View Full Version : What Operating system?
What Windows operating system will allow me to make full use of 1gig of pc 2100?
Thx Nick
Anything based on the NT kernel which pretty much leaves out Win98, 95 and ME (and anything earlier).
Linux will use it as well.
Thanks for the responce. I need to be able to run Direct X8 so that leaves Linux out. So i guess 2k is the answere to make full us of a gig of ram?
Nick
Originally posted by nakom
Thanks for the responce. I need to be able to run Direct X8 so that leaves Linux out. So i guess 2k is the answere to make full us of a gig of ram?
Nick
The 2k would make a 100% use of it.. While XP is a ram hog sorta. Though if you get 512Ram or more.. its beautiful!
Yodums right. If your running 1gig of ram, go for XP. I'm running Win 2K for now. I like it. Mainly cause Win XP is a resource hog. I think the more ram the better. That's why I've got 2K for now till I get more ram. XP comes with Direct X 8.1 already installed. So You'll know your getting the most of it.
Yup the NT based are ram hoggers.. Damn Microsoft .. They should make a third edition of Windows.. Linux edition baby compatible with Win 98.. it would be beautiful.
WinME can theortically utilize up to 2 Gig's and Win2K up to 4Gb
98 and older I think top out around 768???
And I am not sure at all about Linux...
Posted too soon...
WELCOME TO THE SICKNESS!!!
I heard the Win 98 doesn't do too good around 512.. My friend had to take out his 256 from 512 to run Win 98 good again.
I would recomend the Server or Advanced Server flavour of Windows 2000 if you're gunna use that much RAM. I'm sure Pro could use it, but Server and Advanced Server are better equiped to use it, seeing as they are built for that kind of thing.
Originally posted by Oni
I would recomend the Server or Advanced Server flavour of Windows 2000 if you're gunna use that much RAM. I'm sure Pro could use it, but Server and Advanced Server are better equiped to use it, seeing as they are built for that kind of thing.
Think of the cost!!
Besides if he were to game then I definitly wouldn't recommend Server or Advanced Server seeing that its just too complex of a OS to run games and stuff.
Originally posted by Yodums
Think of the cost!!
Besides if he were to game then I definitly wouldn't recommend Server or Advanced Server seeing that its just too complex of a OS to run games and stuff.
Every game that I threw at Server and Advanced Server played just the same as in Professional.
Softwebdev
11-14-01, 07:37 PM
XP RULE.....SECOND TO NONE
if it's not big and clear enough.......;)
dreadlord79
11-14-01, 10:16 PM
I setup my cousins computer: AMD Athlon 1.4GHz, 266 FSB, 2 PCI, 1 AGP4x, 1 AMR, 2 USB, 1 10/100 port built in holding up to 1GB of PC133 memory (high grade, cas 2) and have installed 98 1st edition with all of the downloads available from Microsoft (of course) and he has not had a single problem! He is also running 98 1st edition on his 800 Duron with 1GB of PC133 memory (low grade, cas 3) and has not seen a single problem! If anything, these systems are running btter than you've ever seen. Of course these systems are not OC'ed yet so only time (and some work) will tell;)
Originally posted by dreadlord79
I setup my cousins computer: AMD Athlon 1.4GHz, 266 FSB, 2 PCI, 1 AGP4x, 1 AMR, 2 USB, 1 10/100 port built in holding up to 1GB of PC133 memory (high grade, cas 2) and have installed 98 1st edition with all of the downloads available from Microsoft (of course) and he has not had a single problem! He is also running 98 1st edition on his 800 Duron with 1GB of PC133 memory (low grade, cas 3) and has not seen a single problem! If anything, these systems are running btter than you've ever seen. Of course these systems are not OC'ed yet so only time (and some work) will tell;)
HE should really use his TBird 1.4 1gig ram on Win2k Or Win XP.. HEs not making use of all his power with the chips and stuff in Windows 98..
dreadlord79
11-15-01, 01:15 AM
The only problem with this is that neither he nor I trust anything that Windows puts out until it has been out for a year or more because of the Windows in-ability to put out non-hole filled programs and I don't want to have to screw with viruses. If it could be proven to me that ME would not have any problems; I might consider it. XP is out of the question because I don't like the fact that I have to activate it online. I don't trust "old Billy boy" that much!
Originally posted by dreadlord79
The only problem with this is that neither he nor I trust anything that Windows puts out until it has been out for a year or more because of the Windows in-ability to put out non-hole filled programs and I don't want to have to screw with viruses. If it could be proven to me that ME would not have any problems; I might consider it. XP is out of the question because I don't like the fact that I have to activate it online. I don't trust "old Billy boy" that much!
Yeah, but if you were to throw Win 2K PRO on his machine it would smoke Win 98! And it would be much more stable. It would utilize all of the ram. The Second Service Pack takes care of a lot of incompatibilities.
Ok this is the problem i found with Win2K and the VIA chipset (Same problem reported on Intel I840 I815 chipsets with Win2k also), the win 2k OS has problems on higher speed chipsets maintaining Data integrity. There are numerous fixes for pci latencey to fix this problem though the latest 4 in 1 drivers from VIA do not fix the problem. These fixes include manual editing chipset registers, BIOS configuration changes, BIOS version changes and even removing ACPI support. None of these solutions appear to work for every system configuration. This problem does not appear in WinXP. You can see more info on the Viahardware web site.
My configuration is Win2k SP2 running on
EP 8KHA+
AMD XP1800 CPU
1 gig of RAM
Audigy or Fortisimo II sound card
Leadtek G3 TH video card
Phillips CDRW
ACER 56 soeed CDROM
400 watt Sparkle PS
I just cannot seem to make all this work i am going out to buy XP at lunch and try that. Have any thoughts on what problems i will have or what i did wrong. Also i want my video and sound cards
on seperate IRQ's is this hard to do in XP?
Thanks Nick
dreadlord79
11-16-01, 04:36 PM
After reading all of your posts and speaking with some of the support staff here were I work; I am going to Upgrade to XP when I have the $$. My cousin goes by what I say and he is ready to upgrade as well if it means better performance.
I installed win XP and all i can say is it is AWESOME. All the problems i had with the other things have went away. After a weekend of heavy gaming there was not one problem. Thanks for all the advice.
Nick
Kingslayer
11-19-01, 11:05 AM
XP or 2000.
XP isnt the ram hog that everyone says it is. If you learn to properly configure it and shut down the services that you dont need running in the background, it runs smooth as silk.
wizardloader
11-19-01, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by Yodums
I heard the Win 98 doesn't do too good around 512.. My friend had to take out his 256 from 512 to run Win 98 good again.
Well I'm using win98se and 512 megs 2100 ddr and np so far. I wish damn Microsoft would change the XP licensing agreement so you didn't need multiple copies:( :( :( :burn:
Softwebdev
11-19-01, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Kingslayer
XP or 2000.
XP isnt the ram hog that everyone says it is. If you learn to properly configure it and shut down the services that you dont need running in the background, it runs smooth as silk.
can't agree more...............disable services...........if you are not sure whether it should be disable.......or not.............choose manual...........instead of automatic...................
wizardloader
11-19-01, 01:19 PM
Hmmmmm now ya got me thinking. Think XP would be good for me? XP is just to new. I hear the kernel is fantastic
dreadlord79
11-19-01, 01:49 PM
Windows XP is based on Microsofts first; reasonably; stable OS. That OS would be Windows NT! 2000 is also based on the Kernel from NT. That is why it is so much more stable than any of the other OS's from Microsloth.
(Amazing I started this post hating XP, but know have read quite abit about it and know something!)
P.S.~ wizardloader
I completely agree with you about the lisencing agreement! I have 4 PC's up and running and will have a 5th going soon. Fortunatly, LInux is cheap and good :) The only problem I have is that I have to learn it before I can use it! :beer:
wizardloader
11-19-01, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by dreadlord79
Windows XP is based on Microsofts first; reasonably; stable OS. That OS would be Windows NT! 2000 is also based on the Kernel from NT. That is why it is so much more stable than any of the other OS's from Microsloth.
(Amazing I started this post hating XP, but know have read quite abit about it and know something!)
P.S.~ wizardloader
I completely agree with you about the lisencing agreement! I have 4 PC's up and running and will have a 5th going soon. Fortunatly, LInux is cheap and good :) The only problem I have is that I have to learn it before I can use it! :beer:
Exactamndo!! I like what I hear about Linux. My son is learning it now. However I am not good at command line OS. I'm old and old dogs learn slow. Hope I get it someday:rolleyes:
Windows XP is a great OS.. With 512 Ram go with Windows XP ..
After you tweak everything you'll notice its the best for uses of anything... Workstation, Gaming or juss regular whatever :)
Softwebdev
11-19-01, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by Yodums
Windows XP is a great OS.. With 512 Ram go with Windows XP ..
After you tweak everything you'll notice its the best for uses of anything... Workstation, Gaming or juss regular whatever :)
i have 348 mb.............my computer barely survive.................after everything, my computer has 188 mb left...............
i will get more RAM soon...............
I was running Win XP, I agree it's a very nice OS. But it just did'nt seem to run smooth and quick enough. Even after countless tweaking and disabling of all the services I did'nt need. I installed it on my parents machine and it was really quick. He's got a 1.2 gig T-Bird w\512 megs of ram. vs my duron @ 933 w\256 megs of ram. There's a huge difference.
So I did a clean install of Win 2K Pro with SP2 and all is well. Just as stable as XP but much faster. For me anyway!
Works pretty fast for me, even thought I am on a P3 500..
Originally posted by Yodums
Works pretty fast for me, even thought I am on a P3 500..
Maybe I'm just being to picky
LOL.. But Windows 2k is an identical of Windows XP .. Just add some better looks to it and some more ram eating.. But the one difference that I just love is compatiblity :p
I really havent run into any compatibility problems yet. I play mostly all newer games so that's not much of a concern. Everything else seems to work pretty good.
I guess the new games have good compatiblity with it.. I might switch next time.. *Cries* but I love the Win XP Look. :)
wizardloader
11-20-01, 10:50 AM
So windows 2k is same kernel as xp. Plus all the drivers are working and de-bugged. Face it Microlame (I hate Gates) always releases "buggy" OS so he can charge you or update so he can gather info from you.
Well win2k is cheap now and maybe my way to go. Can anyone tell me what the +'s and-'s from win98SE are? ( Can't wait till I learn Linux)
Kingslayer
11-20-01, 10:58 AM
+ and - of 98se....
Pluses:
Small resource footprint. Outstanding driver support from companies. Outstanding software support. Simple kernel. Price. Offers better speed in gaming. Microsoft product.
Minuses:
Can't handle alot of memory. Reaching the end of it's life span (Microsoft will be dropping all support for 98 soon). Instability. Not SMP capable. (big minus in my book) Lack of local machine security. Microsoft product.
wizardloader
11-20-01, 11:58 AM
98se is better at gaming??
wizardloader
11-20-01, 03:23 PM
Hehe responce plz. Is win 2k worse at gaming than win98SE?:D
Originally posted by wizardloader
Hehe responce plz. Is win 2k worse at gaming than win98SE?:D
That depends on who you talk to. I think its great. Every game under the sun is made to support Windows 2000 now. The only problems that I run into are when I try to run games that need Real Mode DOS. The NT5 Kernel does NOT like to give things full access to the hardware, and thats what Real Mode DOS does.
dreadlord79
11-21-01, 03:27 AM
95 is getting the "axe" as of 12:00 midnight on the 31st of Dec. I wonder when Billy will "axe" 98?
A sad day in computing since 98 is the only one I really trust right now even if XP is based on NT! Oh well, I am going into Linux soon any way.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.