View Full Version : Speed differance between W2K Pro and 98SE?
Just put W2k Pro on a spare HD, and I'm using it for the first time. Very cool so far, I must say! Now I'm trying to decide wether to put it on my main drive. I mostly play games on this box, and my system isn't exactly cutting edge, so I need all the speed I can get.
So, is there a speed hit incurred for gaming under W2K compared to 98SE?
Unfortunatly my drive is a mere 12Gig, so no room for a dual-boot.:( Gotta choose one over the other!
Microsoft
10-13-01, 01:46 AM
w2k = slow games
xp = fast games
98 = faster games
Violator
10-13-01, 03:59 AM
Actually I've noticed very little difference, if anything games load quicker under 2000 and given the better memory management I think it makes for a better gaming environment.
Well one vote each way, hmm? :D
The only game I've played so far on W2k is the UT demo. It played as smooth as it ever has. Took a frickin week to load however, but I blame that on the HD it's installed on.
Isn't W2K and XP based on the same NT kernel? If so, shouldn't they play games about the same?
My idea is that since W2K needs more memory to run then the aloted ram for the game maybe reduced which slows down the gameplay. When my RAM arrives I will be going with W2K PRO. 256Mb for the OS, 256Mb reserved for the AGP aperture size & another 256Mb for whatever game or application I will be running.:eek: :eek: :eek: I JUST REMEMBERED!!! I ONLY ORDERED 512Mb!!! DOH!!!
I'm giving my RAM to my sis
Violator
10-13-01, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by sonny
When my RAM arrives I will be going with W2K PRO. 256Mb for the OS, 256Mb reserved for the AGP aperture size
Basically the same thing m8, reserving for the AGP only comes into effect if games don't write directly to AGP and if you've a card with 32mb or more you needn't worry really. 64 or 128 will do just fine and as I said the reserved area could be considered part of your OS.
Originally posted by Violator
Basically the same thing m8, reserving for the AGP only comes into effect if games don't write directly to AGP and if you've a card with 32mb or more you needn't worry really. 64 or 128 will do just fine and as I said the reserved area could be considered part of your OS.
I noticed a bunch of artifacts with ADOBE Photo Deluxe when I magnify a high res pic then try to clone a certain area for clean up or when I play at lower res. When I use 256Mb for my AGP aperture size they disappear but 3DMark2001 will not run if I set it over 64Mb. From what I know W2kPRO is a HOG for RAM so I just wanted to make sure.
Violator
10-13-01, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by sonny
I noticed a bunch of artifacts with ADOBE Photo Deluxe when I magnify a high res pic then try to clone a certain area for clean up or when I play at lower res. When I use 256Mb for my AGP aperture size they disappear but 3DMark2001 will not run if I set it over 64Mb. From what I know W2kPRO is a HOG for RAM so I just wanted to make sure.
Yes 2000 is quite a hog :D, more so than 98 or ME anyway (but not as bad as XP), but 256+ of RAM will do you fine, as long as you don't have a whole bunch of stuff running in the background
Hopefully I'm good to go. Now the hard question for myself. Raid or no? Raid equals no GHOST.
Ghost does Raided drives.....My drives are Raided. I use Win2K with 512 of DDR. Memory and hard drive speed under Win2K is a lot faster (my HD benchmark at 139 mb/s under Win98 and 337 under Win2K). I did notice about a 5-10 fps drop in speed for Quake III and other similar games but as far as playability goes you don't notice any difference in game play. I do like never having a system crash or lockup.
W2kpro has lowered my fsb some and I'm only using a 256meg stick so when I got to run multiple tasks I have noticed a lag that wasnt there in 98 I dont know I guess I could be imagening this though I think 2kpro is far better. In 2kpro everthing except fsb seems to be faster folders open quicker it even seems like my programs download faster , the color quality is also better so I find 2kpro easier to look at I like it.
Originally posted by ve6jhc
Ghost does Raided drives.....My drives are Raided. I use Win2K with 512 of DDR. Memory and hard drive speed under Win2K is a lot faster (my HD benchmark at 139 mb/s under Win98 and 337 under Win2K). I did notice about a 5-10 fps drop in speed for Quake III and other similar games but as far as playability goes you don't notice any difference in game play. I do like never having a system crash or lockup.
Yeah... I just replied to our discussion on backing up & raid. The RAM is taking forever!!!
Good suggestions, thanks! I'm going to go ahead and switch to W2k next weekend. I've played a few games on it to test, and they all play fast enough to be fun. That's all I need!
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.