1
A few days ago I encountered a strange problem that since then consistently persists, I noticed that Windows 7 all of a sudden became exceptionally slow at opening video files. I haven't got the slightest clue how this could have begun or what may have caused it. I use media player classic with k-lite codecs, the problem is not as noticable if I use windows media player. VLC seems noticably slower than windows media player but noticably faster than media player classic. But in either case, all these players should be opening files in a timespan of 3 seconds normally, only windows media player is doing it anywhere near that fast.
Also shortly after I noticed that Windows Photo Viewer also got this sort of a slowdown, usually taking around 10 seconds to open any image file (would usually be around 3-4).
I've had just about enough of this, and I don't particularly feel like going for the cure-all for all windows problems and reinstalling (this is a relatively fresh, and still quite clean install)
Anybody have any ideas for what could be causing this?
(Just to deal with this one straight off the bat: It's not hard drive problems, I get the exact same problems when I am opening these files off an SSD as I do from an HDD, or even a network drive... it's something else, this was the first (and only) thing I thought of).
PS: Audio files are opening just fine; haven't noticed games being slow at launching either.
I have an nvidia gtx 670 gpu, on driver version 364.51 (In case that might be relevant; and no way in hell I'm updating these drivers anytime soon). I don't have a calibrated color profile (color management settings are default)
My next step is trying to downgrade my nvidia driver... – Cestarian – 2016-04-05T06:42:00.327
3
Possible duplicate of Corrupted graphics, crashes, and noisy GPU fan after updating NVIDIA GeForce drivers to 364.72
– bwDraco – 2016-04-29T04:50:33.0501@bwDraco what are you smoking? This question was asked on April 5th, that question was asked yesterday (BY YOU) so if anything YOUR question is a duplicate of mine, not the other way around (How can I make a duplicate question of a question that didn't exist when mine was asked?). Also, the issues were not exactly the same as yours either, even if the cause was the same. But if you must insist... I guess I'll mark your question as a duplicate of mine, which is the more accurate assumption. – Cestarian – 2016-04-30T16:49:48.777
1
@Cestarian That's not how this site works. We don't purely close duplicates by question age. The more general question tends to be the duplicate target. If a question (or very closely related category of questions) has been asked often enough, largely with the exact same answers, we create what's known as a canonical question to serve as a duplicate close target. See, for example, http://superuser.com/questions/100360/how-can-i-remove-malicious-spyware-malware-adware-viruses-trojans-or-rootkit
– Bob – 2016-04-30T18:34:49.537The other thing to note that being closed as a duplicate is in no way a reflection on the person who asked the question. It's simply a way for us to better organise the site and existing questions to best benefit future users, and to keep all related answers updated in one place. It's not a "me vs you" situation. Duplicate questions remain and are not deleted; they serve as links to the canonical question if someone stumbles on one by search. – Bob – 2016-04-30T18:35:48.463
@Bob I see, I'll keep that in mind going forward then. But even if the other question is better framed than my own, I cannot accept it because there is no mention of my issues, and it is for a different driver version. (364.72 had a whole host of more (and more serious) problems than 364.51 which I was using) – Cestarian – 2016-05-01T12:06:47.700
Oh, you're welcome to dispute it as not actually duplicate, e.g. with a question on [meta]. Or, especially with a canonical, if it's close you can edit to broaden it a little - they are rarely perfect at first and are intended to reduce similar-but-not-exact troubleshooting. We do tend to be more lenient when closing for canonicals. Personally, I'd hold off on doing anything with meta unless this question is actually closed, then you can request reopen if you want. – Bob – 2016-05-01T14:09:09.223
@Bob no need, since I already have an answer, I have no need to keep it open. – Cestarian – 2016-05-02T00:05:39.980