Does installing Win2k using ACPI mode as opposed to Standard
I tried searching for info but cant seem to find any sorry
I tried searching for info but cant seem to find any sorry
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
I did not notice any speed increase when I re-installed W2K with the latest bios for Abit BP6 (MPS 1.4 works without losing USB). But plug and play seems more silent and fast. Moreover, when you have hibernation and soft power-down enabled, you would not want to go back to non-ACPI. The only strange thing is the interrupt numbers in device manager, with fancy ones like 64 or whatever! No conflict whatsoever and rock-solid operation. Also I did not notice any additional overhead in task manager.
The biggest performace difference is if your computer doesn't work after changing it
Reloading from hibernation takes only a few seconds on my box. Booting the usual way takes at least one minute. I personally hate this minute. The same for logging off and shut-down.
Yes, I'd love to have hibernation support, too. Unfortunately my Promise Fasttrak66 IDE RAID controller's driver prevents it...
Although even a normal boot doesn't take very long (1-2 minutes, during which I can go visit the toilet or whatever), I'm missing that I can't leave all the applications open when shutting down the PC and immediately continue to work with them when turning it on again! I think THAT is the greatest advantage of hibernate, not the even shorter boot time...
nova.
Although even a normal boot doesn't take very long (1-2 minutes, during which I can go visit the toilet or whatever), I'm missing that I can't leave all the applications open when shutting down the PC and immediately continue to work with them when turning it on again! I think THAT is the greatest advantage of hibernate, not the even shorter boot time...
nova.
You are right Nova. Going back to one's desktop exactly in the state where it was before leaving is the great thing.
BTW I retain the idea to visit the toilet when I have to reboot the regular way! Could mean another beer!
BTW I retain the idea to visit the toilet when I have to reboot the regular way! Could mean another beer!
You can also choose manually which mode you want Win2k to install in:
During the installation, when it says "Press F6 to install custom SCSI drivers", press F5!
Then you select "Standard PC" or "Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC", or the respective options for multi processor systems.
"Standard PC" should ALWAYS work. If you select "ACPI PC" but your PC doesn't support ACPI 100%, then Win2k will let you know by displaying a blue screen. You'll then need to reset the PC, then you can continue the installation as usual (without pressing F5), it will install in "Standard PC" (APM) mode.
nova.
During the installation, when it says "Press F6 to install custom SCSI drivers", press F5!
Then you select "Standard PC" or "Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC", or the respective options for multi processor systems.
"Standard PC" should ALWAYS work. If you select "ACPI PC" but your PC doesn't support ACPI 100%, then Win2k will let you know by displaying a blue screen. You'll then need to reset the PC, then you can continue the installation as usual (without pressing F5), it will install in "Standard PC" (APM) mode.
nova.
Hibernation? I don't think it is a cool features at all. It store everything in the memory into your hard disk. Say if I have 256 Mb of RAM or 512 Mb of RAM, the copying to the disk process + the copying from disk to RAM process would already take more time than a fresh reboot. Useful for those who have small amount of RAM, but again, with small amount of RAM, everything run so slow, except your hibernation.
I have 192 Mb of ram. It must be the right compromise to get full benefit from hibernation.
Anyway, coming back from hibernation is much faster than a fresh reboot: no start menu, no network connections to look for, no personnal settings to apply, no logon dialogue, no process to look for and launch, no hardware polling, favourite apps already open, etc, etc.
When you fresh reboot you have anyway to fill the memory with all that stuff.
So hibernation is definitely worth to be given a try.
Anyway, coming back from hibernation is much faster than a fresh reboot: no start menu, no network connections to look for, no personnal settings to apply, no logon dialogue, no process to look for and launch, no hardware polling, favourite apps already open, etc, etc.
When you fresh reboot you have anyway to fill the memory with all that stuff.
So hibernation is definitely worth to be given a try.
Yes, indeed!
slkh, you mean: "I don't think it is a cool feature at all FOR ME!" Please don't speak for the majority of this forum, who thinks that hibernation is a good thing. Besides, you don't need to USE it. It's always better to have a feature available, regardless whether YOU want to use it... ok?
nova.
slkh, you mean: "I don't think it is a cool feature at all FOR ME!" Please don't speak for the majority of this forum, who thinks that hibernation is a good thing. Besides, you don't need to USE it. It's always better to have a feature available, regardless whether YOU want to use it... ok?
nova.
I think there is a bit of confusion here. Hibernation only takes about 10 seconds tops to save 256 megs of RAM to the hard disk. When it boots up it takes even less (I ran it on a P3-550 and after the black screen with the white status bar finished the "Resuming Windows" bit which only took around 3 seconds I was right into my desktop). It's much, much faster than some of you are thinking it is.
