Best way to _SPEED UP_ Outlook2003 ? (e.g. More RAM, Dual processors...?)

4. Regarding turning off my anti-virus filtering of emails as they come
in - that sounds irresponsible in the extreme!

Not permanently. Just as an experiment, to see what impact it has on
performance. If Norton turns out to be the biggest culprit, you could
seek another anti virus solution.

Unlikely because I am already using 3 different anti-virus programs
on 3 differnet machines, and they are ALL dog slow when Outlook
downloads!

Strangely Outlook almost never seems to take up much PROCESSOR
time - even when it's compacting! (which can take a while after you
delete fat attachments...). RAM doesnt seem very full.
And the hard disk doesnt SOUND like it's being thrashed...
So I'm at a loss to know where the bottleneck actually is.
But my PC has been compacting for the last 10 minutes and
yes CPU usage hasnt risen about 7-10%!


Ship
Shiperton Henethe

Brian
Your eyes,
the sender, and the subject of the message should suffice.

Please explain

Ship
Shiperton Henethe

Roady [MVP] wrote:
1) In a way it is answered; it is not processor intensive so you are fine on
this level.

Is there any (low-cost) utility out there to help me work out where
the heck the utility is?

Ship

Hi - thanks for all the feedback folks - OP here.

1. No one has told me whether/how much a second processor would help
in practice

Based on the specs you published, I doubt going dial core would speed
things up much. It would however, allow you to multitask more
effectively.

Ah-ha - so would it allow me to run other applications
(e.g. Dreamweaver 8, Xara Xtreme etc) faster at the same time as
Outlook?

Ship

What are you talking about? What do you want to do with what?

--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
Coauthor, Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.howto-outlook.com/
Outlook FAQ, HowTo, Downloads, Add-Ins and more

-----
"ship" wrote in message
oups.com...

Roady [MVP] wrote:
1) In a way it is answered; it is not processor intensive so you are fine
on
this level.

Is there any (low-cost) utility out there to help me work out where
the heck the utility is?

Ship

ship wrote:

Your eyes,
the sender, and the subject of the message should suffice.

Please explain

When you examine a message, if you don't recognize the sender, delete the
message. When you examine a message, if the subject contains a clear
adverisement or multiple misspelled words, delete the message. When you
examine a message, if it contains an attachment you weren't expecting,
delete the message.
--
Brian Tillman

It's not processor or RAM intensive. The sound of your hard disk isn't an
accurate way to measure bottlenecks. Performance Monitor is the tool for
that.

--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
Coauthor, Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.howto-outlook.com/
Outlook FAQ, HowTo, Downloads, Add-Ins and more

-----
"ship" wrote in message
oups.com...

4. Regarding turning off my anti-virus filtering of emails as they come
in - that sounds irresponsible in the extreme!

Not permanently. Just as an experiment, to see what impact it has on
performance. If Norton turns out to be the biggest culprit, you could
seek another anti virus solution.

Unlikely because I am already using 3 different anti-virus programs
on 3 differnet machines, and they are ALL dog slow when Outlook
downloads!

Strangely Outlook almost never seems to take up much PROCESSOR
time - even when it's compacting! (which can take a while after you
delete fat attachments...). RAM doesnt seem very full.
And the hard disk doesnt SOUND like it's being thrashed...
So I'm at a loss to know where the bottleneck actually is.
But my PC has been compacting for the last 10 minutes and
yes CPU usage hasnt risen about 7-10%!


Ship
Shiperton Henethe

In general; yes. There are also processors which are optimized for gaming,
while others are for more targeted towards editing graphics other type of
multimedia or business applications.

--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
Coauthor, Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.howto-outlook.com/
Outlook FAQ, HowTo, Downloads, Add-Ins and more

-----
"ship" wrote in message
oups.com...

Hi - thanks for all the feedback folks - OP here.

1. No one has told me whether/how much a second processor would help
in practice

Based on the specs you published, I doubt going dial core would speed
things up much. It would however, allow you to multitask more
effectively.

Ah-ha - so would it allow me to run other applications
(e.g. Dreamweaver 8, Xara Xtreme etc) faster at the same time as
Outlook?

Ship

I want to be able to see where the bottle neck actually is.
Like I say Outlook currently cripples my PC's speed whilst
it's downloading emails and more or less stops me doing
anything else at the same time - BUT it doesnt appear to be
using much processor time, nor much RAM, nor writing to
the hard disk much! There *IS* a bottleneck, but I'm damned
if I can see where it's happening.

Ship


What are you talking about? What do you want to do with what?

--

Roady [MVP] wrote:
1) In a way it is answered; it is not processor intensive so you are fine
on
this level.

Is there any (low-cost) utility out there to help me work out where
the heck the utility is?

Ship

Your eyes,
the sender, and the subject of the message should suffice.

Please explain

When you examine a message, if you don't recognize the sender, delete the
message. When you examine a message, if the subject contains a clear
adverisement or multiple misspelled words, delete the message. When you
examine a message, if it contains an attachment you weren't expecting,
delete the message.

Sounds great. Now all I need is a single outlook rule that does all the
above...!

Ship
Shiperton Henethe