I would like only to mention that on my old XP machine, with P4 2GHz, 2GB of RAM and old Seagate 160GB:
a ) entering hibernation takes 12secs (while waiting for system to properly shut down - 20-25secs)
b ) resuming from hibernation takes about 15 secs (while booting my system with all the startup applications is about 120secs - time to have the pc fully operational with no hdd activity)
I really wonder how it is possible that your system starts in 25 secs and you do not benefit from hibernation? Hibernation would take 2-5 secs on that kind of machine. Suspend would be useless.
When speaking about starting your system consider all the startup apps not only time after which desktop shows, because after that there is a lot of time for services and startup apps to load, and pcs are practically unusable then. I have a lot of experience with pcs and laptops with 3GHz duos and quatros PCUs and a lot of fast DDR RAM and SATA drives, and it is possible to start them in less than 20 secs, but that is with clean windows setup. Try to install MS Office, and use you system for month or two, and booting takes 30-40 secs, put Outlook to start automatically, and it lasts almost forever...
In my office, while using Oracle and MS SQL - my life would be very difficult without hibernation - waiting 5 minutes for system to close, and then 10 minutes to start. Great.
I really envy that kind of a machine you own. But I really do not understand why to keep your machine running all the time with that UPS constantly loading. I believie that you do not have a couple of servers to keep the world running. So It does not make any sence. You can have money but think about all the wasted energy, and equipment...
You can equally buy new batteries each day, put them into your flashlight, turn it on and put it into closet to have it always ready. Do you see a kind of insanity in that kind of a behaviour? You do not do that, do you?