On 3/3/2024 10:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>
> For the record, I am (and AFAICT, so is the OP (MajorLanGod) talking
> about the 'advertized' "Restart required (estimate: N min)" time, which
> does *not* include the *online* (download and) installation, only the
> *offline* part.
>
> I.e. after an update has been downloaded, Windows Update will already
> do part of the installation (saying "Installing - NN%". This 'Installing'
> time is not included in the "(estimate: N min)" time.

If you watched it, you'd see a familiar behavior.

Railed on one core. CPU bound.
Little flashing of I/O LED (actually, none at all).

This is exactly what you would have seen from
Windows Update, in Windows XP.

Should we be doing the following stuff ? I don't know if this
makes any difference, in the end. It should reduce the supercedence
calculation time. That's what all the resetbase should help do.
But experiments with this stuff, seldom reduce the size of
WinSxS all that much. I never got the impression this sort of
cleaning was all that aggressive.

https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/82643-clean-up-component-store-winsxs-folder-windows-10-a.html

( https://www.tenforums.com/performance-maintenance/183688-dism-exe-startcomponentcleanup-vs-startcomponentcleanup-resetbase-2.html )

Paul

misar <misar@invalid.net> wrote:
> On 03/03/2024 15:59, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > MikeS <mikes@is.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 03/03/2024 13:39, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>> knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 03/03/2024 7:49 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>>>> MajorLanGod <lonelydad58@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> OK, I recognize that my laptop is five years old, but still taking 13
> >>>>>> minutes to install the latest update is not even close to the 4 Microsoft
> >>>>>> estimates. My cpu is an AMD Ryzen 3 3200U runniing at 1.2 ghz. Have CPUs
> >>>>>> gotten that much faster in the last five years?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does your laptop have a HDD or a SSD?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's probably more relevant than the CPU speed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> FWIW, my ~1.5 years old laptop does the monthly updates in about the
> >>>>> time which Windows Updates predicts, mostly 4-5 minutes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My specs:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> AMD Ryzen 5 5625U (2.3GHz)
> >>>>> 16 GB RAM (3200 MHz)
> >>>>> 1 TB SSD (Intel 670p NVMe M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 3D4 QLC)
> >>>>
> >>>> The number of cores in the processor can have a significant effect on
> >>>> the speed that a computer runs. ie, a dual core i7 processor will
> >>>> run much slower than an i7 with 8 cores in the processor.
> >>>
> >>> True, but this is about Windows Update on Windows 11. I doubt that WU
> >>> uses/can-use many cores and Windows 11 systems probably have CPUs with
> >>> more than 2 cores.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, my AMD Ryzen 5 5625U (2.3GHz) has 6 cores, 12 threads.
> >>
> >> Likewise.
> >> My Win 11 laptop has an AMD Ryzen 7 6800U 2.70 GHz, 16GB RAM and a 1TB
> >> SSD but most updates have a very slow install stage. That is ignoring
> >> the download time which even with a good connection is often much slower
> >> than manually downloading the corresponding update installation file
> >> from the MS website.
> >
> > For the record, I am (and AFAICT, so is the OP (MajorLanGod) talking
> > about the 'advertized' "Restart required (estimate: N min)" time, which
> > does *not* include the *online* (download and) installation, only the
> > *offline* part.
> >
> > I.e. after an update has been downloaded, Windows Update will already
> > do part of the installation (saying "Installing - NN%". This 'Installing'
> > time is not included in the "(estimate: N min)" time.
>
> The OP asked "Have CPUs gotten that much faster in the last five years?"
> My point was that even with a faster CPU ALL stages of an update are
> still slow.

Your point "was"? I see only this response from you. Or are you an
alias of "MikeS <mikes@is.invalid>"?

As to "still slow", for me Windows Update updates on my described
Windows 11 laptop with SSD are much. much faster than on my previous
Windows 8.1 laptop with HDD, hence asked the OP if he has a HDD or SSD.

> As for the MS estimate, that is all it is and expecting a precise value
> for any possible combination of Windows hardware is ridiculous.

I assume Windows Update does some - probably one time - performance
analysis of the system before coming up with the estimate. At least
that's what I would do.

On 03/03/2024 13:23, knuttle wrote:
> On 03/02/2024 11:19 PM, Frugal User wrote:
>> On 03/03/2024 03:50, Big Al wrote:
>>>
>>> Her old laptop had sound but it was next to impossible to hear. And
>>> she has impaired hearing.
>>
>> Did you try to hear the sound with external speakers? They normally work
>> out cheaper than buying a new laptop.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I am looking for a new laptop. The problem I find is that most new
> laptops have limited storage.� The suggestion I keep getting is, to
> buy an external drive.
>

You can upgrade the hard disk of a laptop. A 2TB hard disk is more than
enough for most people. The size of hard disk for laptops is 2.5 inches.
The only problem is these days most are SDD and so the price is a bit
higher than hdd but you can still buy hdd from Amazon.