Author Topic: Your opinion about XP (Read 844 times)

Apache · « **on:** July 11, 2002, 09:22:30 AM »

I currently run Windows 98SE for my gaming PC, mainly for compatibility issues with my Voodoo5500. It runs fine.

I was considering upgrading to XP but I'm a little leary because I'm not sure what it will do to my vid card. I'm aware there are 3rd party drivers available but if anyone here is running XP with a 3dfx card, I'm curious if you ran into any difficulties.

Thanks in advance

Staga · « **Reply #1 on:** July 11, 2002, 09:50:39 AM »

Just FYI.
141$ in Pricewatch which btw is 70$ less than what that card cost here :/

LePaul · « **Reply #2 on:** July 11, 2002, 10:37:52 AM »

I'm running a system with Windows 2000 Pro and the Voodoo 5500. I wont go the XP route because I just don't think its the great OS is cracked up to be....at least not yet.

Anyways, I'm using the standard drivers (from 3DFX) and when I did a Windows Update a few months back, noted Microsoft had a new driver for the 3DFX card. Seems to work fine.

My system is a AMD Athlon XP 2000+ (1.666ghz) w/256mb ram (PC133) and a SCSI RAID hard drive(s). In Aces, I am seeing 79FPS with FSAA off, 39~65 FPS with FSAA x2. It works quite nicely. However, games that use the Quake engine are problematic at best.

If you've been following the other threads, my new system uses a GeForce 4 4600. Problem is the GigaByte motherboard is defective, so I'm on the old system until I get the new MSI motherboard (two gaming systems, isn't life good?

). You might want to consider a GeForce 4 4200 or 4400 and dump the 3DFX card altogether. I'm finding more and more games will not work with it. Even the 3D Game Studio software hates it.

Summary: Dump the 3DFX card in favor of a GeForce 4, and go Windows 2000 Professional. I bought a copy of Win2k at GoogleGear.Com for $138 last week.

Lephturn · « **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2002, 04:31:27 PM »

While Win2k is excellent and I really like it, I've found there are features I just really want that come with XP. Cleartext is the big one. I really like the UI upgrade as well. Other than that, XP is largely Win2k under the covers anyway.

Right now I also run Win98SE and a V5 5500. It still gets along just fine. However, I want to go XP for the features it brings, so I've upgraded. I've got a case, PS, Abit NV7-133R mainboard, and 512 MB of DDR Ram sitting here now ready to rock. Next week the drives (Dual Matrox 40 Gig quite bearing in RAID 1), the CPU, and the CDR get here. I'll dig up a floppy someplace for it.

But yep... Win2K rocks. So far XP has been 2K with some extra features. I run XP at work now on a couple of boxes, and now I really want it on my home box bad. XP has been almost as rock solid as Win2k. I had one weird little hitch with the shell sucking up 70% CPU, but I seemed to have cured that with some driver updates. Oh, and that was with leaving the workstation running 24x7. No crashes or reboots here.

Staga · « **Reply #4 on:** July 11, 2002, 04:42:08 PM »

Win2000= NT 5.0
WinXP = NT 5.1

Both are good thought XP is having better support for games. My old W2k couldn't run all games but in XP they work like a dream.

btw I hate that colourfull UI in WinXP. Firts thing I did after installation I changed theme to old windows

Skuzzy · « **Reply #5 on:** July 11, 2002, 04:47:18 PM »

Big difference, which no one seems to mention, is you do not get stcuk with a subscription with W2K, and you do with XP.

Personally, I do not like to be told I HAVE to pay MS in 2 years just to keep my computer running.

CavemanJ · « **Reply #6 on:** July 11, 2002, 05:48:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Big difference, which no one seems to mention, is you do not get stcuk with a subscription with W2K, and you do with XP.

Personally, I do not like to be told I HAVE to pay MS in 2 years just to keep my computer running.

Hallelujah! Amen and pass the 2k brother!

bloom25 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 11, 2002, 10:46:25 PM »

I'm with Skuzzy and CaveJ on this one, WinXP will never be on my system as long as Microsoft persists with product activation. Neither will any other piece of Microsoft software with it (Office XP).

Windows 2000 may be the last Microsoft OS I'll ever own. Once it's gone, I'll just switch to Linux.

Glasses · « **Reply #8 on:** July 12, 2002, 06:12:54 AM »

Lepaul which Motherboard do you have I wanted to upgrade to an Athlon XP System but I was afraid I would lose all my PC133 RAM since I thought DDR Ram was a requisite . Please I hope you did mean PC133

. If So, stability wise what chipset Etc

BTW XP Is great no crashes for me lock ups ETC . I have found though in my other PC that it is touchy with CD burning also some programs like Antivirus or Office 2002 might not work if you change from FAT32 to NTFS apparently the latter is much less compatible and may cause some programs not to install , I have heard. So far all games have installed in my system no problems with it and are very stable. It still has some quirks but stability wise is rock solid.

Animal · « **Reply #9 on:** July 12, 2002, 07:10:20 AM »

So far, Windows XP Pro. has been awesome for me. Even more stable than Windows 2000 (for some reason Win2k is slow and crashes on my system) and its very fast.

I also dislike product activation. What I did was get a pirated version of the corporate edition wich you dont have to activate. I have not problem with this since I own a legit copy of XP Pro, and I dont give a diddly about Microsoft.

If they get more strict with the activation crap, I'll do as Skuzzy will: Linux. Wich will suck, becasue I really dislike Linux (I rarely use my Mandrake installation)

CavemanJ · « **Reply #10 on:** July 12, 2002, 09:37:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Animal

I also dislike product activation. What I did was get a pirated version of the corporate edition wich you dont have to activate. I have not problem with this since I own a legit copy of XP Pro, and I dont give a diddly about Microsoft.

Me thinks yer in fer a surprise......

Animal · « **Reply #11 on:** July 12, 2002, 10:19:10 AM »

What, I'm gonna get busted or something?

LePaul · « **Reply #12 on:** July 12, 2002, 11:58:10 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Glasses
Lepaul which Motherboard do you have I wanted to upgrade to an Athlon XP System but I was afraid I would lose all my PC133 RAM since I thought DDR Ram was a requisite . Please I hope you did mean PC133 . If So, stability wise what chipset Etc

I have 2 Athlon XP Systems now. Both have MSI boards now.

One has the KT133 chip, which uses the PC133 ram (I have 256mb on that system) along with the Voodoo 5 and a SCSI hard drive/RAID 5 setup. The model eludes me at the moment but its a fairly zippy system. However the MSI KT3 Ultra board really is substanially faster.

System 2 uses MSI KT3 Ultra (not ARU). I have 512mb DDR 2100/ECC ram and a Maxtor IDE ata133 hard drive in that system, as well as the GeForce 4 4600. That machine just flies, its really sweet. Nominal price difference on the ram and motherboards, so I'd really suggest a DDR board.

Ask Bloom, we've been haggling this motherboard issue all week

SKurj · « **Reply #13 on:** July 12, 2002, 01:43:01 PM »

I love XP Pro
however in the not too distant future I will likely go to w2k for the reasons Skuzzy mentioned above

MSI K7T turbo 2
XP1800+ (@1900+)
512 pc 133 ram
sblive
gf4 mx
2 hdd's

SKurj

LePaul · « **Reply #14 on:** July 12, 2002, 01:51:40 PM »

Skurj,

The jump from a PC133 RAM system to DDR is quite something. Im running the Athlon Xp 2000 cpu and its well worth it