Windows 2000 Updated Information

[Gurm]

This is a public service announcement for all those who choose to run Windows 2000 with their G400 cards. This is being crossposted to General Hardware as well, since it is pretty interesting (well, maybe I'm biased, but I thing it's interesting!) stuff:

1. If you have ACPI on your system, and you have upgraded to or otherwise installed Windows 2000, you may have noticed that all of your devices are sharing IRQ 9. THIS IS ENTIRELY NORMAL. The reasons for this are as follows:

A. IRQ 9 is a "cascade IRQ". This means not a hell of a lot in terms of modern devices, but it means that it gets special handling by the BIOS.

B. Your ACPI controller has enabled something called "polling". This is a more technically advanced method of hardware device interaction than IRQ's. With IRQ's, your device basically calls a complete halt to all CPU activity once every X nanoseconds, and demands CPU time. This is great, unless a driver is badly written or a device is hogging the bus. Under "polling", the CPU decides when a device should talk to it. This can, as you would imagine, be a little less efficient in terms of hardware interaction (for things like games), but is tremendously more elegant.

2. The G400 drivers for Windows 2000 are nearly perfect in 2D. With the exception of the now known Adaptec EZ-CD Creator bug (don't run it in 32bpp!), there are no application or game incompatibilities in 2D. In fact, the Win2k drivers are BETTER than the Win98 drivers for this.

3. The G400 drivers for Windows 2000 are a crapshoot in 3D. Some games work. Some games don't work. Some games work, but have glitchy graphics. This will undoubtedly get better. In the meantime, if gaming is your top priority, DON'T run Win2k with these drivers. All games in OpenGL are going to be slower. That's just how it is.

4. If you have lots of bluescreens and errors, it's NOT Windows 2000. It's your machine. You may have a wonderful computer, but if it's not ready for NT, it's not ready for Windows 2000.

5. DON'T install Windows 2000 onto the same partition as Windows 98. Just don't do it.

6. DON'T use NTFS unless you need it. If you aren't going to host a secure server, you don't need it. And it just causes problems with your other OS's, your applications and games.

7. Matrox is the BEST in the industry right now for Win2k support. If I hear one more rant about how Matrox sucks at Win2k support, I'll DOS your ass to kingdom come. Capece?

Ok, that's all. There may be more later. Just a public service announcement. That's all.

- Gurm

[LAMFDTK]

Thanks Gurm !


W2k is a Business O/S I wish folks could realize this !

Windows 2000 Professional (thats Professional) Does that sound like a Gaming platform to you?

[This message has been edited by LAMFDTK (edited 10 January 2000).]

[kewlcat]

Awright Gurm!

Guess that means Linux is my gaming OS?



------------------
Abit BP6, Dual Celeron 366@550, G400 32MB DualHead, 128MB RAM, WD26500 6.4GB, SBLive! Value.
Running Mandrake 6.1 and Windows 2000.



[This message has been edited by kewlcat (edited 11 January 2000).]

[paulcs]

Thanks Gurm.

NT and Windows98 on the same partition? Yikes!

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Chasbo]

How about installing the G400 beta W2K drivers? Is it better to run the setup program or use the "Have Disk" method?

Chuck

[Wombat]

Ant should take this and patch it right into the FAQ.

[SCompRacer]

More info on Win 2000 ACPI Hardware Abstraction Layer in MS Article Q237556 and Q246236. (Go here http://www.microsoft.com/ms.htm and type Q237556 in Search. (If I post entire link, this whole page goes W-I-D-E)

While not recommended and with nothing to lose, I switched from ACPI to Standard PC in Device Manager. System went through withdrawl and basically re-recognized all devices and assigned IRQ's according to my MB architecture. Does not work any better, but Quake II will start and run for a bit now and then crash, instead of crashing at the start.

As an option, I was also told that during setup, when you are prompted to hit F6, hit F5 instead and you can select Standard PC then. I have not tried this yet so it's not an absolute.




[This message has been edited by SCompRacer (edited 11 January 2000).]

[Gurm]

You CAN switch from ACPI to regular, but there's really no point. In some cases it can provide DIFFERENT results in terms of compatibility. Not better, just different.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[colo]

LAMFDTK,

please read this before you say that again:

You just miss the point completely. What exactly does "made for
Gamers" mean in the real world? Now don't take that question too
superficially. Stop a moment and think about what that really means.
What do gamers need in an OS?

1) Do they need a cobbled-together patchwork of new Windows kernal and
twenty-year-old DOS code with the CPU constantly flopping between real
and protected modes, or do they need a solid, extensible, stable fully
32-bit kernal, fully protected from the applications and drivers
running on it?

2) Do they need a crippled mix of cooperative and preemptive
multitasking that chugs and grunts along with skipped frames and
stuttering video or do they need a system that provides smooth,
powerful fully-preemptive multitasking and multithreading that makes
full use of your CPU and memory resources?

3) Do they need a system choked into oblivion by legacy 16-bit
resource limitations or do they need a system that eliminates such
arbitrary limitations and measure RAM potential in Gigabytes and Disk
potential in Terrabytes.

4) Do they need a system that hacked networking on as an afterthought
or one that was built around networking from the ground up?

Look, except for some relatively obscure scientific applications, the
type of computing that drives hardware development these days is
gaming. Gamers push the envelope of personal computing in every
aspect of the system. Yet, gamers are stuck with a garbage OS because
MS wouldn't get off their butts and support DirectX on NT4.
Consequently, most game developers have developed for Win9x and left
NT behind. Yet, except for that one (very important) omission, NT4
would have been a much better platform for games as it had the power,
the *real* multitasking and the stability to rock the socks off of
Win9x.

Now, here we are with NT5 about to come out as Win2k and some of you
guys think that, just because MS covers their collective ass by saying
Win9x is for games and Win2k is for business, that each of those is
best for that respective use. Bull! Just ask yourselves this. Which
of you out there sets every option in their OS to the setting that
says (recommended) next ot it by MS? Hmmm? Seriously, not one of
you does that and the reason why is that you know that MS does that
just to cover their butts. The recommended options amount to them
saying "this setting will be slow and provide crappy performance, but
you'll be less likely to waste our time calling tech support if you
choose it".

Well the same thing is true with MS's statements about their OSs.
Don't think for a moment that MS doesn't know that Win2k is the best
gaming platform out there. Do you think they built-in DX7 so that
word processors could use D3D and Direct-sound to beep at you and
flash the cursor when you misspell a word? The only--and I mean
ONLY-- advantage the Win9x line has over Windows 2000 for gaming is
that all the existing games are already written for Win9x. In every
other respect, Windows 2000 is the gamers' dream OS. It has
everything you want and need for serious ass-kicking, full-speed
no-holds-barred gaming.

But now it's up to you. You can sit back and let MS and the gamers
continue to force you onto that feeble, though respectable and
venerable, old grandfather of an OS called Windows 9x, or you can get
out there and *insist* that they develop for Windows 2000. Each and
every gamer needs to email each and every major game developer to let
them know that they *demand* support for Windows 2000 in all their
upcoming games. You should do the same with all multimedia hardware
manufacturers like Creative Labs, etc. as well.

Remember that there is only *one* reason they make any of this
stuff... so you will buy it. Collectively, you control the industry
through your purchasing decisions. Demand this now, demand it loudly
and demand it with your dollars, and you'll see the best gaming you've
ever imagined before the (real) new millennium arrives. Act like
sheep and take whatever crap they through at you, and you'll still be
stuck with Millennium (new face on the same old crap) in three year's
time.

And whatever you do, don't let these pedantic dweebs talk you out of
what you know to be true. You can quote MS legal liability-control
drivel or you can think for yourself and look at what's looking you
right back in the face. Win2k *is* the new gaming platform of choice.
Support those who support Windows 2000 as a gaming platform and shun
those that don't. Your destiny is in your own hands.

[DentyCracker]

"Dont put Win2K and Win98 on the same partition".

I agree with this in principle.
However I have them running on the same partition without a problem on a 233 MMX POS PCCHIPS mobo (128 MB RAM) for 2+ months now so it can be done. I still do not recommend it (I did not have much choice)

[Gurm]

Denty:

I never said it couldn't be done. I (and a few others I know) can do just about anything on a computer. I merely said it shouldn't be done. That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it!

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

[Wombat]

Agreed. My next-door neighbor lost everything when RC1 trashed the partition.

[LAMFDTK]

Wow nice post colo, First one here also !

Hey [In a Perfect world] I agree with you also but....

"The only--and I mean
ONLY-- advantage the Win9x line has over Windows 2000 for gaming is
that all the existing games are already written for Win9x."

You forgot all the future Games

"or you can get out there and *insist* that they develop for Windows 2000."/
"you control the industry through your purchasing decisions"

I can't even find a game to buy that is Complete, I have to wait , after I buy it to get 5-10 patches...then I normally could care less about it because I buy another game, wait for the patch.....


"And whatever you do, don't let these pedantic dweebs talk you out of
what you know to be true."

colo, These are the days of Bill Clinton, no one cares about what is right and who is responsible. right?

"Support those who support Windows 2000 as a gaming platform and shun
those that don't. "

Shun those that don't? Is this THE place to make my stand in the world? I thought it was fighting the new World order?

Just having fun

W2k wont get the support it needs to be what you want it to be. I wish it would.

I'd like to get a Big MAC like the one in the picture over the counter also.

[Fubar]

I thought I shold mention that win2k does not only use IRQ9 for all your devices. Mine is happy, up and running with all devices on IRQ11(was IRQ9 before I went and messed with the components), and my friend has all running on IRQ7.

Fubar

[Gurm]

Yup, 9 is not the only IRQ. It's the "usual" IRQ though, for the reasons listed above. It cascades with 2, making it an 8/16 hybrid IRQ.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is m