2400 XP worth it?

[3dfx]

A very valid point Snake

[rugger]

Upgrade hard drive!!!!!

Do it NOW. Hard drives are stupidly cheap nowadays. (I don't like the warrentees anymore) You should be able to get a seagate barracuda IV for cheap. They are fast and extremely quiet. Use your samsung as a storage hard drive.

What, you haven't put your coat on yet and not yet out the door down to the computer shop. Hurry then, before I kick your butt for having such a lamer drive (only kidding about the kicking butt)

A faster hard drive will definitely make game loading/transitions faster. Pick up a bit more ram while your down there too, that helps.

A cpu upgrade will not make as much difference as the numbers suggest. (been there, done that) In fact, matrox slightlt rearranging their drivers is going to affect performance more (in either direction) than buying that CPU will

[3dfx]

Right well it looks like it is going to be a Hard drive update
Which one though?
I have it down to 3 possible choices from advice on the forum:
seagate barracuda IV
Western Digital Caviar or a
Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 8

What do you think?

[UtwigMU]

WD is faster, while the cuda is quieter. I say WD.

Head to www.storagereview.com to check the tests, noise and heat and decide for yourself.

[Nuno]

I have 2 Barracudas IV: a 40 Gb and a 80gb. Very quiet, fast, affordable and until now, reliable hard drives (the 40Gb is one year old). Highly recomended.

[Liquid Snake]

Actually I was asking a question and not making a point I never worry about my sound card affecting game performance because I haven't used 3D audio since Aureal disappeared. But I was just wondering if it still has a major impact (more than a couple of fps) if I don't use 3D audio.

I'd recommend getting a new HD as well. You'd get faster loading times. I haven't had experience with the newer Maxtor drives or the WD drives, but the Seagate Barracuda IV is good. Pretty fast and almost silent operation. I also have a Maxtor D740X drive, which is about the same but not as quiet. 512MB RAM seems enough. I have 384MB and have never felt that it limits me in terms of gaming.

[Admiral]

512MB RAM seems enough. I have 384MB and have never felt that it limits me in terms of gaming.

I also had 384mb (well, still have, just that the 128 stick isn't installed anymore) till I found why XP crashed so often (and unjustly hated its guts for so long ) and many games alike. My motherboard seems to be extreemly picky about ram, or ram combinations.
Anyway, while in 98 I can see no difference with 256mb, in XP there is a big one. Progs load slower at startup, since the OS eats more ram, games swap more to the hdd and there is the small lag while it happens...
Don't know if 256 DDR can do it for XP, but you do need at least 384 SDR in XP.

If he has the money and the upgrade itch, wouldn't a 333 fsb Athlon XP give him extra performance ?

[3dfx]

Basically I have 512 crucuial DDR and I find that this is enough for me but out of interest here is the spec number of my hard drive:
Samsung SV2042H

[Liquid Snake]

Originally posted by Admiral
I also had 384mb (well, still have, just that the 128 stick isn't installed anymore) till I found why XP crashed so often (and unjustly hated its guts for so long ) and many games alike. My motherboard seems to be extreemly picky about ram, or ram combinations.
Anyway, while in 98 I can see no difference with 256mb, in XP there is a big one. Progs load slower at startup, since the OS eats more ram, games swap more to the hdd and there is the small lag while it happens...
Don't know if 256 DDR can do it for XP, but you do need at least 384 SDR in XP.

That's why I use Win2K

[rugger]

Originally posted by Liquid Snake
Actually I was asking a question and not making a point I never worry about my sound card affecting game performance because I haven't used 3D audio since Aureal disappeared. But I was just wondering if it still has a major impact (more than a couple of fps) if I don't use 3D audio.

I'd recommend getting a new HD as well. You'd get faster loading times. I haven't had experience with the newer Maxtor drives or the WD drives, but the Seagate Barracuda IV is good. Pretty fast and almost silent operation. I also have a Maxtor D740X drive, which is about the same but not as quiet. 512MB RAM seems enough. I have 384MB and have never felt that it limits me in terms of gaming.

Same here. I have 384meg ram and I never reach the swap storm state

[3dfx]

Have either of you tried XP? and what are your thought in comparison to 2000?

[UtwigMU]

NT Werkstation, 512MB, since untill half a year ago still had 128MB I didn't switch to 2k.

Anyway: 128MB of RAM, OS usage:
- NT 4.0 36MB
- 2k (NT 5.0) 50MB
- XP (NT 5.1) 85MB!!!

Now with 512MB NT easily takes up 65-85MB so the more the OS can use, the more it swaps to memory. With XP IMHO 512MB is minimum.

[3dfx]

In you opinion is 2000 better than XP and how does the Parhelia do in that OS?

[Admiral]

Originally posted by Liquid Snake
That's why I use Win2K

How is the game compatibility in 2k SP3 ? (DX7 titles and upwards)
One of the reasons I chose XP vs 2k SP2 at the time was better game compatibility.

Originally posted by 3dfx
In you opinion is 2000 better than XP and how does the Parhelia do in that OS?

With 512 ram I don't think you should worry about 2k vs XP performance. In my case I might consider going back since it eats less ram.

[3dfx]

Well tbh I did use 2000 for a while and it was stable and suffered from little problems with games etc but generally I do prefer XP for all of it's features. Especially the recovery features
I was wondering what ppl thought of SP1 though as I tried that in a rig with a geforce 4 and it gave me nothing but problems. IE Direct 3d didn't work properly etc. I just cant see anything to warrant going back to 2000 IMO but maybe I can be proven wrong.