Need to find an old Tip for WinXP
A few months ago (or last year) there was a registry edit to increase the amount of bandwidth that XP reserves for itself (Like 20%). Now, since I had used that edit, I have had to reinstall but can't remember what the reg edit was.
A few months ago (or last year) there was a registry edit to increase the amount of bandwidth that XP reserves for itself (Like 20%).
Now, since I had used that edit, I have had to reinstall but can't remember what the reg edit was.
If anyone knows, could they send me link to the instructions?
Cheers in advance
Homer
Now, since I had used that edit, I have had to reinstall but can't remember what the reg edit was.
If anyone knows, could they send me link to the instructions?
Cheers in advance
Homer
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
I believe this is what you are looking for, but I haven't verified if it produces any noticeable results.
WINXP PRO QOS FIX
"This tweak applies only to Windows XP Professional.
It seems Microsoft reserves 20% of your bandwidth for use by the QOS (Quality Of Service) Scheduler, which is intended to reserve bandwidth for important applications, a rather wasteful choice.
To increase your bandwidth, do the following:
Make sure you're logged in as Administrator, NOT just with any account with admin privileges!
Click the Start button -> Run -> type:
gpedit.msc
Hit Enter or click OK.
Navigate to Local Computer Policy -> Administrative Templates -> Network -> QOS Packet Scheduler.
In the right hand pane double-click on the "Limit reservable bandwidth" setting.
On the Setting tab check the Enabled box.
Change "Bandwidth limit %" to read 0.
Click OK and close Gpedit.msc.
Under Start -> My Computer -> My Network Connections -> View Network Connections -> right-click on your connection -> select Properties (where your protocols are listed) -> make sure QOS Packet Scheduler is enabled.
You need to reboot for these changes to take effect.
NOTE: All this is necessary to counter Windows XP's default behavior, which reserves 20% of your bandwidth even with the QOS Packet Scheduler disabled.
WINXP PRO QOS FIX
"This tweak applies only to Windows XP Professional.
It seems Microsoft reserves 20% of your bandwidth for use by the QOS (Quality Of Service) Scheduler, which is intended to reserve bandwidth for important applications, a rather wasteful choice.
To increase your bandwidth, do the following:
Make sure you're logged in as Administrator, NOT just with any account with admin privileges!
Click the Start button -> Run -> type:
gpedit.msc
Hit Enter or click OK.
Navigate to Local Computer Policy -> Administrative Templates -> Network -> QOS Packet Scheduler.
In the right hand pane double-click on the "Limit reservable bandwidth" setting.
On the Setting tab check the Enabled box.
Change "Bandwidth limit %" to read 0.
Click OK and close Gpedit.msc.
Under Start -> My Computer -> My Network Connections -> View Network Connections -> right-click on your connection -> select Properties (where your protocols are listed) -> make sure QOS Packet Scheduler is enabled.
You need to reboot for these changes to take effect.
NOTE: All this is necessary to counter Windows XP's default behavior, which reserves 20% of your bandwidth even with the QOS Packet Scheduler disabled.
However, MS and many others have clearly stated that Windows does NOT reserve any bandwidth using QoS. Due to the grossly misunderstood nature of this protocol, it has let so many people get the wrong impression of it.
Here's the KB Article from MS on it:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q316666
And here is the more specific quote from the bottom of that page:
Quote:Correcting Some Incorrect Claims About Windows XP QoS Support
There have been claims in various published technical articles and newsgroup postings that Windows XP always reserves 20 percent of the available bandwidth for QoS. These claims are incorrect. The information in the "Clarification about QoS in End Computers That Are Running Windows XP" section of this article correctly describes the behavior of Windows XP systems.
Here's the KB Article from MS on it:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q316666
And here is the more specific quote from the bottom of that page:
Quote:Correcting Some Incorrect Claims About Windows XP QoS Support
There have been claims in various published technical articles and newsgroup postings that Windows XP always reserves 20 percent of the available bandwidth for QoS. These claims are incorrect. The information in the "Clarification about QoS in End Computers That Are Running Windows XP" section of this article correctly describes the behavior of Windows XP systems.
Some routing and switching devices/applications use them. The concept is awesome if you have a single infrastructure that routes many high demand applications such as telephony (VoIP) and ERP (major database apps) simultaneously along with other traffic. You can assign priority to the various apps/packets, and even drop certain data entirely (like RealJoke streaming radio).
Quote:
You can assign priority to the various apps/packets, and even drop certain data entirely (like RealJoke streaming radio). Ah, I see - so more for business networks than a home LAN or stadalone system? BTW, re: your last point - wouldn't it make more sense to just set 1 of those policy things to just block the installation of anything made by RealNetworks?
You can assign priority to the various apps/packets, and even drop certain data entirely (like RealJoke streaming radio). Ah, I see - so more for business networks than a home LAN or stadalone system? BTW, re: your last point - wouldn't it make more sense to just set 1 of those policy things to just block the installation of anything made by RealNetworks?
Quote:
Ah, I see - so more for business networks than a home LAN or stadalone system? BTW, re: your last point - wouldn't it make more sense to just set 1 of those policy things to just block the installation of anything made by RealNetworks?
Yep, it's definately geared for networks only, and ones that have large amounts of traffic.
One of those policy things? I guess that would depend on what OS/NOS you were using. However, this methodology would completely lock down the behavior *regardless* of OS. And besides, if you have this type of firepower you might as well use it, right?
Ah, I see - so more for business networks than a home LAN or stadalone system? BTW, re: your last point - wouldn't it make more sense to just set 1 of those policy things to just block the installation of anything made by RealNetworks?
Yep, it's definately geared for networks only, and ones that have large amounts of traffic.
One of those policy things? I guess that would depend on what OS/NOS you were using. However, this methodology would completely lock down the behavior *regardless* of OS. And besides, if you have this type of firepower you might as well use it, right?
Quote:
One of those policy things? I guess that would depend on what OS/NOS you were using.I'm not very experienced in the mystic art of Network Fu, I've just seen ppl mention things like Group Policies, etc, & their usefulness in keeping ppl from the eeeeeeeeevil of RealNetworks. Quote:However, this methodology would completely lock down the behavior *regardless* of OS. And besides, if you have this type of firepower you might as well use it, right? Good point.
One of those policy things? I guess that would depend on what OS/NOS you were using.I'm not very experienced in the mystic art of Network Fu, I've just seen ppl mention things like Group Policies, etc, & their usefulness in keeping ppl from the eeeeeeeeevil of RealNetworks. Quote:However, this methodology would completely lock down the behavior *regardless* of OS. And besides, if you have this type of firepower you might as well use it, right? Good point.
Ahhh, I see grasshopper. Many different applications can use "policies" of some sort to do various things, and it seems that you haven't had a chance to use them but you have been told that these mystical settings exist. I guess it would be kinda hard to recommend the use of one app over another when you haven't worked with either, eh?
Yep.
I've never really had the opportunity or a reason to learn networking. I suppose someday I will, when I have more computers [i don't throw parts away, but I don't have room where I live @ the mo to use any that I could make out of the parts I have spare], but it's a bit pointless [& hard to do the practical stuff] when you only have the 1 machine. I could go on a course, I suppose, but I don't do too well @ courses - I do much better by fiddling about with stuff, & RTFM [only when really necessary ]. Pretty much all I know about computers is self taught.
I've never really had the opportunity or a reason to learn networking. I suppose someday I will, when I have more computers [i don't throw parts away, but I don't have room where I live @ the mo to use any that I could make out of the parts I have spare], but it's a bit pointless [& hard to do the practical stuff] when you only have the 1 machine. I could go on a course, I suppose, but I don't do too well @ courses - I do much better by fiddling about with stuff, & RTFM [only when really necessary ]. Pretty much all I know about computers is self taught.
