Lower performance in W2k

Hello!!! My system: P2 celeron dual 500 Voodoo 3500 Beta 2 w2k drivers 128 megg ram!! Well, now I have tested w2k up against w98. I realize that W98 still have the best performance in games since Voodoo don't support smp in 3d.

Windows Games 5469 This topic was started by ,


data/avatar/default/avatar36.webp

2 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-04-03
Hello!!!
 
My system:
P2 celeron dual 500
Voodoo 3500
Beta 2 w2k drivers
128 megg ram!!
 
Well, now I have tested w2k up against w98. I realize that W98 still have the best performance in games since Voodoo don't support smp in 3d. I get lower framerates in w2k than I get in w98. This concerns games and benchmarks.
I have noticed that the 2d performance is slightly better in w2k compared to w98.
 
Anyone who has experienced anything else may apply a posting here.
Please let me know.
 
Thanx
Smaugen :):
 
 
 
------------------
Signing off
Smaugen!!!

Participate on our website and join the conversation

You have already an account on our website? Use the link below to login.
Login
Create a new user account. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds.
Register
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.

Responses to this topic


data/avatar/default/avatar22.webp

15 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-04-12
In my case the games I tried look great and perform just fine, however The Sims and Ultima IX run smoother than in Win98
 
K6-II 450Mhz on QDI Titanium IB+ mb
160 Mb RAM
Voodoo3 3000 PCI
13 Gb HD (UDMA2)

data/avatar/default/avatar13.webp

31 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-02-28
You must remember that Windows 2000 is a very young operating system - some call it NT 5 - but there have been many changes since the last version of NT. This also means that the drivers for this system are still pretty much in their infancy, without many of the optimisations that Win98 have baan able to enjoy through a long development program. However, Win 2000 is a far more efficient system, and it's only a matter of time before graphics card drivers catch up with their Win 98 counterparts.

data/avatar/default/avatar28.webp

71 Posts
Location -
Joined 1999-11-03
In this case I would like to say:
Don't blame win2k, this is entirely because of the drivers from 3dfx.
They suck. Thats it and thats that.
As an example, my framerate in Q3 dropped about 20fps when changing to win2k.
P2-400, 128Mb, V3-3000,

data/avatar/default/avatar39.webp

3867 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-02-04
In Quake 3 at 1024X768 with all settings to the max I get the EXACT same frame rate that I do in Build 2499 of Windows ME. This is on a Matrox G400 32mb AGP SH OEM.

data/avatar/default/avatar13.webp

31 Posts
Location -
Joined 2000-02-28
I think that DOSFREAk has summed it up - the G400 drivers under win2K are very good (I should know - I'm using them) and there is little difference as he points out between Win 2K and Win ME so I'm afraid you need to wait until 3DFX releases drivers that give your card half decent performance.