[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\PriorityControl]
"IRQ8Priority"=dword:00000001

At first I thougth was just another one thoses lame tweak so I take a shot in dark and try it what heck with all system problem I had last week let see what eles I can broke this week hehe but after run this a bit WoW I did see speed up in just everything.
I like thank Christoph for this one.

i only see System CMOS/real time clock on IRQ8

How could that possibly have an effect on speed?

AlecStaar you know how add in using the Registry Editor then reboot.

Xiven to tell you truth that very good questions I don't know one thing for sure it never dawn me to try System CMOS/Real Time Clock IRQ Priority I have always thougth wouldn't do anything boy was I wrong I guest should done that long time hehehe.

I hope hear good news from you AlecStaar on weather not it work for you.

Tried it myself too. I think we can trust you

I dunno, Windows seems a bit "snappier" but it could well be my imagination... How could I really tell if there's been a speed increase?

don't your apps load faster?

Maybe.. it's hard to tell though

Actually ICQ does seem to start in about 1/2 the time as before.

Thanks for the great hack

Has anyone tried this on NT4? NTDiagnostics doesn't actually show IRQ8 so I'm not sure if my System CMOS/real time clock is actually on that particular IRQ, but I guess it could be.

Thanks

Interesting. I have tried this on 2 seperate systems and it does seem to make the system snappier. The intersting thing is when I did a search of microsofts technet for infor about it I got nothing but a cryptic message at best; somthing to the effect of these options are not listed as they should not be changed by the user. Makes me wonder what other unknown settings aren't listed in Microsofts tech papers....anyway great tip...thanks...

anybody done benchmarks yet to measure the difference?

Well I did some "benchmarks" on program startup times using a stopwatch (I couldn't think of any better way. Tested without the hack first (clean reboot, wait for all disk activity to finish) then with the hack.

Results are:



Hardly conclusive (and certainly not accurate), but it looks like it's pretty much even between the two.

Well, I tried it under NT4 and I must say, things feel a bit snappier, but I really have no hard proof. Outlook seems to load a bit quicker, but everything else, just seems to feel a lil different. This could be my imagination though

I thought i'd just say that there was no noticeable performance difference when i used the registry hack.

I'm sure different sytems have different response levels to the crack.

I Run on a Dell v400, PII 400, 128 PC100, 8mb 2x AGP. Win2K SP2.

I tested on ICQ2000b, Outlook 2000 & other apps.

I'm not saying it doesn't work, I'm sure it does, for one thing you seem so excited:D about it.

Maybe it'd make a difference if i had a PIII, or PC133 RAM or whatever the bottleneck in my sytem may be.

Cheers.

has anyone tried with XP ??

Really weird
It seems that progs load faster ...
Tried:-
- 1stPage html editor, seems to load and quit twice faster
- PhotoShop, opens very fast, same for PaintShop Pro
- Quake3, loads so fast I can no longer see the console window with all the loading log stuff
Irq 8 is shown as being owned by realtime cmos on my system.
I am not sure it is subjective. Apps really seem to load faster.
Is there a way to measure this accurately?
I am puzzled...
If true, this is a great discovery

Makes no difference here whatsoever (which leaves me unsurprised). There seems to be no evidence of anything even reading such a registry key.

Bump!
Anybody else tried it, tested, benchmarked?
Constructive answers please, no "I didn't expected anything from that" bullshit that do not bring any value-add...

Should I type the string in quotes or not?

Just put the text below in a text editor and save as for example irq8.reg then double click on it to load it into the registry

REGEDIT4

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\PriorityControl]
"IRQ8Priority"=dword:00000001

Regards

Ok. But things are a bit faster in WinXP for me.

Tried it with Win98 : I did not notice anything special.
That seems to confirm something may be happening in W2K as I noticed some faster closing of some apps.
Well, it does not do any harm anyway :p

mine says win32 priority seperation and not irq8 is this the same thing?

no, no, you have to add a new dword called IRQ8Priority and set it to 1....