XP pro vs XP home performance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marten Kemp
  • Start date Start date
M

Marten Kemp

I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro? I've defined a userid and
turned off all the performance-sucking feechurs that I
know about and the Home machines are *still* slower.
 
Marten Kemp said:
I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro?
Click to expand...

No reason for that to happen. The systems are nearly identical. Pro
can join a domain and has some security features that Home doesn't. If
something is slowing down your relative's machine it isn't the OS.
It's entirely possible that you have snazzier hardware on your Pro
machine than they do on their Home machine.
 
Marten said:
I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro? I've defined a userid and
turned off all the performance-sucking feechurs that I
know about and the Home machines are *still* slower.
Click to expand...

XP Pro and XP Home, when configured correctly and optimized and running on
similar machines, have exactly the same performance. Your relatives'
machines are probably running extra programs/processes - even though you
think you turned things off - and some of those programs may be necessary
for those specific computers. Also, the amount of RAM is a significant
factor even if the processors are the same. I also don't know your level of
computer expertise and whether you would recognize malware running or not.
I say that not to offend you in any way, but naturally malware can be a
factor.

Without being able to see your relatives' machines, that's as specific as I
can get. Bottom line, performance is not a factor between the two operating
system versions - the hardware and third-party software (drivers, programs,
processes) are.

Malke
 
Marten Kemp said:
I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro? I've defined a userid and
turned off all the performance-sucking feechurs that I
know about and the Home machines are *still* slower.
Click to expand...


Differences between Home and Pro do not relate to speed..


--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
all things considered, IF there is a significant difference in program
loading and startup, I would look to see if the hard drive controller
had reverted to PIO instead of DMA access. (Device Manager, IDE
controllers, primary channel, Properties, advanced.
 
Marten said:
I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro? I've defined a userid and
turned off all the performance-sucking feechurs that I
know about and the Home machines are *still* slower.
Click to expand...

Thanks to all who replied. I have a Dell Dimension 2400
out in the garage from a friend of my sister who replaced
it 'cause "it was running too slowly." One Of These Days
I'll bring it in and investigate - it'll probably be some
combination of PIO mode, malware and misconfiguration.
I'll post the results if there's any interest.

Then I'll load it up as a Debian Linux webserver to
replace the dual 650 P-II Proliant that I'm using now.

(http://enthusiasts.dyn-o-saur.com lives on it,
http://enthusiasts.dyn-o-saur.com/testing/index.shtml
links to XP Pro system ("mount -t smbfs"), and
http://enthusiasts.dyn-o-saur.com/testing/test-0.php
talks to a MySQL database on XP Pro. Yeah, I'm kind
of a geek.)
 
I run XP Pro but I've been coerced into a bit of problem
solving on relatives' XP Home machines with roughly similar
chip speeds. Is it my imagination or does Home run
significantly slower than Pro?
Click to expand...


It's your imagination. There is *no* difference in speed between them.
They are essentially identical except that Professional has extra
features (mostly related to security and networking) missing from
Home. Most home users don't need and would never use these extra
features and will see no benefits by upgrading.

For details go to

http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/windowsxp_home_pro.asp

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/whichxp.asp>

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/choosing2.asp

Also note another point, not included in any of the above:
Professional allows ten concurrent network connections, and Home only
five.


I've defined a userid and
turned off all the performance-sucking feechurs that I
know about and the Home machines are *still* slower.
Click to expand...


If you are seeing a performance difference between them, it is caused
by hardware differences, different configurations, or malware
infection.
 
Back
Top