Windows98 vs Windows2000

This is a discussion about Windows98 vs Windows2000 in the Windows Hardware category; My question to everyone. . . What do you think that's running smoother and faster with apps and games?? Win98 or Win2000 ? Just wanna know.

Windows Hardware 9627 This topic was started by , . Last reply by ,


data/avatar/default/avatar27.webp

62 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-03-08
My question to everyone...
 
What do you think that's running smoother and faster with apps and games??
 
Win98 or Win2000 ?
 
Just wanna know

Participate in our website and join the conversation

You already have an account on our website? To log in, use the link provided below.
Login
Create a new user account. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds.
Register
This subject has been archived. New comments and votes cannot be submitted.
Mar 27
Created
Mar 31
Last Response
0
Likes
5 minutes
Read Time
User User User User User User
Users

Responses to this topic


data/avatar/default/avatar30.webp

102 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-03-08
My head hurts from discussing this but I will add something anyway. Win2k loads apps faster and is stable( I mean stable! ). Games/speed will vary. Some wont work in win2k and you will lose some frames. My last test with quake3. I have k6-2 450 on a via mvp3 chipset voodoo3 2k.
 
win2k : 30.1 fps
win98 : 35.7 fps
 
I would also like to add that win2k is superior for lans. If you have a network win2k is a must.

data/avatar/default/avatar30.webp

102 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-03-08
Oh sorry I forget their are other video cards in the world. ( I spend to much time at 3dfxgamers. ). Benchmarks may be faster with different cards.

data/avatar/default/avatar39.webp

113 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-02-23
I get almost identical FPS in Quake3 in Win98 and Win2k with default settings for my TNT. But when I overclock (with TNT OC) my TNT in Win98, the FPS increases by approximately 10fps. When I overclock in Win2k (with Powerstrip), the FPS increase is only about 2-4fps. I don't really know why that is. Maybe Powerstrip doesnt do as good a job overclocking as TNT Oc does. Or possibly the NVidia drivers are to blame.
 
Also Unreal Tourney is about the same in both Win98 and Win2k, maybe a tiny bit smoother in Win98.
 
I just tried EA Sports F1 2000, and that game actually ran better on Win2k.
 
Generally my apps run much faster and smoother in Win2k. The best thing is that it doesnt crash as often as Win98.
 
Anyhow, pretty soon I would imagine games running much faster on Win2k, as drivers get finalized, games are written specifically for Win2k, etc.
 
Just a few thoughts...
 
Andy

data/avatar/default/avatar29.webp

1209 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-10-27
your best bet if you want stable systems and good gaming, wait for Windows Millennium. Or if you really want to wait long, wait for Windows BlackComb (i think it's called that) which won't be out for a long time.

data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp

157 Posts
Location -
Joined 1999-11-13
1 - Windows Millenium is a $hit : Win98 Kernel will never be as stable and solid as NT Kernel.
2 - Win2k drivers are still under beta release so they will improve day by day (I've won more than 30% fps since I've started Win2k (september99)). 5.13b ins't so far from Win98 benchmarks and it seems the end of the tunnel isn't that far.
3 - If you wanna have a Win98like stable OS, try Windows Neptune : it's Win2klite (Win2k kernel with easy configuration). It as graphics improvement so may be faster than Win2k in games (according to me, the best benchmarks of Neptune are made using Win2k basic drivers (<3.50) vs Neptune current drivers (5.13b)).
 
 
Awx

data/avatar/default/avatar27.webp

62 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-03-08
OP
Where can I get Windows Neptune ????
 
I'm using w2k / win98 dualboot but Soldiers of fortune is running slower in w2k, less frames then in win98 and I'm using retail 3dfx driver for my voodoo3.
 
But W2K is solid as a rock

data/avatar/default/avatar29.webp

1209 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-10-27
obviously, me to the rescue again. I'm running Beta 2499 of Windows Millennium, it is just as stable as Win2k and it loads faster then it too. Also Windows Neptune has been CANCELLED, they are not bringing it out. They are instead bringing out Windows Whistler

data/avatar/default/avatar05.webp

114 Posts
Location -
Joined 1999-11-04
I will have to confess, I still use Win95 for all of my games, just for the mere fact they just run and I dont have to worry about drivers, compatibility, etc..
 
When I was benchmarking my systems using a win95 vs. win2k Pro format, I did find that Glide and Opengl just run better and smoother in a Win2k enviroment. But that argument could be shot by just saying Nascar 3. Direct3d was much better in Win95 for all games that I use. Until more companies start maturing their drivers, I just stay with win 95 to eliminate any headaches. With a family to support, I just dont have the time to try to fix things anymore (which I would love to do, time providing).
 
Now the dial up access was much different. So much better in Win2k even with DUN 1.3 and tweaked out win95. There is no comparison. (hey, on the crappy lines out here, 3.35 kb/s is way better than 2.8 kb/s. Ping times were better in Win2k.
 
I think the main reason I use Win 95 more now than win2k pro is that stupid humming noise from the diamond mx 300 sound card! And no drivers yet for this, and the default drivers for win2k are just horrible for nascar3.
 
 
 
------------------
Celeron 300A@450, Abit BH6, 160 RAM, Maxtor 6.4 UDAM33 HD, 48x Lite-on CDROM
Diamond v770 tnt2 16 meg, Voodoo2 8, meg, 17"Daytek