In Search of the Sub-30 Second Boot
Can we use Windows 7's new fast-boot capability and BIOS optimizations to get to the desktop in less than 30 seconds?
If you’re the kind of person who fumes at the microwave because it takes so long to nuke popcorn, you probably can’t stand the plodding boot of your PC, either.
And who can blame you? Time spent waiting for first the BIOS and then Windows to come to life is time that could have been spent working, gaming, or surfing the web.
Microsoft’s claim that Windows 7 could boot (from the BIOS) in 11 seconds first gave us the hope that such idle time might be lessened dramatically, but being Maximum PC we wanted to take the idea even further. We sought to not only replicate Microsoft’s claim, but to see how much time we could shave prior to the OS loading, with a combination of hardware and BIOS tweaks. Our ultimate goal: to have a machine up and running within 30 seconds of hitting the power switch.

So if your attention deficit disorder hasn’t already caused you to click to the next story, find out how we were able to achieve the shortest boot possible.
Timing is Everything
How we systematically shaved precious seconds off our reference rig's boot time
How fast can Windows 7 boot? In 11 seconds, Microsoft claims. And to prove it, the company even demonstrated the feat to a room full of technical press. But even if you take MS at its word, that’s really only half the story. Microsoft’s demo proved how fast a Win7 PC could boot once the hardware handed off the booting process to the operating system.
For our challenge, we included the BIOS, as well.
Obviously, the most important factor there is the motherboard. For our platform, we decided to go with Intel’s everyman socket: the LGA1156. In choosing the board, we considered four possibilities—two different Asus boards, an Intel, and a Gigabyte—before settling on Gigabyte’s GA-P55-UD6, primarily for its Quick Boot feature (more on that later).

For storage, we decided that an SSD with its ultra-fast random-access time was the only way to go. Furthermore, that’s what Microsoft used in its own boot demo. We auditioned three different drives—one using SLC NAND, another using the highly regarded Indilix controller, and the third being Intel’s second-generation 34nm 160GB X25-M drive. All three had similar boot times but we opted for the X25-M 160GB because it was the only one that supported the TRIM command at the time. Windows 7 natively supports TRIM, which can greatly increase SSD performance when writing to sectors that have been previously used and then erased.
Other hardware in our rig included 4GB of DDR3/1333 (going with 8GB added an additional 1.5 seconds to our boot), a SATA optical drive, and an EVGA GeForce GTX 280 card. Initially, we thought a GPU with a fat 1GB frame buffer might impact the POST (that’s a lot of RAM to initialize), so we also tried a low-end GPU with a 256MB frame buffer, but saw no change in boot times. Our OS choice: Windows 7 Ultimate.
The start-to-finish boot of our reference rig: 45 seconds.
Improving POST Performance
For the record, Microsoft used a reference board design for Intel’s Capella mobile platform for its boot demo, along with a 1.7GHz Core i7 mobile processor and an older 80GB Intel SSD drive without TRIM. We should note that mobile platforms are inherently faster at booting because they are complete optimized systems with far fewer parts to power on and inventory. A typical laptop will get through POST in less than 10 seconds, with some taking as little as five. BIOS maker Phoenix has even demonstrated a notebook PC using UEFI that can POST in one second. Desktop boards, however, with their infinite hardware variability, POST far slower. One of the appealing features in Gigabyte boards is the Quick Boot setting in the BIOS that lets the board POST faster if the hardware has not changed. With the Quick Boot setting enabled, we saw the POST time go from 28 seconds to 17 seconds. We then shut off extraneous hardware such as the floppy port and serial port, made the hard drive the first boot device, and disabled other boot devices, as well. By doing this, we shaved another two seconds off the boot time. Disabling the unused FireWire port and SATA ports that were not in use didn’t decrease the POST time, but we saw Windows 7’s boot drop by a second or two.
You can save a few microseconds (or more, depending on your board) by booting all your drives off the native south bridge instead of any discrete controllers. If you have just two hard drives and a SATA optical, it’s more time-efficient to have all three connected to the chipset’s native controller instead of a third-party controller. Some BIOSes may also enable spinup timers for hard drives by default. This gives mechanical drives time to spool up before the board tries to boot to those. Lowering these timers can save you seconds.
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
![]()
DanDog
February 15, 2010 at 11:35am
As for the few seconds you save when booting: worthless. What about all the wasted hours, even days, you spent writing this article. Just saying. l Love the Max PC crew, but this article still gets a thumbs down.
![]()
sweetnsassymj
February 10, 2010 at 8:27pm
Why were no AMD boards tested? Have you only got LOVE for Intel and NO LOVE for AMD? Not all of us go for Intel here so it's only fair to show the fastest from both competitors, just not one!
![]()
DBsantos77
February 13, 2010 at 11:29am
MPC always goes with the leading competitor. From what I've read, they used to side with AMD when they had the Athlon kicking intel ass, maybe five years ago.
-Santos
![]()
jonahkirk
February 10, 2010 at 6:37pm
I'm with Sebie. I rock an AMD socket 939 Athlon x2 3800, Asus mobo. I, too, am starting my new build. I picked up one of the Dania-electric Newegg packages that contains a G1 Intell XM18 80 gb as the first part of my build. A 1 Tb Baricuda 32mb buffer is my user (data) drive. I was considering writing an article about what a performance boost an ssd is for an older system. Sorry, guys, but I consistantly boot Windows 7 RC in the mid 20's-only minor optimizing. What am I missing?
![]()
dirumetal1986
February 09, 2010 at 11:11pm
My pc usually stays on for weeks at a time, sleep mode is your friend.
![]()
DBsantos77
February 09, 2010 at 7:41pm
I think I will keep my Hibernate on all my machines and get into 7 in under 14 seconds. Beat that?
-Santos
![]()
imagonex
February 09, 2010 at 6:14pm
In some cases this article might provide some tips on how to reduce boot times for some people out there. However, is that entire 1 to 2 minutes of one's life so precious one can't wait to get to the OS?
In some situations one must wait and there's not much one can do about it. For example, take a Nehalem Supermicro Dual Xeon socket board with a SAS RAID card and similar devices, sorry, you're just going to have to wait.
This article can be helpful for some (that do indeed have BOOT times that can be reduced) or the obsessive tinkerer.
![]()
NAYRhyno
February 10, 2010 at 9:53am
One must not make assumptions about one's precious one time needs for one minute of time during one's boot of one's PC. One Must FAIL
_________________________________________________
![]()
R3dJok3r
February 09, 2010 at 4:45pm
Seriously, what’s the big deal? “Oh no’es, my computer takes one whole minute to boot up, that’s so long!”
Like Chrome, it’s more of a con then a plus. By turning off things to start during boot, they slow you down later once computer is up and running.
The same people who are swept in by the fancy talk of a 30 second boot up spend 6 hours nuking their minds in front of a tv.
*Rant over**
![]()
To0nces
February 09, 2010 at 5:21pm
Yeah I have to agree with you. Plus, this is what Sleep mode is for. I almost never do a full boot unless a restart for updates.
![]()
Sebie Kay
February 10, 2010 at 10:56am
I stick with stand by/hibernate 90% of the time. Much quicker off/on time, especially with me limping along on an old Athlon 64 x2 3800+ (overclocked to 2.25 Ghz from stock of 2.00). I had to stay away from Vista, as the boot times were horrible with my current build. I am, however, hoping to do a complete tear down and rebuilt (the only thing I'm keeping is the case, an Antec 900) soon that will consist of a core i7, 4 gb ram, SSD, and win 7. But at $1400 for that build... I have to wait of couple of more pay checks to scrap together that kind of cash.
Long about way of saying it, I'll stick with the standby/Hibernate method for now! :D
-=Do unto others... THEN RUN!!=-
![]()
nekollx
February 09, 2010 at 5:49pm
amen
besides shut down PCs mess with my Folding stats!
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
![]()
Athlonite
February 24, 2010 at 4:38am
To All those who only use standby how much power is your PC still using mine uses nothing because it gets turned off at the wall and still boots in less than a minute just enough time to make a cuppa coffee
ASUS M3A32MVP-DELUXE AM2+, AMD Athlon x2 7750BE @ 2700MHz + Tuniq Tower 120
2x Corsair Dominator Twin2x2048C5D-8500 (4x 1GB) DDR2-1066MHz 555-15CL2 2.10v
HIS Radeon HD5770 FAN 1GB DDR5 cclk/850MHz memclk/4800
2x WD2500AAJS Raid0 Boot / 3x Samsung HD502IJ storage
2x Pioneer DVR212S SATA DVDRW
Hiper Type-R580 PSU
Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook
Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.















