Increase in performance from 98SE to Win2K? Should I upgrade?

[fluxcapacitor]

...I think I remember reading that, Windows 2000 offers better performance than 98SE. I use 98SE simply because I understand it is the best for games but the instability is getting to annoy me. My only real concern is that I don't have any experinces w/ win2k. I understand the GUI is the same. What about editing startup programs, like in 98 in the system info, you can select what starts at boot and what doesn't. I know ME doesn't allow for that. What about driver support? Isn't there a lack of either Direct 3D or OpenGL? Can you run older games like Half Life? Counter Strike should always be installed, it runs under Win2K no? Real older games like Civ2? Hell, what about MAME32, anyone w/ a 2k system run that? The DOS version of MAME is ass, 32 is all I use for that. My Norton is 2000, that'll probably need to be upgraded. Also, if you click the link in my sig you see I only run 256MB, is that too little for Win 2k or it's enough to run smooth yet still see a difference w/ more? If anybody can give recommends/tips here I'd appreciate it...thanx;)

[RED Hot Machine]

Originally posted by fluxcapacitor
...I think I remember reading that, Windows 2000 offers better performance than 98SE. I use 98SE simply because I understand it is the best for games but the instability is getting to annoy me. My only real concern is that I don't have any experinces w/ win2k. I understand the GUI is the same. What about editing startup programs, like in 98 in the system info, you can select what starts at boot and what doesn't. I know ME doesn't allow for that. What about driver support? Isn't there a lack of either Direct 3D or OpenGL? Can you run older games like Half Life? Counter Strike should always be installed, it runs under Win2K no? Real older games like Civ2? Hell, what about MAME32, anyone w/ a 2k system run that? The DOS version of MAME is ass, 32 is all I use for that. My Norton is 2000, that'll probably need to be upgraded. Also, if you click the link in my sig you see I only run 256MB, is that too little for Win 2k or it's enough to run smooth yet still see a difference w/ more? If anybody can give recommends/tips here I'd appreciate it...thanx;)

I've not found win2k to be any quicker than 98, but is a lot more stable. I've had no problem running nav 2000, as long as you install the nt/2k version should be on the nav cd. Half life runs ok once patched above the orig version. not tried civ2 or mame32. only game i've found not to run is c&c. Quake runs really well, the oldest game on my sys is worms2 and that is ok.

i'm also running 256 and it seams to be fine. A friend has 512 in his rig and i don't notice much difference.

[RED Hot Machine]

The best thing to do is go dual boot, that way any games you find not to work under 2k and can still use 98 for. That is the way i've got my system setup, and a few other people here do the same.

[ve6jhc]

My hard drive and memory performance under Win2K are almost 3 times higher than under Win98SE.....Games run about 10% slower in frame rates but in game play I don't notice any difference. The best thing is that it never crashes the OS.

[jbslow]

I also noticed a little decrease in FPS so my 3dmark scores fell from 9250 to 8850 at default cpu and vc but mark2k bassically stayed the same maybe a 10 point loss.

I'm going to check my memory right away though to see if its performing better ve6jhc.

I think I need more memory couse already a few times I've had to reboot to access the internet do to limited system resources. Thats either caused by a lack of memory or its the isp start up disk its 95/98 comatable but they dont even have a 2k disk for me! To bad I'm in a contract for another 10 months.

[ve6jhc]

I am running 512 of SDRAM....Win2K does like ram!! Try downloading Wintune...It is a nice little benchmark program that runs through its test in only a few min. It test CPU, FPU,2D,3D,OpenGL,Ram, Cached and uncached HD.

[Dutch]

I have found that since I upgrades to Windows 2000, My internet speed is better, my overall system speed is about the same, And It is WAY more Stable than 98 or ME...I would upgrade

[jbslow]

Originally posted by ve6jhc
I am running 512 of SDRAM....Win2K does like ram!! Try downloading Wintune...It is a nice little benchmark program that runs through its test in only a few min. It test CPU, FPU,2D,3D,OpenGL,Ram, Cached and uncached HD.

Yep 2kpro does improve memory scores some.

win98
1.2.@1.3 (145 x 9) - 656/866

2kpro

[LinkStatic]

hmmnnn... In my case, I ran had gains in FPS on Q3:A and Counter Strike when I upgraded to win2kpro from ME. And win2k's memory management is something to look at, really good. Also increased my 3dmark scores ( by also installing 21.81/D4 drivers ).....

[ve6jhc]

WinME is about 10% slower than Win98SE on the same machine. Win2K seems to be much faster then Win98SE on most things except 3D gaming is a little slower (only on benchmarks not on perceived game play). I had dual booted my 1 GB Tbird for about one year before I dumped Win98 in favour of Win2K full time.