Here Is What You Need To Run Windows 10

[josejones]

Anybody know anything about Windows 10 boot times? It's suppose to be upgraded or faster than Windows 8.1.

What about driver support for the new NVMe SSD's and M.2's? What is the cap from Windows 10 on the first generation of NVMe SSD's - 20 Gbps, 32 Gbps 40 Gbps or what?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/280390-32-sata-satae/page-2

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1843654

Bud i read you comment and i decided to finally time my Windows 10 Tech Preview boot time. It takes 22 seconds to reach password request and PC is fully functional the second the password in. There's ZERO wait time once you are in.

My system is

Intel i7-4970,
MSI Gaming 5 (mobo),
850 Pro 256 GBs SSD
EVGA GTX 960

And this is just the technical preview. I am being dead serious, MS finally did something right.

High-5, Larry Litmanen

 

[USAFRet]

There is no "big stink over boot times." Windows 8 made changes to the way Windows boots that can drastically reduce startup time. Microsoft claims that Windows 10 improved upon that so, I am curious about it.

Boot-up time may not be an issue for some but for many of us it is, especially if one does NOT have an SSD or when trouble-shooting or re-formating and many re-boots are necessary. A quick bootup can drastically reduce time for those who work on computers and "time is money."

If you enjoy 5 or 10 minute boot times then good for you.

5 or 10 minutes is the other software, not the OS.

 

[erendofe]

well the secure boot requirement t stopped 3 computers in my house from upgrading. nothing like handing out free rocks !!!

 

[josejones]

"5 or 10 minutes is the other software, not the OS"

Not when updating and the rest of what I said:

"Windows 8 made changes to the way Windows boots that can drastically reduce startup time. Microsoft claims that Windows 10 improved upon that so, I am curious about it.

Boot-up time may not be an issue for some but for many of us it is, especially if one does NOT have an SSD or when trouble-shooting or re-formating and many re-boots are necessary. A quick bootup can drastically reduce time for those who work on computers and "time is money."

 

[USAFRet]

"5 or 10 minutes is the other software, not the OS"

Not when updating and the rest of what I said:

"Windows 8 made changes to the way Windows boots that can drastically reduce startup time. Microsoft claims that Windows 10 improved upon that so, I am curious about it.

Boot-up time may not be an issue for some but for many of us it is, especially if one does NOT have an SSD or when trouble-shooting or re-formating and many re-boots are necessary. A quick bootup can drastically reduce time for those who work on computers and "time is money."

Yes, Win 8/8.1 boot is/was faster than previous.
But 5-10 minutes is NOT the OS.

I just tried and timed my old, slow, cheeesy, dualboot Toshiba laptop. Minimal software install. Same hard drive (2 partitions)
Win 10 - under 30 seconds from BIOS to desktop
Win 7 - 1 minute from BIOS to desktop

If we are also doing updates, then all bets are off.

 

[josejones]

Well, my Windows 7 without an SSD and minimized background resources still takes about 3.5 minutes even without updates and it's *NOT* due to any other software at all.

 

[josejones]

Well, wait a minute, I just checked and it took almost 2 minutes with a 6 year old MSI 790FX-GD70 with SATA 2.0 and a disc HD before I was able to actually open any windows. But geez, when I'm trouble-shooting or whatever - it can take quite a long time and it's not that big of a deal unless I have to re-boot many times, then, it feels like I'm waiting 10 minutes to be able to actually start using anything and that gets real old real quick.

I always push the button to boot-up and then go do something for a while.

I hope to be able to do a Skylake build this fall/winter and get a new NVMe SSD. Nevertheless, a quick boot up time can be very helpful when working on computers.

 

[USAFRet]

'almost 2 minutes' is a whole lot different than '5-10 minutes'.

It may feel like it takes ages, but until you actually time it, it does not count.

 

[ceh4702]

Go ahead and try to use 1 gb to run 32 bit OS. You will be sorry. Be realistic. Just dont expect to be able to open any real programs.

 

[NightLight]

i no longer care about the bad comments about win 8.1 and 10. go ahead, stay stuck in you old ways, you are probably dinosaurs yourselves. go run linux or macos you idiots. yes i'm drunk, but it's the truth

 

[josejones]

Why do I have no option to reply to comments?

'almost 2 minutes' is a whole lot different than '5-10 minutes'.

It may feel like it takes ages, but until you actually time it, it does not count.

No, it's exactly what I said previously, my 6 year old MSI 790FX-GD70 with SATA 2.0 and a disc HD did take about 3.5 minutes to boot up until I turned off as many background and other processes etc I could and that got it down to 2 minutes. When trouble-shooting or during updates it has taken 5 to 10 minutes before. Nevertheless, that's not what any of this is about.

I'm just trying to get confirmation that Windows 10 boot time is better than 8 and especially 7. Microsoft has said that they worked on faster boot times with 8 and that they built upon that to make 10 boot-up even faster. But now, I can't find that Microsoft link.

 

[somebodyspecial]

There is no "big stink over boot times." Windows 8 made changes to the way Windows boots that can drastically reduce startup time. Microsoft claims that Windows 10 improved upon that so, I am curious about it.

Boot-up time may not be an issue for some but for many of us it is, especially if one does NOT have an SSD or when trouble-shooting or re-formating and many re-boots are necessary. A quick bootup can drastically reduce time for those who work on computers and "time is money."

If you enjoy 5 or 10 minute boot times then good for you.

If you "WORK" on computers and haven't ponied up the $55-90 for a 128-256GB SSD you should quit, as your business is bad. My boot time is seconds (under 20 I think, win7 64, xp64 same story) and I only have a 128GB, the 240-256 speeds things up more. Get a new boot drive. Even a poor person can afford $50 for such a massive improvement in a lot of stuff as a boot drive. If time is really money to you (and you're doing WORK on this pc, as in earning money with it in some way), this should have been a no brainer ages ago. Mushkin 240GB $83 right now on newegg. Many are under $90.

 

[soldier44]

Skipped 8 and glad I did. This will be what 8 should have been. Bring on DX12 and the games that support it.

 

[FashionablyLate]

What? NEED UEFI? that CANT be right... but may be that's the MS cunning plan.. "yes win 7 and and 8 can all have it as free update" knowing full well that most cant update as will need new Mobo!!! that's got to be wrong. EVEN MS cant be THAT crazy.. can they?

OH NO!!!!!, you mean you need tech that is 4-5 years old to be able to install windows. Now that is just garbage. I should be able to install windows 10 on my old commodore. MS is just crazy for this.

or crap you mean I can not update my xp machine to run windows 10. OH NO!!!! My 12 year old hardware should really be ready for windows 10.

I wonder if you too have an old DOT matrix printer that you use for printing office 365 word file.

These same people are probably the first in line to get new smartphone hardware and latest version of Android without complaining, but when MS says you really should be upgrading your hardware, it's blasphemy. They probably also complain that a new AAA game has lofty hardware requirements, but the game doesn't run well on their old system. I don't have sympathy for people with double standards for PC hardware/OS's.

 

[scout_03]

for a fast start up disable those auto update software check on start up that help .45 sec to 1 min on start up win 7 .

 

[josejones]

somebodyspecial: "If you "WORK" on computers and haven't ponied up the $55-90 for a 128-256GB SSD you should quit, as your business is bad. My boot time is seconds (under 20 I think, win7 64, xp64 same story) and I only have a 128GB, the 240-256 speeds things up more. Get a new boot drive. Even a poor person can afford $50 for such a massive improvement in a lot of stuff as a boot drive. If time is really money to you (and you're doing WORK on this pc, as in earning money with it in some way), this should have been a no brainer ages ago. Mushkin 240GB $83 right now on newegg. Many are under $90. "

God damn it, this isn't about me or my own PC. I'm asking legit questions about the improved boot-up time for Windows 10 that Microsoft themselves have claimed. What is wrong you people?

I will *NOT* be spending a dime on any SSD's until the new NVMe interface is released, PERIOD, end of story, case closed, not open for negotiation.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF OR LINKS FROM MICROSOFT DISCUSSING WINDOWS 10 IMPROVED BOOT TIMES? Links please.

 

[USAFRet]

On my personal test box (old cheesy Toshiba laptop), little difference between Win 8/8.1 and Win 10 for 'boot time'
Significantly faster than Win 7.

These guys seem to say the same.
Trustedreviews: http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/windows-10-vs-windows-8-1
Windows 10 vs Windows 8 – Performance
One of the key improvement of Windows 8 over Windows 7 was actually performance. It booted quicker than Windows 7, went in and out of standby quicker and was often quicker in general use too.

Sadly, it doesn’t look like Windows 10 will have any particularly big improvements in this area but will instead build on the foundations already laid by Windows 8. It’s one of the few areas where Windows 8 can claim parity with the new OS.


I have not found anything, direct from MS, specifically relating to improving boot time performance over Windows 8/8.1.

 

[none12345]

OEM UEFI mandate, thats fine by me. Who wouldnt want a new system with one.

But, there are plenty of systems that people still use that are more then powerful enough for modern software, that do not have a UEFI bios. So, it would be utterly stupid to make that a requirement. I dont believe it is a requirement, just saying that its stupid to want everyone to throw away their computers just because they are a few years old.

Ya, ya i know, it use to be common. When computer power was sometimes doubling every 6 months, it was a different story. But now with yearly increase of like 5-10%, systems last a LOT longer. A 6 year old system(ignoring graphics for a moment) is not that much slower then a current system. A 6 year old system with a modern graphics card is not very far behind a brand new equivalent priced system.

Pretty much if its got a dual core+ and a modern graphics card, its plenty capable for todays software. If you dont play games, you wont need the modern graphics card.

 

[yoji]

OEM UEFI mandate, thats fine by me. Who wouldnt want a new system with one.

But, there are plenty of systems that people still use that are more then powerful enough for modern software, that do not have a UEFI bios. So, it would be utterly stupid to make that a requirement. I dont believe it is a requirement, just saying that its stupid to want everyone to throw away their computers just because they are a few years old.

Ya, ya i know, it use to be common. When computer power was sometimes doubling every 6 months, it was a different story. But now with yearly increase of like 5-10%, systems last a LOT longer. A 6 year old system(ignoring graphics for a moment) is not that much slower then a current system. A 6 year old system with a modern graphics card is not very far behind a brand new equivalent priced system.

Pretty much if its got a dual core+ and a modern graphics card, its plenty capable for todays software. If you dont play games, you wont need the modern graphics card.

+1 .. well said sir.. totally agree. My 6 year old i7 920 @ 3.3Ghz, orig 6GB tri channel mem, upgraded with SSD (even if neuterd a bit by SATA 2 on MOBO) and new graphics card (GTX 960) does a very good job.
I will get a new PC when Win 10 comes out.. but be nice to donate this one to my daughter with fresh Win 10 install. .

Cheers

 

[somebodyspecial]

somebodyspecial: "If you "WORK" on computers and haven't ponied up the $55-90 for a 128-256GB SSD you should quit, as your business is bad. My boot time is seconds (under 20 I think, win7 64, xp64 same story) and I only have a 128GB, the 240-256 speeds things up more. Get a new boot drive. Even a poor person can afford $50 for such a massive improvement in a lot of stuff as a boot drive. If time is really money to you (and you're doing WORK on this pc, as in earning money with it in some way), this should have been a no brainer ages ago. Mushkin 240GB $83 right now on newegg. Many are under $90. "

God damn it, this isn't about me or my own PC. I'm asking legit questions about the improved boot-up time for Windows 10 that Microsoft themselves have claimed. What is wrong you people?

I will *NOT* be spending a dime on any SSD's until the new NVMe interface is released, PERIOD, end of story, case closed, not open for negotiation.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF OR LINKS FROM MICROSOFT DISCUSSING WINDOWS 10 IMPROVED BOOT TIMES? Links please.

Considering Win10 isn't coming until sept, nobody can really answer your question for 1/2 yr or more. Anandtech said they don't even believe it will be done then unless they have a version baked up that isn't being handed to users, as the product is so unfinished right now. The shipping product could be quite different 6-9 months from now. New build seems to be chock full of problems too at anandtech comments (and breaking drivers etc). Your question will be legit in 6-9 months maybe.

NVMe won't gain much for home users (how many users use them like enterprise?), without them needing some kind of niche setup at home (mysql database or something?). I don't run a netflix vid serving operation at home or a massive database. What am I looking for boot times of 10-15sec vs. 20? 😉 As an example, samsung's rundown on NVMe uses:
https://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/product/flash-ssd/nvmessd
MZWEI400HAGM samsung 400GB NVMe $1100. Intel has the DC P3500 for $600 or so at 400GB. Not sure how many people will be jumping on these as they're called DC (for a reason). This kind of bandwidth is great for datacenter etc, but home use its not going to change your life or be cost effective.

From the tone of your posts (swearing, caps etc, "why no responses to my post"), maybe save the $55-90 on SSD and get an anger management appt. 😉

 

[synphul]

Wow, 5-10min boot times? That's not normal. A cold boot for me is under 1min with a 7200rpm hdd (no ssd) booting win7 and that's including loading hwmonitor, steam, yahoo messenger, printscreen (screen cap utility) and antivirus. If win8.1 boots even faster it should be even less of an issue. I have another machine that's used for heavy graphics work, between the additional 8gb of ram and a 240gb os/programs drive - yes, it's a little more responsive under heavy load (aka, photoshop, several browsers, illustrator, bridge etc etc). I'm not saying ssd's are bad, but had I not gotten it on sale for $60 I might have been a little peeved paying closer to $120-150.

 

[eldragon0]

Linux is looking great, no metro display either.

I am running W10 Tech Preview on my PC, you do not need to use Metro at all.

Believe me it is THAT good, MS did a wonderful job.

I hated W8, whoever was behind it should hide in shame, but W10 is honestly great.

Anybody know anything about Windows 10 boot times? It's suppose to be upgraded or faster than Windows 8.1.

What about driver support for the new NVMe SSD's and M.2's? What is the cap from Windows 10 on the first generation of NVMe SSD's - 20 Gbps, 32 Gbps 40 Gbps or what?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/280390-32-sata-satae/page-2

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1843654

I'm booting off an old intel 25M (I think >_<) SSD. Boot times off fresh install on 8.1 was 7.8 seconds, and off a fresh install of windows 10, was also 7.8 seconds.

 

[gggplaya]

What is the big stink over boot times? Is it because so many people are running this on a laptop or something where it's being turned on every time they use the system or am I one of the oddballs who doesn't turn my pc on/off multiple times a day? People seem really jazzed about boot times and I guess I just don't get it. It's such a minor portion of being on a pc or seems like it anyway.

I like linux well enough, it's been the same old story for the past decade though. Troubled by driver updates and support - often times a version or two behind win based systems. It's gotten better but until it has full driver support for various things it's difficult to jump ship from windows completely.

ROFL. I boot once a month usually, and only if I'm totally annoyed by patch Tuesday and don't delay installing them (family members badgering me to give them the go ahead so I finally do it on my units, then give a thumbs up...LOL). Win7 64 is just that good, and I'm too busy to boot most days it seems when patch day hits. You sir, are not alone 😉 I'll even say I've went MONTHS. Most of the time when I go down it's only due to plugging/unplugging so many drives, I think windows ends up confused so I reboot...LOL. Between flash drives, and ~18 externals there's lots of crap I put windows through at times. IF you're protected (AV+threatfire+firewall, behind a router or two also depending on the room), patch Tuesday means nothing. My PC sleeps, never really goes off.

Boot times mean absolutely NOTHING to me (since win9x versions pretty much). SSD=who cares, and today's OS doesn't need reboots like win9x.

Thank you for wasting electricity. But i guess if your parents are paying the bill, who cares.

You also need to get yourself a good NAS drive.

 

[SamSerious]

It is always the same. Google has already officially stopped support for Android 4.3 and nobody really complains about it. But when MS says, non-UEFI-Boards won't be supported by Windows 10, people are starting to get furios - although even Win7 is still supported?!
Okay, so Google is always good and MS always bad? Come on, guys...

 

[josejones]

somebodyspecial: "From the tone of your posts (swearing, caps etc, "why no responses to my post"), maybe save the $55-90 on SSD and get an anger management appt."

somebodyspecial, you are not helpful at all so, just stop responding to me. AGAIN, this isn't about me or my 6 year old PC. I'm asking legit questions about the improved boot-up time for Windows 10 that Microsoft themselves have claimed, which you obviously cannot answer.

Waiting until Windows 10 is already out would obviously be too late for Microsoft to make any serious adjustments, if any are even needed. So that's not helpful either.

With the new NVMe interface I find it difficult to believe it won't make any difference at all, since they're 6x faster than other SSD's.