Author Topic: IRQs and W2K......?? (Read 1346 times)

mason22 · « **on:** October 18, 2001, 12:47:00 AM »

ok, my turn with all this IRQ stuff:

all 9's....that's not good is it?

how do i fix it if it's bad. my machine specs:

PIII600E @ 901mhz (150mhz FSB)
ASUS P3V4X
256megs PC133
SB AWE gold
Geforce2 ULTRA 64 megs
WIN 2000 professional

Furious · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2001, 01:35:00 AM »

Mine looks very similar. Win2k and lotta 9's.

Microsoft ACPi-Compliant System
Creative SB Live! Value
NVIDIA Geforce2 GTS/Geforce2 Pro
PCI device
Standard Universal PCI to USB Host Controller

all of 'em on 9
nothing assingned to 2,3,5,7,10,11

F.

mason22 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2001, 01:40:00 AM »

hmmm, just did some looking through MS support....looks like we're screwed if we had ACPI installed ON from the beginning?

Wobble · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2001, 01:47:00 AM »

yup, thats is, jsut change it ro 'standard PC" and it will be fine, i jsut went through it a few min ago.

mrsid2 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2001, 01:53:00 AM »

What you need to do is disable ACPI from w2k.
MS says it's enough to do repair installation of W2k with ACPI disabled, I found out that I needed to do a FULL reinstallation with standard PC profile.

During installation bootup of W2k you get promt: press f6 if you need to install any third party scsi devices

During that prompt, press F5 and you will get a menu which enables you to select your AP profile. In the menu select Standard PC and continue installation normally. Be aware that reinstalling w2k forces you to reinstall most of your software unless you can backup the registry data somehow.

Also check IRQ reservations from your BIOS, you seem to have an awful lot of ISA markings in the IRQ list which shouldnt be there. Or do you have SB awe64 in ISA slot??

Skuzzy · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2001, 06:50:00 AM »

There is a way to get w2k to work when you switch off ACPI, but it is not pretty and I would not recommend it.
Best to be ready to do a full installation of the OS after disabling ACPI.

Another note: Disabling ACPI does not insure devices will not be on thier on interrupt. You really have to look hard at all your motherboard docs, as most motherboards will have PCI slots hardwired to share interrupts with USB and AGP ports.
Once you have determined which PCI slots are shared, then it is a matter of putting your PCI cards in non-shared slots.
And for crying out loud, be sure to disable any COM or LPT ports you are not using in the BIOS ROM.

Also make sure Windoze is not loading the drivers for those disabled ports. In Win98, you can use msconfig to do this, not sure about w2k though.

A lean and mean system should boot really fast. My poor old 800Mhz/100Mhz FSB system will boot Win98SE in about 7 seconds. This is timed after the BIOS init is done. And I have about 30 ICONS on my desktop. I saw this one 1.2Ghz system at the CON that took about 20 seconds to boot. Oy! I would shoot myself if I had to wait that long for a system to boot.

mrsid2 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2001, 10:03:00 AM »

Then don't try W2k Skuzzy.. =))

I have a raid-0 setup and it still takes 20 seconds to boot up. Really bugs me off when installing several patches.

Furious · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2001, 03:24:00 PM »

This from Microsoft's TechNet:

Quote

If you want to disable ACPI support after Windows 2000 is installed, you must reinstall Windows 2000 with APCI disabled in the computer's BIOS. Because numerous changes are made to the registry and system files, an upgrade installation does not work.

Full article here: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q197/0/55.ASP

F.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2001, 03:37:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mr RiplEy:
Then don't try W2k Skuzzy.. =))

I have a raid-0 setup and it still takes 20 seconds to boot up. Really bugs me off when installing several patches.

Bummer. I keep reading how people say that each iteration of the MS OS's boots faster than 98. Good to here that may be an exageration. I have no patience for slow booting computers. That slow boot-up will keep me away from w2k for sure.

qts · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2001, 04:14:00 PM »

So what if it's a slow boot? My computer just stays on. About the only time I down it is when I take it to a LAN meet.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2001, 04:23:00 PM »

Whenever I am testing new software, you have to reboot to make sure the registry is right for install and uninstall. This is tedious enough as it is.
We develope a lot of software here, and time is money.

-ammo- · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2001, 11:04:00 PM »

first, even though IRQ is shared by all that, it shouldn't be creating a problem for you with win2k. Its normal. I even moved the SB card to leave the PCI slot under the AGP slot but win@k didnt care, it shared it anyway. But ever since I upgraded to win2K, i ahve had zilch for problems. If its not giving you any trouble, leave it alone

Wobble · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2001, 11:21:00 PM »

Win2k takes longer to boot up, but you need to boot it about 1/10th the time you need to boot win98..

installing drivers, yea its slower with win2k.. but how often do ya do that?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #13 on:** October 19, 2001, 07:23:00 AM »

ammo, the way w2k handles the sharing of interrupts is by adding another layer of software to act as a redirector for interrups. This adds more CPU cycles to be handled for every interrupt.
If you are a performance nut, like me, you find this scheme to be rather unacceptable. It is a decent bandaid to handle the lack of interrupts available in the PC architecture though. Of course, given the overhead of w2k itself, there may not be a visual difference in performance when getting rid of the shared interrupts, but it will reduce the number of CPU cycles to handle interrupts.

Wobble, any reboot I have to do is voluntary. My 98 systems just run and run. I have never had a lockup or crash, so w2k will not make any difference in that regard. As we constantly swap hardware around for benchmarking and testing, reboot time is important. Not to mention all the software development we do, which can require multiple reboots, depending on the nature of the program.

mason22 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 19, 2001, 06:24:00 PM »

according to that article posted by furious, if i were to go ahead with the re-install of win2K, would i have to re-install all of my software as well? or would it just right over the system files and registry??