performance in w2k
This is a discussion about performance in w2k in the Windows Games category; anyone using w2k notice that it needs more ram than win98 especially in unreal tournament
anyone using w2k notice that it needs more ram than win98 especially in unreal tournament
Participate in our website and join the conversation
This subject has been archived. New comments and votes cannot be submitted.
May 24
May 27
0
3 minutes
Responses to this topic
No sh*t it needs more ram, it aint no puncy Win9x code.. It is made for Server and Business applications, not to try and cut corner every which way to save ram.
If your going to cry about it using more RAM, you should have never installed Win2k to start with, its just common sense
------------------
Its True! Its True!
If your going to cry about it using more RAM, you should have never installed Win2k to start with, its just common sense
------------------
Its True! Its True!
I noticed a big jump in performance on UT by moving from 128 to 256 and then even more to 384.
Thing is..UT runs like a dog on quite a few machines. The engine aint as good as the Q3 one by a long chalk.
But as they say...
You can never have enough RAM ;-)
Thing is..UT runs like a dog on quite a few machines. The engine aint as good as the Q3 one by a long chalk.
But as they say...
You can never have enough RAM ;-)
Minimum I recommend=128
I dont know about anyone else, but compared to Win98, win 2k gives a slower performance in games, and lower score on Madonions 3dmark2000
For a system like mine i dont think that should be the case/ though i must say the actual desktop performance, like multitasking is way better
Athalon 750
K7m M/b
Asus v6800 geforce ddr
256 pc-100 ram
sb live value
20 gig maxtor 7200rpm
For a system like mine i dont think that should be the case/ though i must say the actual desktop performance, like multitasking is way better
Athalon 750
K7m M/b
Asus v6800 geforce ddr
256 pc-100 ram
sb live value
20 gig maxtor 7200rpm
Well, WK2 is no intended for gaming although it works great with all games I have, however Windows ME is another world (yes it's Windows 9X world, I know), the performance in gaming is outstanding (I'm talking about WinME RC0+DX8 beta), for an instant I thought I had new CPU. Good thing is DX8 will be available for Win2K and that, along with Win2K service packs, will make Win2K users happier and help us to survive til Neptune is out
Nope,
I get 5-6 frames/sec more in Win2k.
733 Coppermine
Geforce 256 DDR (5.17 win2k/5.22 win98)
SBLive!
I get 5-6 frames/sec more in Win2k.
733 Coppermine
Geforce 256 DDR (5.17 win2k/5.22 win98)
SBLive!
What would be a good platform to test on?
It doesnt seem too many people use 3Dmark...
thanks
It doesnt seem too many people use 3Dmark...
thanks
Quake.
Ok, sorry to sound stupid,
but im assuming you mean quake 3
(demo?)
how do you get frame rates to show? is there other info that displays?
thanks
but im assuming you mean quake 3
(demo?)
how do you get frame rates to show? is there other info that displays?
thanks
The best way to get Quake III fps is to run a time demo. To do this, do the following:
1. Load Quake III (obviously)
2. Go to the console by pressing the ` key (on the left hand side of the keyboard - second row down)
3. In the console type "timedemo 1" - press return
4. Type "demo demo001" or "demo demo002" press return
This will run a short time demo, and at the end you'll be given your average FPS score.
1. Load Quake III (obviously)
2. Go to the console by pressing the ` key (on the left hand side of the keyboard - second row down)
3. In the console type "timedemo 1" - press return
4. Type "demo demo001" or "demo demo002" press return
This will run a short time demo, and at the end you'll be given your average FPS score.
