🚀 go-pugleaf

Hoping for better preformance on SMP systems

"Ricket" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:8F0E6E9F3LondonCalling@164.128.36.42...
> Yo Gameboys & Gamegirls !
>
> I'm actually a happy simmer running Win95 OSR2. No probs with drivers or
> stuff and general good performance.
>
> Could you folks tell me what benefits you get when upgrading to Win2k ?
>
> BTW, I had no difficulty turning down all suggestions to upgrade to Win98
> or Win98SE, failing to find any real benefit.
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> Ricket

Tony (Tony) wrote in <13joessvpjet7g4sc4a2ob3napvktcu3bj@4ax.com>:
>
>Dual processor support.
>Scalability.
>Native encryption.
>Stability.
>Speed.
>
>It would be a real waist to run my dual p3 500s, 512mb ram, 3  18.2
>gig U2W Seagate Barracudas on Win95.


Basically what he said.  

- more stable OS

- run more things at once without fear of performance or stability problems

- make better use of resources like ram

- some things are faster.  My network, disks and USB scanner run faster 
under Win2K

- Dual CPU support.  Multi-threaded apps run faster and don't affect other 
apps or the GUI nearly so much.  For example, I can decode binaries from 
newsgroups while playing a game, browsing the web, or encoding MP3s and or 
scanning images.  Under Win98 this would be a complete bust, with lots of 
thrashing and unresponsive gui/mouse.

- Scalability also relates to computer life span.  If you can use more ram 
and cpu's to improve performance, then upgrades will get you further before 
you are forced to buy a new system.  For the cost of a dual-cpu MB and an 
SMP capable OS, my original P2-400 system is now dual P2-400, and I'll 
upgrade to dual P3-700 when those chips are at the end of their cycle.  
This will be several times faster (with SMP) than the original system and 
should last me 3 years from the date I bought it.   Not bad when you 
consider how fast computers become obsolete.  SMP systems also make great, 
fast servers when it's no longer fast enough to be your main system.

I run Tyan Tiger 100, dual P2-400, 256MB ram, 2 x IBM 22GXP 22GB drives, 1 
Segate 9GB medalist pro, 1 Quatum Atlas II 9GB, Adaptec 2940 U2W, Creative 
V2 SLI, ATI Xpert 128, Sblive, ATI TV Tuner, 32X cdrom, 4x/8x panasonic 
CDR, DLT 4000 tape, Mustek 1200 CU USB scanner, Compaq Dual port 10/100 
ethernet.   Having room for expansion is nice, esp if the OS supports those 
devices.  

FOR GODS SAKE! NOT THIS DAMN TOPIC AGAIN.....GET A DAMN CLUE! REALLY

"Ricket" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:8F0E6E9F3LondonCalling@164.128.36.42...
> Yo Gameboys & Gamegirls !
>
> I'm actually a happy simmer running Win95 OSR2. No probs with drivers or
> stuff and general good performance.
>
> Could you folks tell me what benefits you get when upgrading to Win2k ?
>
> BTW, I had no difficulty turning down all suggestions to upgrade to Win98
> or Win98SE, failing to find any real benefit.
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> Ricket

Tony (Tony) wrote in <13joessvpjet7g4sc4a2ob3napvktcu3bj@4ax.com>:

>
>Dual processor support.
OK.

>Scalability.

Could you please explain ?

>Native encryption.

This too please ?


>Speed.

Win2K is faster than Win95 ?
By how much ?
Any benchmark refs ?


Thanks
ricket

grinch@home.com (Mr. Grinch) wrote in
<8F0EAFB6Agrinchhomecom@24.64.2.57>: 
>- make better use of resources like ram

How ?

>
>- Scalability also relates to computer life span.  If you can use more
>ram and cpu's to improve performance, then upgrades will get you further
>before you are forced to buy a new system.  For the cost of a dual-cpu
>MB and an SMP capable OS, my original P2-400 system is now dual P2-400,
>and I'll upgrade to dual P3-700 when those chips are at the end of their
>cycle.  This will be several times faster (with SMP) than the original
>system and should last me 3 years from the date I bought it.   Not bad
>when you consider how fast computers become obsolete.  SMP systems also
>make great, fast servers when it's no longer fast enough to be your main
>system.

Fine. That's if you already have a multiprocessor board.
Anyways, for games like flightsims do you really benefit from SMP ?
I thought that the SMP implementation depended on whether you implemented
multiple threads in your application.

Does anyone know if any flightsims have a multi-thread implementation ?


Thanks for the info.

Ricket

hoshi-ryu@home.com (Jeremy Balsley) wrote in
<201H4.31428$Ig.143743@news1.rdc1.tx.home.com>: 


>Keep in mind:  Windows 95 can't handle AGP (unless it's a patched 'B'
>version),
>ACPI, multimonitor, USB (again, unless it's a patched 'B' version), or
>any of the
>specific 'NT' goodies that 2000 carries.

I happen to have this B patched version. So I do get AGP and USB. I just don't 
have any USB devices yet.

>Windows 2000, on the other hand, can handle SMP (multiple processors on
>one motherboard),

OK.

> NTFS (a 'new' filesystem that allows for native Long
>File Name support,

NTFS has the bad habit of shuffling clusters around, and once your MTF is 
fragmented in even a few pieces, performance takes a bad hit.
Also the few benchmarks I wrote in GNU C under Win95 and WinNT showed that 
FAT32 read access is at least 20% faster than NTFS.


>efficient use of space
>(fragmentation is reduced, and wasted space is minimized, with 512byte
>clusters),

FAT32 and some tweaking allows you to adjust the cluster size depending on the 
number of files on a volume and the general file size distribution.

NTFS *does* fragment. And performance can get pretty ugly.

>and some protection built in for filesystem errors), and can take
>advantage of all

In almost 6 years of pro use of NT, I had more unrecoverable file corruptions 
under NT than under Win95. Let's say here your mileage may vary.

Thank you very much for your insight.

Ricket

devincs@btinternet.com (devincs) wrote in
<8cj0of$p6v$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>: 

>FOR GODS SAKE! NOT THIS DAMN TOPIC AGAIN.....GET A DAMN CLUE! REALLY

Thanks, where do I find it ?
Is it still lore ?

Ricket

On 7 Apr 2000 07:49:49 GMT, root@[127.0.0.1] (Ricket) wrote:

>grinch@home.com (Mr. Grinch) wrote in
><8F0EAFB6Agrinchhomecom@24.64.2.57>: 
>>- make better use of resources like ram
>
>How ?
>
>>
>>- Scalability also relates to computer life span.  If you can use more
>>ram and cpu's to improve performance, then upgrades will get you further
>>before you are forced to buy a new system.  For the cost of a dual-cpu
>>MB and an SMP capable OS, my original P2-400 system is now dual P2-400,
>>and I'll upgrade to dual P3-700 when those chips are at the end of their
>>cycle.  This will be several times faster (with SMP) than the original
>>system and should last me 3 years from the date I bought it.   Not bad
>>when you consider how fast computers become obsolete.  SMP systems also
>>make great, fast servers when it's no longer fast enough to be your main
>>system.
>
>Fine. That's if you already have a multiprocessor board.
>Anyways, for games like flightsims do you really benefit from SMP ?
>I thought that the SMP implementation depended on whether you implemented
>multiple threads in your application.
>
>Does anyone know if any flightsims have a multi-thread implementation ?

Retail? Unlikely. Quake III Arena is supposed to be one of the first
if not only multithreaded retail game. The extra processor will still
help do other applications while your single threaded Flight Sim. runs
like network, OS services, etc. So you'll see some benefit even there.
- Mark A. Odell (remove thisisnotvalid. to reply via email)

My town has bad power, it goes out quite a bit, never once has
WinNT or now Win2K lost one cluster of data during a power loss.
I could be compiling a file at the time and I'd still come up fine
once power resumed. Defrag your disk.

On 7 Apr 2000 08:05:26 GMT, root@[127.0.0.1] (Ricket) wrote:

>hoshi-ryu@home.com (Jeremy Balsley) wrote in
><201H4.31428$Ig.143743@news1.rdc1.tx.home.com>: 
>
>
>>Keep in mind:  Windows 95 can't handle AGP (unless it's a patched 'B'
>>version),
>>ACPI, multimonitor, USB (again, unless it's a patched 'B' version), or
>>any of the
>>specific 'NT' goodies that 2000 carries.
>
>I happen to have this B patched version. So I do get AGP and USB. I just don't 
>have any USB devices yet.
>
>>Windows 2000, on the other hand, can handle SMP (multiple processors on
>>one motherboard),
>
>OK.
>
>> NTFS (a 'new' filesystem that allows for native Long
>>File Name support,
>
>NTFS has the bad habit of shuffling clusters around, and once your MTF is 
>fragmented in even a few pieces, performance takes a bad hit.
>Also the few benchmarks I wrote in GNU C under Win95 and WinNT showed that 
>FAT32 read access is at least 20% faster than NTFS.
>
>
>>efficient use of space
>>(fragmentation is reduced, and wasted space is minimized, with 512byte
>>clusters),
>
>FAT32 and some tweaking allows you to adjust the cluster size depending on the 
>number of files on a volume and the general file size distribution.
>
>NTFS *does* fragment. And performance can get pretty ugly.
>
>>and some protection built in for filesystem errors), and can take
>>advantage of all
>
>In almost 6 years of pro use of NT, I had more unrecoverable file corruptions 
>under NT than under Win95. Let's say here your mileage may vary.
>
>Thank you very much for your insight.
>
>Ricket
>

- Mark A. Odell (remove thisisnotvalid. to reply via email)

I was wondering if your usb port shares an IRQ with the card you
have in PCI4.
 I also have a Tiger 100 and have this problem.

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

On 7 Apr 2000 08:05:26 GMT, root@[127.0.0.1] (Ricket) wrote:

>I happen to have this B patched version. So I do get AGP and USB. I just don't 
>have any USB devices yet.

Which is why you are still happy with Win95...no version of Win95
works correctly with current USB devices...not even the might B
patched version.

Go to your local computer hardware store and read the USB hardware
boxes. Count how many list among the requirements Windows 98 or later.
My guess is it will be nearly all of them.

Heck, even the Microsoft USB mouse and USB keyboards state on the box
they require Windows 98 or later & you figure if anyone would be able
to make Win95 B work with their hardware, MS would.

jason.tozerNOjaSPAM@cliffordchance.com.invalid (jtozer) wrote in
<0af2c4d6.63e84864@usw-ex0102-015.remarq.com>: 

>I was wondering if your usb port shares an IRQ with the card you
>have in PCI4.
> I also have a Tiger 100 and have this problem.

I don't have an IRQ conflict on my Tiger 100.  What are all of the cards you 
are using and what are their IRQs?  What IRQ is  your USB at?

Here is my Tiger 100 layout, from IRQ 0 and up:
00 system timer
01 keyboard
02 programmable irq
03 com 2
04 com 1
05 Creative SB16 Emulation (In the bios, I set IRQ 5 to ISA/LEGACY, not PNP)
06 Standard Floppy Disk Controller
07 Printer port LPT1
08 System CMOS / real time clock
09 Compaq Netelligent Dual 10/100 TX PCI UTP Controller
09 IRQ holder for PCI Steering
10 Creative SB Live! Value
10 Compaq Netelligent Dual 10/100 TX PCI UTP Controller
10 Adaptec AHA-2940U2W PCI Ultra2 SCSI Controller
10 ATI Xpert 128 AGP VGA
10 IRQ Holder for PCI Steering
10 IRQ Holder for PCI Steering
11 Intel 82371AB/EB PCI to USB Universal Host Controller
11 IRQ holder for PCI Steering
12 WheelMouse2 (ps/2)
13 Numeric data processor
14 Intel 82371AB/EB PCI Bus Master IDE Controller
14 Primary IDE controller (dual fifo)
15 Intel 82371AB/EB PCI Bus Master IDE Controller
15 Primary IDE controller (dual fifo)

The card arrangement is this, starting at AGP:
AGP - ATI Xpert 128
PCI - Adaptech 2040U2W
PCI - Compaq Dual port 10/100 ethernet
PCI - Voodoo2
PCI - Voodoo2
PCI - SB Live! value
ISA - ATI TV Tuner

and I have a Mustek 1200 CU USB scanner on the USB port.