Superfetch - Is It Worth It?

I was just wondering what you guys think about Superfetch, that one thing that comes with Vista.

Is it really worth keeping it on? Does it really speed up performance that much?

I seem to be running out of RAM every now and then when I have a ton (yes, a TON) of tabs open in Firefox (haha). Should I turn off Superfetch so I don't lag like crazy?

This is on Firefox 2.0 by the way. I heard 3.0 is less resource-hogging, but I haven't downloaded that yet. If performance in 3.0 is a lot better, I'll just go ahead with that instead of turning off Superfetch.

 

i dont use it and my computer is fine. the only thing i ever search for is programs from the start menu and that works pretty fast. Unless you search often than i'd say turn it off. ironically this is my 500th post and it got me the search option back on this forum lol.

 

i like super prefetch because alot of the programs i run often start up faster... if your computer needs more ram though it will start emptying the ram so that you can have more available for the requiring process... how much ram do you have?

 

How much RAM are you running?

Superfetch will start seeing more benefits with 2-3 or more GB of RAM, under 2 GB should turn off SF.

 

he's taling about superfetch not indexins

 

IMO Superfetch is an over hyped feature to hide the inefficiency of Windows Vista. Some claim it's needed to properly and efficiently run Vista, total BS. I have it turned off on my Vista machine and it runs fine without it.

Some have also said yeah but why have memory just sit there not being used if you shut of Superfetch. Again, that's BS. Vista's memory management system is dynamic with or without Superfetch. I have 4GB on my laptop and I watch how Vista starts off on boot up with around 325MB in cache. Over a period of time as you open programs the size of that cache will grow dynamically and will shrink dynamically. It's not uncommon to watch my system go from 2.75GB of unused ram go down to 5MB. Then after programs are closed i'll watch a lot of that cache memory get unloaded.

I've also read that Superfetch helps your programs start up faster. That's true and not true. The reason that's true to an extent is that the programs you most likely will use get dumped into memory thanks to those prefetch files. What isn't mentioned is that when you manually call up a program it might take a second or 2 longer without Superfetch. But once you load it into memory it's there. So if you close that program and open it again it will open very quickly as if Superfetch was on. Again to get real simplistic. Superfetch is like a car with an automatic transmission. It does all the shifting for you. Without Superfetch you have to shift the the gears. You still go as fast as you would with an auto transmission except you do more of the work. The bottom line is Vista will work just the same without Superfetch on. It starts off slightly slower without it but will perform very quickly as if it were turned on.

I also put my laptop in standby a lot as I rarely reboot so my laptop performs as snappy as if I had Superfetch turned on.

Superfetch is a marketing tool. If you want to turn it on because it makes you feel better, have at it. I turned it off and i'm all the better for it. No more annoying disk thrashing and prefetch files get created.

 

See this post.

 

Like I said if it makes you guys feel better leave it turned on. IMO Superfetch is a joke and i'm not a believer.

 

iph03n1xi, I think you should try it for yourself to see the differences, cause SF may work for someone, but it doesn't mean it will work for you, SF is not designed for everyone, as you can see there are many mixed feelings about it. Personally, SF works for me.

 

Huh? What exactly does superfetch have to do with search? Hint: Nothing.

Gary

 

Precisely! It all depends on how predictable your usage patterns are. If the first thing you do every time you boot up your machine is to run outlook and excel, then you will indeed see some improvement in speed with superfetch turned on. It is nothing more than anticipatory program loading service. If it correctly anticipates what needs to be loaded, it will feel faster to you. If it is not able to correctly anticipate what is needed, it won't feel any faster. But more importantly, it also won't feel any slower either. Some of the "I know better than professional operating system programmers" advisers here espouse turning it off under the erroneous assumption that it slows things down if left turned on and it is unable to correctly anticipate your usage pattern.

Gary

 

May be, may be not, there other threads talking about the subject, check them out.

 

No one who understands how Superfetch works has ever claimed anything to the contrary. Superfetch is all about improving that "starts off slightly slower" bit you dismiss as inconsequential. When you talk about the fact that when an app is closed it still remains in cache and the next load of the app will be faster if it is still in cache, you are spot on. Superfetch is all about preloading that cache. No more, no less.

Gary

 

I have superfetch off, also virtual memory off, and hibernation off.

And i have had no problems, yet!

 

And I have all of them on and have no problems since July of last year. So what does that tell us? Nothing.

None of these options is about problems or lack thereof. All three of these are about the performance/speed of the OS. In the case of superfetch, its how quickly an often used app loads. With virtual memory it is about how the OS behaves when put under a high memory use stress situation. With hibernation, it is about how long does it take for the machine to reach a ready state and with what configuration of apps already running.

Gary

 

Sorry Gary but i'm not going to fall for any Microsoft Superfetch spin or PR, BS especially when the much maligned OS is Vista in all it's bloated glory. I never put any stock behind 3D benchmark tests that shows how close Vista is in performance to Windows XP. I judge it on my terms i.e. in game performance and FPS while playing. For games XP is the way to go. I don't need to listen to any reviews or look at benchmark scores. Windows XP is still king if you want to play games at max performance.

Superfetch is the same way for me. I don't need to read some engineer's white papers or read some review on the wondrous powers of Superfetch. I have allowed it to cook for several weeks and it was no different than when I installed the OS. It's also not that much different turning it off. You need to read what I said.

Vista's memory management system still works whether Superfetch is on or off. It loads and unloads memory with or without Superfetch on or off albeit at a much slower rate. All available system memory is still utilized whether Superfetch is on or off. As I said earlier without Superfetch on, apps load a tad slower but that changes if you call up the same program or app or pages into memory without a reboot. It loads just as quick as if Superfetch is on.

I'm not convinced and won't be that Superfetch is required to bring out the best performance in Vista. It's not needed.

 

Leaving it ON won't hurt you either.

 

Oh no... here we go again. :twitcy:

 

As well as turning it off.

 

C'mon guys, just flip a coin to decide leave it on or off. :laugh:

 

I did. Maybe you should re-read my reply. I said the ONLY thing Superfetch has ever been claimed to accomplish is to possibly improve that initial load of an app. You are absolutely correct that it does NOTHING to improve the second time you load the same application.

Again I agree. The only thing Superfetch does is try to anticipate what should initially be loaded into memory after you boot the machine. It has no other effect on the memory management.

No one is trying to convince YOU otherwise. I am trying to inform other folks who see your blanket statement that implies no one needs Superfetch that they MIGHT find a different result. I have no doubt that it is not helping you. But nor is it hurting the performance of your machine either. For folks with a consistent repeatable pattern of usage they will see that one or two second difference in response time when they first load an application. To some that difference is tangible. To you it is not. I get it. But don't assume your results and needs are the same as everyone else who uses Vista. Personally, I like the fact that it takes two seconds less to load outlook after a reboot, since it is always the first thing I load.

Gary

 

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe...

I has no impact in performance to leave it on. For SOME folks, and that is the key... some folks, it may help inital load time of the apps you most often use. For other folks it has virtually no effect.

So to me, if it doesn't hurt to leave it on, and it might help to leave it on, then why bother to turn it off? I do get the benefit by leaving it on, Rodknee does not. But he sees no benefit by turning it off either.


Gary

 

At least there are ways to turn it on and off (and in-between settings, too).

 

That's not what I said as I see all benefits in turning it off.

That's one less process loaded on startup. Superfetch offers me no added performance by turning it off and I don't have to deal with the annoying back and forth disk thrashing.

And for the record I have said on several occasions i'm convinced Superfetch is a joke/marketing ploy to compensate for Vista's inefficiencies/bloat-ness. I've said if someone is convinced it's doing them some good by turning it on then more power to them. I'm just not buying into the Superfetch camp.

Something tells me we won't have a choice with W7.

 

Sorry then, I must have misunderstood what you meant when you said "It's also not that much different turning it off." in the first quote above.

BTW disk thrashing is NOT a characteristic of Superfetch. It pretty much does it's work one time and is out of the picture after that.

Gary

 

There will always be a way to modify it in some way. Caching and buffering have been implemented as tuning facilities in computing systems for 40 or 50 years, perhaps longer. Tuning facilities always have knobs somewhere.

 

SF or not SF is the question

 

"Essere et non essere ut est proguntum".... Man I hope I still remember my latin from 40 freakin' years ago. ...big ol' grin...

Gary

 

That just isn't true. If it only did it's thing 1 time, I'd leave it on.

 

Well i'd probably still turn off Suoerfetch. But yeah disk trashing annoyingly happens at any time due to Superfetch. All anyone has to do is go to task manager and watch the infamous "now you have it, now you don't game" Suoerfetch likes to play over and over when it gets stuck trying to figure out what to keep or unload.

Stopping the service puts an end to the annoyance.

 

I suggest you upgrade to Firefox 3 regardless of super fetch or not. I would like to know why you don't want to though, if you could explain that to me please.

 

Until you load another app, one of the apps loads a new dll or you close an app, there is nothing for superfetch to do. It doesn't just sit there shuffling memory around.

Gary

 

Some say leave it on others off. Do what you like, but I have had mine off for the last 3 weeks and I love it. No more hammering of my hardrive and everything runs fast and smooth. So far I have had no reason to turn it back on.

 

Then why is my HD being constantly accessed for no reason when it's turned on, and not being accessed when it's turned off, if there is nothing for it to do? I left it on for days, and shut it off for days, and I never saw any real noticeable difference in my program loading speeds with it on.

 

^^^^
QFT

 

I give up, why? Can YOU explain why I have it turned on and see no such disk activity? I monitor it with Process Explorer and the only time I see SysMain (the superfetch service name) become active is when there is some change in state of a dll or application. I.E. when one is loaded or unloaded.

Gary

 

I have no idea, but all of us that have turned it off aren't imagining it.

 

I never suggested that you were imagining it. The point is, all of this is another giant case of anecdotal "evidence". The messages about turning off SuperFetch (especially from Rodknee) imply that SuperFetch is a fraud and is causing everyone to experience disk thrashing and that everyone needs to turn it off. And that assertion is just a bit of hyperbole. My point in the discussion is that it is not the fraud he depicts and that not everyone's machine exhibits the disk thrashing attributed to Super Fetch.

For some of us, Super Fetch does exactly what is advertised. That is, it does a anticipatory preload of the cache that does help speed up the initial load of certain applications after a reboot. It's benefits are not enormous by any stretch of the imagination, but little incremental improvements in the OS like this are cumulative.

Gary

 

Exactly. For every person in this thread that says its thrashes their disks, there will be the same amount that say it doesnt. Anecdotal evidence means absolutely nothing. If you want to turn it off because you think it thrashes your disk, great. But turning it off wont improve the performance of anything as noted in this thread.

 

Let's put it this way, let's say you eat 3 times a day, then you decided in the morning to have all 3 meals at once, this way when later at lunch your time comes the food is already in the stomach, and when dinner time comes the food is already in your stomach.

This is what the people who have turned off SF are saying, why to have the RAM full if you don't need to. Despite that the application loading time could be faster. However, I turned SF off and I don't see any deterioration in applications loading times.

Regarding the thrashing thing, I still see my HDD workings here and there, not big deal, but it still does a little.

 

You can't fill up your stomach like that. Throw up will be the result...Whereas RAM won't throw up, but will give space for other running apps.
So turning ON superfetch is the smart way to go,

 

If you say so.

 

Totally false. As i've stated numerous times once you load anything into memory with Superfetch off, it will find it just as quickly if you recall that file, app or program back into memory as if Superfetch was turned ON.

If you don't reboot a lot like I do, performance wise having Superfetch turned off is NO different than if it was turned ON. It doesn't matter one bit.

Where Superfetch becomes helpful if you want to call it that is when you reboot your computer. I find a better trade off not dealing with the annoying intermittent disk thrashing, one less process on startup. And the system quickly becomes just as responsive with Superfetch off. Memory is allocated and used correctly regardless whether Superfetch is ON or OFF.

Like I said if you guys really think SUperfetch is the way to go, have at it. I'm not in the Superfetch camp.

 

I can't believe you guys are still arguing? :laugh:

Drop it guys, none of you will convince each other. :twitcy:

 

OK but where is the increased performance exactly? You are saying that your system works just as fast as when Superfetch was on. Disk thrashing and one less startup process arent increasing your system performance (perhaps negligible difference in boot time). Just as fast does not equal increased performance.

Like I originally said, if you think its causing your disk to be thrashed, then by all means go ahead and turn it off. But its not doing anything for your system performance.

 

I had disabled Superfetch for the past week. I discovered the following:
1. Reduced Harddisk thrashing (only after logging in, or quitting an application that use alot of ram, Ex. Games)
2. Increased application start up time (for the first launch of any applications)
3. NO performance gain, if any at all, is during the period of time when Superfetch is trying to fill the ram with cache. At that time, Superfetch is using the harddrive continuously and that it makes the other application start up slower, with it disabled it launches *slightly* faster when compare to the time when superfetch was enabled.
4. Increase amount of unused ram, currently have 540 mb of ram unused out of 2 GB Total.

The above is pretty much what I experienced with superfetch off. There is NO significant gain in performance with the Superfetch turned OFF. Even when Superfetch was ON, the benefit that it provides is only noticeable during the initial launch (first time) of applications. The greatest benefit of having SuperFetch turned off is probably the reduced thrashing of the harddrive, and possibly the conservation of some battery power. In conclusion, I believe there is no advantage in touching Superfetch at all, unless you want to reduce the noise caused hard disk accesses.

Now Disagree with me.

 

I don't disagree with what you say. I'll add that there is no performance gain whether Superfetch is turned ON or OFF. It won't make your games run smoother, it won't increase your FPS in your game.

All it does is speeds up page, file or program loading after you boot your system. With Superfetch OFF, you don't have that advantage initially but you gain it back as data and programs gets moved into memory. After a short period of time, Superfetch loses it's advantage.

 

I don't have any disk thrashing with SF turned ON. Hard disk is meant to be thrashed anyway.

 

Absolutely correct and absolutely all that SuperFetch has ever been claimed to do.

Gary

 

This topic has been beaten to death, but there is one benefit, though, ask me anything about superfetch, I can tell you everything now