dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6524
share rss forum feed

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to JohnInSJ

Re: [W2K] Is Windows 2000 still considered a rock-solid OS?

said by JohnInSJ:

said by dave:

Sure, mechanically it's easy, but his point about the chipset is still valid.

But still hardly rocket science for ram upgrades

Depends, doesn't it? If you're already at the chipset-supported max, then adding more RAM is definitely rocket salad.


not

@comcast.net
reply to dave
said by dave:

Nonsense. Or at least, ridiculous generalization without data to back it up.

Mind you, I agree that if you're buying a new machine, you might as well buy 8GB. But it is far from clear that an existing 4GB system will be anything that can be called 'slow'. Especially since you don't bother to specify any kind of app load.

18 in the IT industry has given me enough views into what works and what doesn't and what is sufficient or sufficient to not ever hear from a frustrated user who's machine appears slow because they cheaped out initially.

4GB is minimum for W7 and even with that, the VM utilization will be pretty big. Add to that a slow drive without a large cache and you're compounding the issue. Here's a general rule of thumb I use for configs and the outcome is a solid machine with enough speed to not hold up the user no matter what they do.

CPU w/6-8MB cache built in (I'll take a larger cache over MHz any day)
8GB of RAM
7200 RPM drive w/16MB cache

Stick with that and you should be good for 5 years at a time without slowdown worries regardless of what you're using today or plan on using tomorrow software wise.

Also CPU wise, i3 are a joke. i5 minimum by today's standards in choice (just pay close attention to the cache size as per above). Just as before Core2Duos were prefered over simply CoreDuos when available.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Running virtual machines is another matter, your average person who does little more than browse the web, and check e-mail so they don't need all that power. There's something to be said for not buying antiquated hardware to begin with, but what the computer is being used for matters. People don't need a 3770k to browse the web, and check e-mail.

On gaming builds the 2500k(overclocks like a beast) or 3570 are suggested as they have decent price, and four cores to allow background programs to use the other cores since most games might only use up to two cores. The i7 processor is seen as excessive unless they want to pay more for other reasons.

I had a thread a while back pointing out how companies like Dell, and Apple were charging upwards of $150 to $200 more for 4GB more of ram, pointing out these people could buy the memory far cheaper themselves instead of paying for these outrageous price hikes. If you have to order dozens of computers from a company like Dell for your office then you definitely want to make sure you're not overpaying unless you're just trying to spend your budget before it gets replenished.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent out necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.


Dustyn
Premium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
kudos:11
reply to scottp99
Why not go with the proven success and reliability that comes from an operating system that was created with the home user in mind?

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yWkHraHKvI


caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
WA, USA
kudos:4
reply to scottp99
My guess is that with a machine several times better than mine (which is an older C2D E7200, 4GB, 560ti-1gb box running Win7 Pro SP1 x64 quite well), he either has a bloated or warez install or uses no security protection and is thus buggered. Or, it's full of dust and crap and overheating, fans aren't working or his HDD is fubar.

No reason for it to be slow in a normal install and usage. I even run a small XPpro VM while doing multiple other things on mine and it hardly gets above 50% CPU or RAM usage.

Even if using onboard video in a modern CPU/mobo, Win7 should fly if you turn down the Aero a bit.

Put it this way; my only remaining Win2K box is a PIII 366 w/ 512 ram. It's that old. Since I can run VM's of any older OS I want on a newer and more secure OS with support and updates, why bother with antiquity?

(BTW, that Celeron hasn't been even booted up since I got Win7)

--

My 9/11 Tribute..online since 9/14/01
Need an Avatar? Check out Wafen's Avatar Pages


not

@comcast.net
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

Running virtual machines is another matter, your average person who does little more than browse the web, and check e-mail so they don't need all that power. There's something to be said for not buying antiquated hardware to begin with, but what the computer is being used for matters. People don't need a 3770k to browse the web, and check e-mail.

On gaming builds the 2500k(overclocks like a beast) or 3570 are suggested as they have decent price, and four cores to allow background programs to use the other cores since most games might only use up to two cores. The i7 processor is seen as excessive unless they want to pay more for other reasons.

I had a thread a while back pointing out how companies like Dell, and Apple were charging upwards of $150 to $200 more for 4GB more of ram, pointing out these people could buy the memory far cheaper themselves instead of paying for these outrageous price hikes. If you have to order dozens of computers from a company like Dell for your office then you definitely want to make sure you're not overpaying unless you're just trying to spend your budget before it gets replenished.

VM in my post meant virtual memory (swap file), NOT virtual machine setup. Come on man! Sheesh.

Anyway, put 4GB in a W7 machine and see how much VM utilization is used and then do the same with 8GB. Big difference and that difference directly carries over into performance increases for the machine. The idea isn't as to what you're going to be using the machine for today (email, Office, etc.). The idea of optimizing the available RAM so that you don't run into slowness issues going forward.


Insight6

join:2012-08-25

1 edit
reply to scottp99
I've had and used extensively all Windows Operating systems starting with Windows 3.1 through Windows 7 64 bit.

The first relatively stable OS was Windows NT. Windows 2000 improved on that. However, both were for business not home consumers or home applications or hardware compatibility.

I've had Windows 7 since it came out and I never turn off my machine and it has never crashed. It also is fast. I have 6 gigs of RAM.

Windows 7 is much more secure than Windows 2000 and out of sight more compatible with more applications and supports more hardware than Windows 2000. Windows 7 was conceived relatively recently and updated regularly to be the newest and best all around Windows OS ever.

Forget about 2000--IMO that's a no-brainer. Find out what is causing your problems with Windows 7. Once identified and fixed you will be happy with and confident in the OS.


zacron
Premium
join:2008-11-26
canada
reply to scottp99
I still have an HP Vectra VL running WIN2K to support an antiquated (but sincerely reliable) accounting package.
--
"Lord giveth but he also taketh away"
»www.speedtest.net/result/2102768148.png


caffeinator
Coming soon to a cup near you..
Premium
join:2005-01-16
WA, USA
kudos:4
reply to scottp99
Just in case anyone wondered.... I wasn't kidding.

This is on an 'old' C2D @ 2.53ghz with 4GB of RAM and an EVGA 560ti 1GB. All at stock speeds, only a slight mem overclock.




This is normal running...with my XP VM running MSSE, an old DX8 game and Miranda IM, while running all my normal security stuff in Win7x64 plus FF running two tabs, one a streaming Flash video lasting several hours.

Not possible to do on Win2k at all FAIK.
--

My 9/11 Tribute..online since 9/14/01
Need an Avatar? Check out Wafen's Avatar Pages