Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Microsoft Windows XP And Vista

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-24-04, 07:48 AM   #13
Clay
Registered User
 
Clay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,993
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by darktip
problem I have is xp is faster in booting up compare to 2000. but 2000 fast once you are inside OS and that is were xp starts slow down.. so habe some issues with picking one or the other
Out of the box XP "should" be faster than W2K on all fronts and not require tweaking...course this isn't a perfect world so if you haven't already check out these sites with tips and tweak guides. Some are kinda goofy looking but they all have good info:

http://www.winguides.com/ (great all-around site, registry, etc)

http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/xp.htm

http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/winxp.htm (awesome site)

http://www.tweakxp.com/

http://www.dougknox.com/

http://www.theeldergeek.com/
Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-04, 03:21 PM   #14
schuey74
GTX 280 (675/1458/2500)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 819
Default

XP supports Hyperthreading and 2K does not.
schuey74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-04, 11:12 AM   #15
RobHague
I like cheese.
 
RobHague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 904
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by schuey74
XP supports Hyperthreading and 2K does not.
Yes it does, except XP knows that they are logical, 2k see's them as pysical processors... but it works all the same.
__________________

There used to be a signature here, but now there isnt.
RobHague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-04, 06:24 PM   #16
SuLinUX
 
SuLinUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 847
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Gator
I've experienced no slow downs using XP vs 2K... maybe there is something else at work that's giving you the slow downs.

Personally, I like XP better. Sure it's a prettier version of 2K, but if all the games are intended for XP than wouldn't it make sense to have XP . Furthermore, I've actually read of a few games like NBA 2004, which donot run well or at all on Win2k, and they don't plan to make patches for it because they consider Win2k a "business operating system."

On a side note, I also think XP handles USB devices better, at least it did for me when I switched.

Another vote for XP
XP is nothing more than a skinned version of Win2k and it's a myth it being faster, I remember getting way more 3dmarks in Win2k. I noticed GTA Vice city runs better in Win2k and it just seems alot less bloated.
__________________
AthlonXP 2600+ / nForce2 Asus A7N8X-X / PNY GeForce FX5900 Ultra / 1024Mb Samsung Ram /nForce Sound / Hansol 920D Plus 19" monitor / Lite-On 32x12x40 / 2x Maxtor HD 40Gb/80Gb / nVidia 7174 driver / Gnome 2.10.1 / Kernel 2.6.11.9 / Slackware 10.0
SuLinUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-04, 08:54 PM   #17
Heavyd
Registered User
 
Heavyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 115
Send a message via ICQ to Heavyd
Default

I say this all the time..... Open GL games... then Windows 2000.... Direct X games.... XP... or if ur like me.. do a duel boot
Heavyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-04, 05:08 AM   #18
pureflow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4
Send a message via ICQ to pureflow
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

I'm running w2k. I'm not very sure about XP security systems but it seems that it's less headache to confirm w2k security shared folders for PC/MAC.

plus point for XP is that sharing folder for MAC is easy. declaring security rights per user is a big headache over w2k.

I am thinking of making the switch.. but my server is already W2k Adv Svr.

but thinking of XP being able to play porsche unleashed kinda make me wanna change. but my real use for the PC is photoshop. where a JPEG file is around 10-20mb(JPEG)/ 100-300Mb (tiff). I wonder if XP would have better memory management/caching system.
__________________
AMD Dual 2100+
Dual 21" Trinitrons 3200x1200x32
3Gb DDR266 rams
Pinnacle stereo
39160R
4x36Gb x15 seagate
4x 9.1Gb 10k seagate
Antec 550ws
Ti4600 128Mb Elsa 925 vivo
yamaha 2100s
pioneer scsi DVD
SB live
Lucent WinModem
Windows2000 SP4

Fans:
2x 120mm deltas
5x 80mm deltas
2x Aero 7+

Last edited by pureflow; 03-23-04 at 05:34 AM.
pureflow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-04, 07:35 AM   #19
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

Quote:
Originally Posted by pureflow
I wonder if XP would have better memory management/caching system.
That hasn't changed over Windows 2000 (thankfully). When you close programs in XP, they relinquish memory back to the OS unlike Windows 9x.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-04, 07:51 AM   #20
Clay
Registered User
 
Clay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,993
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

Quote:
Originally Posted by saturnotaku
That hasn't changed over Windows 2000 (thankfully). When you close programs in XP, they relinquish memory back to the OS unlike Windows 9x.
Yeah, but a few tweaks can help even more, this one in particular:

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\Explorer.
Create a new sub-key named 'AlwaysUnloadDLL' and set the default value to equal '1' to disable Windows caching the DLL in memory. Restart Windows for the change to take effect.
Clay is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-04, 02:15 PM   #21
dns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

Agreed, XP is far better for gaming than 2000. Although I do like 2000's interface much better than XP, this can be changed anyway in Control Panel . If XP boots slower than 2000, it's just because your startup folder has too much running in it. try deleting some things that you don't need to use on startup. You can find this at Start > Programs > Startup
dns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-04, 07:48 PM   #22
Riptide
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 8,303
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

I kinda wish MS had pulled the plug on 98 support like they were going to. Maybe it's just me, but 9x is the most unstable POS ever. As soon as 2000 came out, I loaded it up and never looked back. Even with beta nvidia drivers the thing was more stable than 9x on my old pentium 3 machine. I could write a book about the trials and tribulations I went through with 9x - it's a frickin pile. The sooner people move on, the better.
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-04, 09:47 AM   #23
SuLinUX
 
SuLinUX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 847
Default Re: windows 2000 vs XP

Has anyone got any REAL proof that XP is faster because it's myth as far as I'm conserned, i'm sure if MS fixed the memory leaks it would help alot.
__________________
AthlonXP 2600+ / nForce2 Asus A7N8X-X / PNY GeForce FX5900 Ultra / 1024Mb Samsung Ram /nForce Sound / Hansol 920D Plus 19" monitor / Lite-On 32x12x40 / 2x Maxtor HD 40Gb/80Gb / nVidia 7174 driver / Gnome 2.10.1 / Kernel 2.6.11.9 / Slackware 10.0
SuLinUX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Windows 8 could be the next Vista News Archived News Items 0 06-15-12 10:30 AM
Like XP or Vista: how will businesses treat Windows 8? News Archived News Items 0 06-06-12 09:10 AM
NVIDIA Brings 18 Years of Experience to Windows 8 News Archived News Items 0 06-03-12 06:20 AM
Sync it up: Hands on with the preview of Windows 8's cloud sync service News Archived News Items 0 06-02-12 08:30 PM
Windows 2000 SP3 - - IT'S OUT! OMG! I DON'T BELIEVE! PCarr78 Microsoft Windows XP And Vista 22 08-01-02 09:23 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.