Question Just made my Windows 7 unbootable. Help with repair.

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
I am having one computer disaster after the next. I was only getting 1/8 core activated. Device manager was showing 8 but utilities were only showing one of my FX8350's cores. Quick look showed about 60% CPU load just streaming video so I was looking at possible fixes. One fix said to disable the number of processors in the advanced boot option menu. So I did that. I also changed my UAC settings. I rebooted and it wouldn't boot. I ran system repair twice and it didn't fix it. Then I went into BIOS and disabled Cool n Quiet. Still won't boot. It booted into safe mode but I don't have mouse or keyboard. Is there no USB support in Safe Mode?
 

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
This is great. I ran system repair again and it said it fixed the problem but when I rebooted still wouldn't reboot. There is a blue screen with error messages that flashes by to fast to see. Can you stop that? Now when I try to boot into Safe Mode, it starts to load everything then just reboots back to the ASUS screen. I had to power the computer off when I booted into Safe Mode the first time because I had no way of navigating to shut it down properly. I'm running system repair again.
 

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
As far as I can see so far it's a BIOS/hardware issue. I was trying to fix the core count problem. It's a dual boot setup with XP. I booted into XP and CPUID reported all 8 cores. I disabled Cool n Quiet and switched the CPU core enabling control back to auto. Now I can boot into Windows 7. It's pretty sluggish and choppy. Not sure what to do next.
 
Last edited:

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
I turned on the core count in advanced boot options and it didn't boot. I was able to boot into Safe Mode and got USB support. I unchecked the core count box and the max memory book was check and set to 256MB. I unchecked that. I reenabled it just to see and it switched to my 32GB's. I'll leave both unchecked. CPUID reports the 8 cores while in safe mode. Rebooting now.
 

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
That fixed it. How and why there's a boot option to limit memory to 256MB is beyond me. So found out how it feels to run Windows 7 with 256MB of memory. I hate Windows. If I could run everything I need to on Linux I would.
 

jamesdsimone

Senior member
Dec 21, 2015
616
164
116
Is there a Linux distro specifically configured to run Windows software. I have tried Wine with so so success. I'm not an IT person so Running a virtual box is a bit beyond me.
 

Tech Junky

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2022
3,365
1,118
106
Is there a Linux distro specifically configured to run Windows software. I have tried Wine with so so success. I'm not an IT person so Running a virtual box is a bit beyond me.
No. VM or some programs might make them run slightly better but, there's no real native method of running windows based software in Linux. The simplest option is to just run windows in a VM as needed.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,577
9,268
136
I am having one computer disaster after the next. I was only getting 1/8 core activated. Device manager was showing 8 but utilities were only showing one of my FX8350's cores.

A specific core? Which utilities? What did Task Manager have to say about the logical processor count?

Quick look showed about 60% CPU load just streaming video so I was looking at possible fixes.

So far this seems like a case of poor utilities giving out ambiguous information and a generic 'my computer is running slow' problem.

One fix said to disable the number of processors in the advanced boot option menu.

Why... this makes no sense.

I also changed my UAC settings.

UAC has nothing to do with system performance.

Then I went into BIOS and disabled Cool n Quiet.

I can't imagine any reason why this would help. The only reason I'd consider temporarily playing with this setting would be if I noticed that the max processor frequency under load was about a third of what it should be and it wasn't due to a Windows power profile issue (which is a lot more likely than CnQ being the cause).

Is there no USB support in Safe Mode?
There is on Win7, but perhaps you have your mouse and keyboard plugged into USB 3.0 ports? USB 3.0 support on Win7 requires extra drivers, which may be disabled in sleep mode.

Please note: my post is not intended as a put-down or antagonistic in any way, I'm just worried that you're making your life a lot harder by following bad and illogical advice and then trying anything to see if it helps. I have a feeling that there's more to this story than "I disabled some processor cores and now my machine won't boot" as well, there's no reason why Windows would throw a fit because the core count changed, even if it went down to one core. When I was running an AM3 rig on Win7, I had a processor that had two unlockable cores so my system went from 4 to 6 cores and back again many times in its life without any issues.

That fixed it. How and why there's a boot option to limit memory to 256MB is beyond me. So found out how it feels to run Windows 7 with 256MB of memory.

Would you prefer that Windows has less configurability? The likeliest explanation here is that you inadvertently enabled this setting when you were messing with advanced boot properties and limiting the number of logical processors.

ReactOS: I've heard of ReactOS before but I've never used it.
 

Tech Junky

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2022
3,365
1,118
106
@igor_kavinski

Crossover's been around for a very long time and I've considered it but, never bit the bullet on it due to the spotty results on different apps. I'm a bit leery about paying for an app that acts like the free version with a fancy skin applied. i.e. MacOS or Wine.

MacOS is basically *nix wrapped in a pretty package that obfuscates the underlying activities to make a profit. I find it funny that it has the same core processes when using the terminal that you see in free linux distros. Apple just found a way to monetize and make captive the same core free OS functions.

Anyway... I would simply spin up a VM of Windows and use it sparingly. Someone else though recently brough up ProxMox as a bare metal VM setup that might expose more resources rather than running a VM within an OS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: igor_kavinski