It's a
freebie functional analog of TaskMan.

But, whereas a number of CPU hogs can hide under "System Idle
Process" in TaskMan, Process Explorer gives you more of a
breakdown.

When I had the PIO problem, it showed up as double-digit CPU)
under System Idle Process | Interrupts.

 

[wilby]

I have a desktop XP pro SP3 that has always run quite well for me. It
has a sata 80 GB drive and 2 GB of ddr2 ram. The cpu is Intel E-6300 duo
core 1.86.

It began running slow several weeks after I moved it to a desk where my
wife uses it. She uses MS Office 2003 and IE-8. That's about all she
ever uses.

I can watch HDTUNE run as it scans the timing of the hard drive and it
starts around 50 to 60 and that's fine however doing almost anything
else at the same time drops the rate to somewhere between 1 and 3.

If I start CCleaner, and click "analyze", I'll see the files go past me
on the screen so slowly that I can go make coffee, and drink some of it
before the analyze finishes. It was never at all like that when I had it
at my desk.

I've used Malwarebytes, Super Antispyware, and Norton 2010 on it looking
for malware, nothing ever is found.

I can watch the cpu use during the slow CCleaner analyze and the cpu use
never gets at all high.

I even tried a new hard drive that didn't make a bit of difference.

To me it feels like an old MFM drive that has it's interleave set to a
very inefficient setting. I'm getting closer to tossing it into the
dumpster every day.

Any suggestions?

Thanks, Wilby

So far I've eliminated the PIO possibility, now I'll continue with the
other suggestions.

Thanks, Wilby

 

[MowGreen]

So far I've eliminated the PIO possibility, now I'll continue with the
other suggestions.

Thanks, Wilby

If you have the Norton 2010 installation file/media *and* Product Key,
as an experiment, uninstall Norton 2010, reboot, then run Symantec's
Norton Removal Tool, reboot once more.


Download and run the Norton Removal Tool to uninstall your Norton product
http://us.norton.com/support/kb/web_view.jsp?wv_type=public_web&docurl=20080710133834EN&ln=en_US

Is the system appreciably faster now ?


MowGreen
================
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
================

"Security updates should *never* have *non-security content* prechecked

 

[wilby]

If you have the Norton 2010 installation file/media *and* Product Key,
as an experiment, uninstall Norton 2010, reboot, then run Symantec's
Norton Removal Tool, reboot once more.


Download and run the Norton Removal Tool to uninstall your Norton product
http://us.norton.com/support/kb/web_view.jsp?wv_type=public_web&docurl=20080710133834EN&ln=en_US


Is the system appreciably faster now ?


MowGreen
================
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
================

"Security updates should *never* have *non-security content* prechecked

Mow:
I have the install and the key, I'm tempted to give this a try.

The reason I haven't already done it is the fact that this computer has
operated with Norton IS for more than a year and the slow issues are
only recent. On the other hand, Norton does do plenty of updates and
free upgrades. Something important may have changed.

My Win-7/64 machine didn't slow a bit when I put Norton on it but that's
a different machine in every respect.

My wife is suggesting that this is a great excuse for me to buy her a
nice laptop and to let me use the old XP machine for experimenting with
Linux or maybe donate it to someone that needs it.

Thanks to all who responded.

Wilby

 

[Peter Foldes]

Wilby

Norton is known for slowing down systems. Norton can run on your system without any issues and then hit even after a few years of no issues with it. This is very well know.I call Norton a Russian Roulette and a virus by itself.

Try what Mow posted and let us know

--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[wilby]

If you have the Norton 2010 installation file/media *and* Product Key,
as an experiment, uninstall Norton 2010, reboot, then run Symantec's
Norton Removal Tool, reboot once more.


Download and run the Norton Removal Tool to uninstall your Norton product
http://us.norton.com/support/kb/web_view.jsp?wv_type=public_web&docurl=20080710133834EN&ln=en_US


Is the system appreciably faster now ?


MowGreen
================
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
================

"Security updates should *never* have *non-security content* prechecked

Mow:

OK, I decided to remove Norton IS 2011 (I thought it was 2010) from the
slow computer.
I used XP to remove it and then ran the Norton clean-up tool to finish
the job.

On rebooting after the removal I actually found no difference in speed
of the computer. Norton has a bad name among some people however I am
quite pleased with the 2010 and 2011 versions. It is fast, clean, and
have never had a problem with it.

In years past I did have a Norton that was a real hog but that seems to
be history now.

This slow computer is an Asus that looks like it was one of the first to
have SATA options. The main drive ports are IDE (2 ports, 4 drives) and
then a couple of sata ports added as a bonus. I have to be very careful
in the CMOS setup or it isn't bootable because it is wanting IDE drives
only. I suspect there might be a cmos setting that isn't happy. I might
switch it back to an IDE drive and see what speed I get them.

Thanks, Wilby

 

[wilby]

Wilby

Norton is known for slowing down systems. Norton can run on your system without any issues and then hit even after a few years of no issues with it. This is very well know.I call Norton a Russian Roulette and a virus by itself.

Try what Mow posted and let us know

Hi Peter:

"Norton is a virus", I got a laugh out of that. You might be right and
I've been lucky.

I used Bit Defender 2008 and 2009 and there were very few laughs and
many tears. It was constantly screwing me up and crashing. I must have
reloaded it 50 times, only to crash again in a few days.

One laugh was when BD gave me a big warning that Windows Operating
System was acting in a dangerous manner and that I should remove it.

I posted the message on the BD user forum and it was immediately removed
and a replacement message about how wonderful BD is was substituted.

Thanks, Wilby

 

[Tester]

Wilby,

To me it is a clear case that you need to reformat your HD and start
everything from scratch. This means you need to backup your private
documents, pictures, emails and everything else that you created yourself.

You also need to collate all the serial numbers and CDs and DVDs to
reinstall all your applications like Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop
etc. If you have a printer then you need the CD for the drivers for it.

Best thing is to make a "To Do List" on a spreadsheet with all the
serial numbers written on it.

You are now ready to wipe your disk and start the process all over
again. Don't install "Malwarebytes or Super Antispyware" because they
are completely rubbish. Instead you should use MSE from Microsoft and
it should take care of your security issues. MSE is FREE.

hth

 

[Daave]

Mow:

OK, I decided to remove Norton IS 2011 (I thought it was 2010) from
the slow computer.
I used XP to remove it and then ran the Norton clean-up tool to finish
the job.

On rebooting after the removal I actually found no difference in speed
of the computer. Norton has a bad name among some people however I am
quite pleased with the 2010 and 2011 versions. It is fast, clean, and
have never had a problem with it.

In years past I did have a Norton that was a real hog but that seems
to be history now.

This slow computer is an Asus that looks like it was one of the first
to have SATA options. The main drive ports are IDE (2 ports, 4
drives) and then a couple of sata ports added as a bonus. I have to
be very careful in the CMOS setup or it isn't bootable because it is
wanting IDE drives only. I suspect there might be a cmos setting
that isn't happy. I might switch it back to an IDE drive and see what
speed I get them.

It's certainly worth a try switching it back to IDE.

The newer versions of Norton aren't the resouce hogs they once were.
Then again, a number of us suspected a recent update could have gummed
up the works. Guess that's now ruled out.

Some malware can sneak in, regardless of having Norton running in the
background. This is more likely to happen if there are any security
holes (i.e., absence of the latest XP security patches, older versions
of Java, Flash, and Adobe Reader). So, it's possible you have malware!
And if you have one of the variants that cleverly avoids detection, you
might very well need to flatten and rebuild.

But before you do anything else, I think you should configure a Clean
Boot environment as SC Tom suggested. Then see what your performance is
like.

Finally, what does Task Manager tell you?

 

[wilby]

Tester:

I guess that I really must agree with you about a new install. I've
rarely been able to really fix a Windows system after there were serious
problems. Some times it will look good for a while but only later will
issues start happening.

I'll start finding my install discs and record the software keys.

My wife claims it started after she viewed some training DVD discs that
came from Intermountain Health Care, a big hospital/medical business.
Just because the discs were professionally created doesn't mean that
they were clean.

I will play with the clean boot process but I'm not hopeful.

Peace, Wilby

 

[Tester]

You might also want to look at cloning/imaging the HD AFTER the clean
install so that it acts as a backup. Let us know if you want some info
in this matter. Resetting the system from backup clone images takes
about 20 minutes and so this might be the best approach for the future
disaster recovery strategy.

hth

 

[Daave]

+1

You might also want to look at cloning/imaging the HD AFTER the clean
install so that it acts as a backup. Let us know if you want some
info in this matter. Resetting the system from backup clone images
takes about 20 minutes and so this might be the best approach for the
future disaster recovery strategy.

hth

 

[MowGreen]

Mow:

OK, I decided to remove Norton IS 2011 (I thought it was 2010) from the
slow computer.
I used XP to remove it and then ran the Norton clean-up tool to finish
the job.

On rebooting after the removal I actually found no difference in speed
of the computer. Norton has a bad name among some people however I am
quite pleased with the 2010 and 2011 versions. It is fast, clean, and
have never had a problem with it.

In years past I did have a Norton that was a real hog but that seems to
be history now.

This slow computer is an Asus that looks like it was one of the first to
have SATA options. The main drive ports are IDE (2 ports, 4 drives) and
then a couple of sata ports added as a bonus. I have to be very careful
in the CMOS setup or it isn't bootable because it is wanting IDE drives
only. I suspect there might be a cmos setting that isn't happy. I might
switch it back to an IDE drive and see what speed I get them.

Thanks, Wilby

You're mowst welcome, Wilby. As much as I don't like NIS, I have to
admit that the last 2 versions are not the resource hogs that we all
came to know and *luv* so well in the past.

At the very least, you gave it a shot. I concur with the last couple of
posts ... it's time to wipe, reload, and then image the drive for future
restoration(s).


MowGreen
================
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
================

"Security updates should *never* have *non-security content* prechecked

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per wilby:

So far I've eliminated the PIO possibility, now I'll continue with the
other suggestions.

Did anybody mention indexing having been turned off for C: yet?

Been there, done that.... -)

 

[wilby]

Per wilby:

Did anybody mention indexing having been turned off for C: yet?

Been there, done that.... -)

Pete: I didn't ever think about indexing, it was on. I turned it off and
now will see what happens.

Thanks.

Wilby

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per wilby:

Pete: I didn't ever think about indexing, it was on. I turned it off and
now will see what happens.

I was not clear in my post.

Turning it *Off* seemed to slow down the PC for me.

 

[Daave]

Per wilby:

I was not clear in my post.

Turning it *Off* seemed to slow down the PC for me.

Hmmm, that's odd. Usually the effect is the opposite (to some extent).