Win98 or Win2000?

[The Bullgod]

Which one is better fo UT?

I've got an AMDk6-2 450, 96Meg Ram, 16Mb Voodoo3 2000 blah blah. I get about 30fps in UT, and it drops as low as 10 in major firefights. Will this improve if I upgrade from 98 to 2000?

[|SB|Neuron]

Windows ME is clearly the best system for a UT user. I´ve got it my self as you probably understood.

[The Bullgod]

How is ME different to 2000? If I'm not mistaken, the year 2000 WAS the turn of the millenium. LOL are they much different?

I really want to know about win2000 because I got a free copy and I'm not sure whether to install it, as that will involve a format; I don't wanna do that unless it will help my games a bit.

PS like my Avatar?

[|SB|Neuron]

The good thing about ME is that the computer skips DOS so that it works faster. And I´ve heard that Win2000 is not for the playing kind. Even if I havent tryed Win2000.

[|SB|Neuron]

If you have the posibility to download new drivers to your 3d-card, you should. I´ve had the same problems my self. i just downloaded new drivers and then everything was as i supposed to be. :)

[|SB|Neuron]

When can you decide your own Custom Tag?
Need to know!:confused:

[|SB|Neuron]

The good thing about ME is that the computer skips DOS so that it works faster. And I´ve heard that Win2000 is not for the playing kind. Even if I havent tryed Win2000.

[Dead_Hood]

There have been instances in which win 2k will not allow UT to run correctly, therefore is suggest win ME. However, Microsoft blows so I recommend Linux. =)

[TwoHardCore]

I don't think that 96MB of RAM with your system will run Win2k very well. It's a better OS for getting the most stable environment, and depending on the 3dfx w2k drivers it may be ok for gaming.

I just installed w2k on my old system (celeron 400, 128 PC-100 etc) and it's noticeable slower than Win98 or ME were.... It's still quite useable and will become much better when I add my other 256 MB, when I upgrade my newer rig.

IIRC, 256 is a good minimum for w2k if you run any graphics apps etc....

I'm sure there are many, many, many more ppl with w2k experience, but I think ME would be best for your current system.

[alien8]

If you are using your system mainly for games, stick with Windows98 - it'll give you your best performance. I'm surprised at your framerates - what resolution do you run at? They should be better than that with those specs. The UT engine loves 3dfx cards! I was getting those same specs with my AMD K6/2 300 and 16mb Voodoo Banshee card, so you should be doing alot better than that...

[HR_DrBasta]

Well, I'm running Win2K for 3 months on my machine and my UT got better then with WinMe or Win98SE.
More frames, better memory processing, better net-code, stable, no crashes, no BSODs...
All I can say is that Win2K is superb! :D

[-AEnubis-]

Originally posted by HR_DrBasta
All I can say is that Win2K is superb! :D

AMEN.

I dual boot 98 and 2k, for some old games don't run win2k, and my burning software doesn't support win2k.

Win2k runs on the NT kernel, and 98, 98se, and ME all run the 98 kernel. That is why 2k is so stable. 2k though, doesn't get as much video driver attention, but your pings in 2k will always be better, 'cause it's all about networking.

How much ram you have makes a difference too. Bench markx show little to no differences between 128, and 256 mgs of ram in 98. The os wasn't designed for use of that much. If you have more, use ME or 2k, not sure if se will use it. 98 should run better w/ less ram.

I get weird chop and lag some times in 98, so I always play UT in 2k, and depending on the version of driver and dx I'm currently using, get occasional quirks, and locks, but nothing to write the companies about.

The only thing that makes 2k less stable then NT is directx, meaning, if you game, your system will never run "perfect", but my AMD TBird 700, on my A7V, w/ 256mg PC133 Ram, and Voodoo 3 3k, on my Win2k OS, runs UT beautifly. 80-100 frames, no loss, or major dips.

[HR_DrBasta]

Yep, totaly agree with you AEnubis :D

[alien8]

Hey, I totally agree with you guys (heck, I'm using Win2K as my primary gaming machine), but for 90% of the people out there who are already using Win98, there is no reason to do the upgrade to 2000. The price of the upgrade alone is a show-stopper, let alone the fact that Win2K is not an OS for newbies :)

[Shadowfax84]

Win2k is god compared to any win9x operating system. And the part about win2k not performing as good as winME or win98 in games is pretty much a myth now because win2k drivers for vicards have devolped so much. I got an increase in performace in games going from winME to win2k with my tnt2. Win2k has my vote.

[ThunderBirdUT]

Hello all folks...

I have been tested with all OS such Windows 95,98,98SE,NT, and 2000 with last version updated.

RAN UT with last version patched.

95: good!
98/98SE: PERFECTLY
ME: Bugging if you install more alot of MAPS, MODS, SKINS etc..
NT: worked but slow.
2000: not bad but slow than 98SE. and got crashed twice.


I choice Windows 98SE all I love it so much! and it NEVER give me problems at all!

I suggest to use Windows 98SE with fully updated from Microsoft Windows Update.

hope you get this.:D

:rl: ThunderBirdUT:redeemer:

[-AEnubis-]

I'm just talkin' of my experience with my voodoo card. The Win2k version of my drivers made it to 1.03, where the 98 is at 1.07... now, I don't know if this is because they keep screwing up the 98 ones, or just not workin' on the 2k ones enough, but I do still swear by Win2k for everything I do.

The vid card you use may have a difference in the performances, so if your going to tell us how UT played for you in the different OS's, you need to let us know with what vid card ThunderBirdUT.

[PsychoMoggieBagpuss]

I'm now running Win2k on a P3-800EB with a GeForce 1 DDR 32meg, 784 CAS" PC133 ram and an sblive.
Since I've installed it (two months ago) it has crashed a total of two times.
Also UT now no longer has the annoying intermitent lag/stutter that occurs when running opengl with the S3TC textures.

[|SB|Neuron]

Some months ago I tryed Windows ME BETA version. It sucked big time. The computer was f*cked up. I got errors all the time.
Just wanned you to know...Neuron

[ThunderBirdUT]

$MP$-AEnubis

Umm... it's might happens..

my video card is Voodoo3 3500TV for now..

i have 5500 AGP, I am upgrading on my PC for AMD 1.4Ghz Thunderbird DDR!!! YAY!!! just got it!!

ThunderBirdUT
:Pulse:

[BlkJello]

I wouldnt switch to 2000 if i were you. ive got both and UT in DX runs like crap on win2000. Horrible, Horrible mouse lag. and ive tried every tweak under the sun for UT and win2000. Opengl runs better but there is still glitches in the textures especially on the ramps in dmMorpheus. Stick with win 98 bud! Ive also tried winme and yes ut runs alittle better but all the other bloat that winme brings isnt worth it.

P3 866
asus cusl2
256 meg micron pc133
creative geforce2 gts
sblive xgamer 5.1
seagate barracuda 30gig 7200rpm

[WebSlinger]

Windows 2000 Professional, Service Pack 2 (5.0 - 2195)
Intel Pentium III, 865MHz
Memory 128MB
Voodoo3

runs fine here, creates an error when closing sometimes but only when it's between maps.

OH and turn off ALL Accessibility features in win2k, if you trigger one of them while in game using a Windows Accessibility Feature hot key, UT will minimize and you will be looking at a dialog box. Any programs running in the background that pop up a modal window will cause UT to minimize in win2k. This is not always the case in win98, since win98 will allow your screen-takover program to continue running in the fireground. Also be sure to not accidently hit the Windows Start menu key in win2k.

[The Bullgod]

Originally posted by alien8
If you are using your system mainly for games, stick with Windows98 - it'll give you your best performance. I'm surprised at your framerates - what resolution do you run at? They should be better than that with those specs. The UT engine loves 3dfx cards! I was getting those same specs with my AMD K6/2 300 and 16mb Voodoo Banshee card, so you should be doing alot better than that...


800x600, 16bit, lighting on (no volumetric though), decals off.
Medium on everything else.
Changing res doesn't affect anything with voodoo cards in 3dfx - i get the same framerate in any res.


How would I improve on this then?

[-AEnubis-]

Pentiums, and Geforces..... YUK.

My advice... AMD for anything you do. Currently, to give you an idea, the K7 processors are benching better then the P4's, let alone the P3's of equal size....

If you play UT primarily... 3DFX cards rock. A V3 3k is under 100 dollars, a small price to pay for superior frames in UT. I turn 80-100 with mine (vsync disabled). If you play many other games, of course, geforce will be the way to go.

Funny thing Is I still turn 60-80 GL Frames in Quake, 30-60 in Half-life, and the only place it sux is in tribes 2 where it ranges from 15-110 D3D frames, depending on map size, current visible distance, and amount of people on the screen.

Then, if you've taken the above advice, get 2k strictly for it's stability, and superior networkin', 'cause it will cut 30-60ms off your pings depending on your connection/isp.

THEN, maybe, just maybe, with much practice, you could hang w/ me without using your hardware as an excuse :D.

[The Bullgod]

Originally posted by $MP$-AEnubis
Pentiums, and Geforces..... YUK.

My advice... AMD for anything you do. Currently, to give you an idea, the K7 processors are benching better then the P4's, let alone the P3's of equal size....

If you play UT primarily... 3DFX cards rock. A V3 3k is under 100 dollars, a small price to pay for superior frames in UT. I turn 80-100 with mine (vsync disabled). If you play many other games, of course, geforce will be the way to go.

Funny thing Is I still turn 60-80 GL Frames in Quake, 30-60 in Half-life, and the only place it sux is in tribes 2 where it ranges from 15-110 D3D frames, depending on map size, current visible distance, and amount of people on the screen.

Then, if you've taken the above advice, get 2k strictly for it's stability, and superior networkin', 'cause it will cut 30-60ms off your pings depending on your connection/isp.

THEN, maybe, just maybe, with much practice, you could hang w/ me without using your hardware as an excuse :D.


Hang with you? Do I know you? :Poop:

[alien8]

Bullgod: Try this article (http://www.tweak3d.net/tweak/ut/) over at Tweak3D in regards to tweaking UT. Might help you out some...

[-AEnubis-]

That's the way I like it.

[RitualSuicide]

I run a few dual-boot machines, one of which has a V3-2000 and runs both Win98 and Win2K.

UT plays just fine under both (I'm using the "x3dfx" beta Win2K drivers) and the frame rate is actually slightly higher in Win2K. Still, for some reason it just doesn't "feel" right (as if the refresh rate is really low, but it's not) under Win2K for me so I play UT mostly under 98.

Note: The 3Dfx driver install puts some shared files in a common directory under both OS's, so the very fact that I'm dual booting could be a part of my perceived problem.

[Athlon_2o0o]

Windows 2000 is created for business... I've tried it myself and it sucks ass with games. Just like linux, games work on it like ****. Upgrade to Windows Me or stick with Windows 98 if you don't need reliability, but just gaming fun.
And AMD is the best!! I have both Pentium and Athlon processors and the Pentium is much slower with worse framerates too. it also crashes more! My name is not Athlon for nothing!!! :)
by the way: I know you bullgod, the directx 8.1a man hehe.

[SimplyCosmic]

Windows 2000 is created for business... I've tried it myself and it sucks ass with games. Just like linux, games work on it like ****.

*sigh* Look, when it comes to operating systems and games, there's three things that affect performance:

The Operating System itself - This involves the basic coding of the actual low level interfaces and, in general, just how well it's laid out.

Third Party Software - This includes both hardware drivers and the games themselves. When proper attention is given to the non-9x OS's (as evidenced by nVidia's latest benchmarks), then performance can easily equal that of 9x. As for games, shoddy 32-bit programming is all too common.

The Skill of the Operator - Your knowledge of the operating system goes along way in affecting it's performance.


One of the video cards I use in my computers is an nVidia TNT2 Ultra. Originally, this was in my Win9x gaming machine. Eventually I added Win2k, and just before I upgraded the hardware around December, it would routinely benchmark in at within 2-5 fps of 9x's performance under UT. Now that card is in a Linux box, which has the latest nVidia drivers, and gets about 10 fps better than both of the Microsoft OS's.

For a home user who only uses their computer for email, web surfing, game playing and the occasional term paper, stick with Win9x. For the those who do alot more on their computer, and are concerned about security, especially in a multi-user environment, then Win2k is it.

[Gamma_Sword]

Old classic DOS runs UT on my machine perfectly! Just type 'UT' at the command prompt, poof! UT runs right away!

It goes beyond 100 FPS and never crashes! Pixelated graphics look so stellar :D ... ooh, nice 16-bit sound effects! I never thought they would sound much better than 128-bit sounds!

... Well, okay, I'll stop joking... but that would be cool if UT would run on DOS :)

I have Athlon 600 with Win98 SE on it. I maxed out all graphics, sound and everything else to maximum quality, and I always get 30+ FPS on most maps with 31 bots thrown in. When I'm by myself on those maps I usually get 50+ FPS constantly.

Judging from my experience with Win98 SE, it is probably the best gaming platform maybe until when WinXP comes out.

[Athlon_2o0o]

oh how funny
you cannot even launc DOS without a floppy in windows me hehe
anyway, I know what u mean, but I don't suppose that bullgod wants to create a server or doing things for business, he just want to play games, email, web, listen to music, chat and things like those so no Windows 2000 for him.

[The Bullgod]

Originally posted by Athlon_2o0o
oh how funny
you cannot even launc DOS without a floppy in windows me hehe
anyway, I know what u mean, but I don't suppose that bullgod wants to create a server or doing things for business, he just want to play games, email, web, listen to music, chat and things like those so no Windows 2000 for him.

well said. I'll stick with 98 then.

Oh, BTW Ath, I get to call you NEWBIE! Bwahahahahahaha revenge for all those times you shot me in the back :p

I tried all those things at Tweak3d years ago, my system is fully optimised yet I still drop as low as 15fps, sometimes lower. I phoned the support line and they said it was because of the low floating point of my AMDk62/450. Thing is, my card is a Voodoo3 2000, which barely supports D3D or OpenGl, so UT is the only game that actually runs on this PC. Hope Unreal 2 has 3dfx support :)

[-AEnubis-]

Originally posted by SimplyCosmic


The Skill of the Operator - Your knowledge of the operating system goes along way in affecting it's performance.


This is a big one. If you're wondering how I turn the frames I say I turn with the hardware I have... There is your answer.

[SimplyCosmic]

you cannot even launc DOS without a floppy in windows me hehe

Actually, you launch MS-DOS every time you boot MS Windows 3/95/98/ME. The 9x line still runs on top of MS-DOS, unlike the NT based systems (NT/2000/XP).

You just can't easily access a MS-DOS prompt from MS WinME.


Side Note: For those who notice I always attempt to put an MS (Microsoft) in front of things like DOS and Windows, it's because their only generic names in the computing world. For instance, there's PC-DOS, DR-DOS, X Windows, etc . . .

[qazix]

Originally posted by SimplyCosmic

Side Note: For those who notice I always attempt to put an MS (Microsoft) in front of things like DOS and Windows, it's because their only generic names in the computing world. For instance, there's PC-DOS, DR-DOS, X Windows, etc . . .

"Windows" isn't generic, afaik. Is there a product from any other company named Windows? I think not -- it would violate Microsoft's trademarks/copyrights. There's no such thing as "X Windows" either: it's officially "The X Window System," or X11. :D

[SimplyCosmic]

Sorry, but X Windows (and yes, that's a valid alias according to MIT and the X Consortium (http://www.x.org)) predates MS Windows by two years. And there are several companies which sell commercial X Windows servers, generally accelerated.

MS Windows is trademarked as "Microsoft Windows®", not as just "Windows".

[SamD]

I don't think a lot of people have XP right now but so far with XP I've had a much better performance in UT.. as tested on two different systems, against Win2000 and Win98se. XP has great drivers but unfortunately also some annoyances that I hope will get worked out in the final release ;)

However, Microsoft blows so I recommend Linux. =)hahaha..

[-AEnubis-]

Is it a new kernel or one of the old ones?

How does it differ otherwise from NT and 98?

...and what is it intended for?

[SimplyCosmic]

MS Windows XP uses the NT kernel, which offers greater stability and security than the 9x kernel thanks to it's Hardware Abstraction Layer. And, when drivers and software are written properly and behave properly, you can get better overall performance out of it as well.

XP is designed to merge the two Microsoft operating system families (9x and NT) into one family, with various levels (a consumer edition, a comercial desktop edition, server, advanced server, etc).

For more indepth answers to most general questions, visit The MS Windows XP FAQ (http://www.winsupersite.com/FAQ/whistler.asp).

[Athlon_2o0o]

lol bullgod :)