CRC Marketing vs. Reality

My first run the other day with CRC turned up a few hundred items. Wow, I said to myself, this is really a great utility. Since then, I’ve had occasion to compare findings with RegSeeker and jv16PowerTools in consecutive runs. Running CRC first then one of the others, each time the latter has come up with many more registry items that are (allegedly) extraneous. CRC even missed something left over from a BOC 427 reinstall.

Am I alone in this finding? I’m curious to see what happens running the order in reverse.

  • XP/SP3 (Win32/Athlon 64)
  • Comodo PF, AVG 8, SuperAntiSpyware, BOC, WinPatrol (all curent)

The question isn’t how many it finds, but how (truly) safe are they to remove?
(see the CRC bug reports)

I actually did look at the bug reports first and found only two remotely related in terms of finding a lot of items on the first CRC run. One subsequently got an error message and the other had things go south after using the compactor (I’ve not understood the reason for compacting the registry separate from general defragging). Your point is a good one about the quality of finds, but is a different one than I’m making; i.e., what one finds after the initial run relative to what other similar apps find.

What about actually listing those entries and helping Comodo devs to improve CRC detection rates?

Nowhere it was stated that CRC won’t be improved.

we have a top notch R&D facility and people who are here to help and knows their stuff. So why not take advantage by sharing the issues you had in more details so that you get to benefit from a world beating product?!


I will, in the coming days, as they occur, although either of you could easily test Comodo’s marketing claims about CRC vs. the competition yourselves; I don’t think my system is particularly unusual. I would be glad if Comodo’s claims were true, or turn out to be so, since who doesn’t want to be able to run one instead of two or three cleaners most of the time. That’s why I posed my question, to find out if others are seeing the same thing I am.

Since you raised thast point that was something I expected you had to do.
There is no way to tell the number of entries detected by each product if you remove the detected keys before testeting all of them.

But I think that creating a topic about undetected enties would be more helpful and I’ll gladly join it to report back when I spot some of them.
I use CCleaner along CRC because they complement well feature-wise.

I have using my PC at work (XP Pro SP2) for 6 years without any registry cleaning (oh, the horrors!). I allowed CCleaner v2.11 to repair several hundred items (don’t remember how many), then used CRC v1.0.12.16 to repair 650 entries. CRC threw an error before finding entries in the In-depth Search category. I didn’t let CRC repair 254 unsafe entries. Glarysoft Registry Repair (Registry Repair - Best Free Registry Cleaner to Scan, Clean and Repair Windows Registry | Glarysoft) now finds 1259 problems, but I didn’t let it repair them. Once the bug in CRC is fixed, I will be interested to see how many entries it finds in the In-depth Search category.

Has anyone else compared CRC and Glarysoft Registry Repair? Unlike CRC, CCleaner and Glarysoft tell you what they found wrong with an entry. Only CCleaner tells you what it will do for an entry before you OK it to repair.

i had glarysoft and uninstalled it right before i installed CRC. before i uninstalled glarysoft it said my registry was clean and then CRC found another 600+ entries.

every registry cleaner finds different things.
and i also like how ccleaner and glarysoft tell you what was wrong.

How should findings from different apps be reported? I can’t find a way to copy them except by screenshot.

CRC experts, and others, let me ask you: How much performance is gained from a smaller registry?

As the registry of RejZoR in this topic is ~38 MB, and my own registry is ~6 MB (I’ve got Windows XP SP3), I’d like to know if there is any simple way to tell the system performance differences… and if not, we could at least discuss it. :slight_smile:


I always understood a smaller registry quicker boot times?

Hi ,
That bug is fixed in the upcoming version . Glarysoft Registry Repair checks some errors twice : scans HKEY_USERS and also HKEY_CURRENT_USER witch was already scanned in HKEY_USERS . It also deletes some empty keys from HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT that are referred by other keys , from File_Associations sections . Deleting that entries causes other problems at the next scan . I also found some valid keys that are considered invalid by this reg cleaner . Still , on my computer Glarysoft Registry Repair founds only 359 errors and CRC 637 errors .

Thats what Comodo says. Auslogics says it’s almost 3 times larger…

IMHO a saller registry yelds no real preformance gain apart from (I guess) freeing more memory.

On the other hand cleaning invalid/unused entries could also prove useful to improve system reliability (this also is only my opinion)

For example before using a 3rd party cleaner the control panel installed application dialog took years to load.
But there are also uninstallers that forget to remove registered components entries in the regitry.

Another thing XP does it is to create an entry for each new extension detected on the system regardless if there is an associated app.

The size of the registry on my seriously vLited Vista is about 24 MB :stuck_out_tongue: I think that’s pretty good. Though I haven’t noticed real performance gain if I regulary clean and compact my registry. And that happens (the cleaning) everyday a couple of times. Of course, when you remove a few hundred megabytes of clutter and a few hundred bad registry entries on lets say my cousins PC, then you get some speed :slight_smile:

Even with a registry size difference like the above, I suspect the performance gain is minute in general. The best way to test is to use a test PC or image time your boot process and application startups. Then later bloat up your registry up by installing a slew of bloatware and conduct the same timing tests.

The only ways for anything related to the registry in noticeably speeding up a computer are tweaks (e.g. prefetcher, service time out affecting shutdown times, etc.) and correcting errors (e.g. obsolete entries that might conflict with existing software or ones created by malware).

Files that don’t exist any further in your system, but have entries remaining in the Registry will slow the boot process down considerably as Windows tries to search for each (missing) file. Removing these entries from the registry will speed up the boot process only in that the files are no longer being searched for.

Compacting (or compressing) a registry will speed load time of the registry and save memory used, but only marginally be noticed. The extra memory gain might however, be more noticeable by the software you run in the (limited) memory space available.

ie. virtual memory is much slower than physical (the more physical available, the faster the application seems). This is why (on x64 systems) having 8G of RAM is better than 4G (Windows will use 1G more with the 8G space, therefore less time accessing files stored in virtual (makes your PC appear to run faster/smoother). (But this last part is off-topic, I apologize for that).

I ran five cleaners last night without deleting anything, and CRC listed the fewest entries, Glarysoft the most. I can’t vouch for the validity of any of what they found. Just not sure how to post the findings here.

An interesting Registry Cleaner thread by some knowledgeable people at - aumha Resources and Information. . I don’t use one, although I do use Windows Disk Cleanup and CCleaner to get rid of trash before I do an image with Acronis