Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Benchmarks: Win98SE vs WinXP Pro

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Benchmarks: Win98SE vs WinXP Pro

    TEST SYSTEM
    P4 2.53B @ 3.344ghz 176fsb
    Kingston Hyper-X 3000 2x 512mb
    GF4 ti4600 - det 30.82 - 75hz RR


    OS SPECS
    Win98SE = IE6SP1, FAT32, 512mb vcache
    WinXP Pro = SP1/2, FAT32, (no tweaks)

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BENCHMARKS

    > DivX Encoding < (lower is better)
    Win98 = 24:27
    WinXP = 22:47


    > 3DMark2001 <
    Win98 = 14304
    WinXP = 14486


    > PCMark2002 < (cpu / mem / hd)
    Win98 = 8110 / 8159 / 1150
    WinXP = 8215 / 8223 / 1145


    > Aida32 Membench < (read / write)
    Win98 = 4707 / 1178
    WinXP = 4483 / 1174


    > X-Isle Tech Demo < (1024x768x32)
    Win98 = 155.5
    WinXP = 157.4


    > UT2003 Demo < (1024x768x32, flyby / botmatch)
    Win98 = 175.6 / 86.7
    WinXP = 175.9 / 86.3


    > Quake III v1.32 < (1280x1024x32)
    Win98 = 220.5
    WinXP = 224.3

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    :-)

  • #2
    soooooo, is this where you've been hiding?

    nice results on the WinXP, especially in the Divx area you're so fond of. did you remember to register your paid-for copy?

    Comment


    • #3
      hehe~

      yea the DivX benchmark shows just how well XP performs when using large files under full load.

      i never reg anything, but for the record yes i do actually own 98 & XP licenses

      further XP tweaking (services) is yielding even better performance, but ill leave that for another thread

      Comment


      • #4
        So - Will you ever be a XP convert?

        Thugs = Win98 Lifer

        Thanks for the headsup

        Comment


        • #5
          welcome to BE.com jhites

          XP is a very large animal compared to 98. (2gb vs 250mb)
          its been taking me some time to get used to where all the d@mn control panels are, but im getting there.

          Comment


          • #6
            how about an NTFS comparison:?

            Comment


            • #7
              ugggg

              my 1st install i used NTFS and i was not happy dealing with it AT ALL
              reinstalled with FAT32 and its working nice and fast for me.

              if i had a spare HD layin around id do a proper comparison ~ but i dont


              its good to see you here Erik

              Comment


              • #8
                hint: convert.exe

                Comment


                • #9
                  id rather just clone the drive onto another with NTFS ~ that way it would be as identicle as possible. (and w/o disturbing my current drive)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    okay: Ghost the drive and then run convert.exe

                    looking forward to seeing the difference

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      ok ok, dont rush me

                      1st chance i get ill run that comparison.
                      im very interested in the results myself but breaking the 2gb file size limit and performance are my only 2 interests :deviltail

                      i need more time on XP tho ~ after what is basically 8 years on 95/98 im not yet as comfortable on XP.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I am glad to see you're enjoying XP Thugs.

                        I got my hand on SP4 for win2k and using it now,but as soon as I get a 2.4C i will go to XP.
                        Last edited by Claude; 07-30-2004, 12:26 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ErikaeanLogic
                          hint: convert.exe
                          Dot use Convert because if you do you'll end up with 512byte sectors. yuck.

                          the default ntfs is 4kb, If i would have to convert I would use partition magic instead.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Last edited by Claude; 07-30-2004, 12:26 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Claude
                              Dot use Convert because if you do you'll end up with 512byte sectors. yuck.
                              the default ntfs is 4kb, If i would have to convert I would use partition magic instead.
                              yep, i read the same thing ~ thx for the heads up

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X