Windows Windows XP - any performance gain?

Hey,

I've spent some time getting some hardware together for my desktop, and I have it now at a level that I think is reasonable, but I'm not quite getting the performance I'd expect from it (e.g. playing half life 2 is a little stutory in the open enviroments and such and such). The only thing I haven't upgraded is my O/S, which is still 98se. I was wondering if upgrading to Win XP will boost my performance, as I think alot of my hardware and drivers are actually geared towards an XP enviroment so it would seem logical to assume that I would see an improvement, has anyone else had any experience with this?

Currently I'm running an athlon XP 2400+ on a chaintech zenith 7njs mobo with 512MB PC2700 RAM, ASUS Radeon 256MB 9800XT graphics board, integrated C-Media audio chip and windows 98se, my video drivers are the latest ones you can get for 98, as the newer ones only run under XP.

Also, could I get some advice on which XP to get if I decide to go to XP, home or pro? And is it better to get the full version rather than an upgrade package?

Thanks

 

XP allows you to get as much as 15% percent increase in performance on the same hardware over something like 98SE. Also, I have heard upgrade horror stories way too much, and I strongly suggest you do a full install. Also, you really only need pro if you're going to make it ninto a server or if you have multiple processors. Hope this gives you some ideas.

 

A warning on XP OEM, it can stop working (and you won't get another activation from MS) if you do a major upgrade (like new mobo & cpu). It's also not transferable between machines. Minor upgrades (graphics card, hard drives, etc) every few months are OK.

May be worth forking out the extra for the Upgrade version if you change kit regular. If you've got a 98 CD that's all you need for XP Upgrade, 98 doesn't have to be installed so a clean install is easy.

I had a nice stable 98SE, no complaints, but XP is a big improvement in lots of little ways IMO like fast boot time and lots of eye candy. But as padrejones2001 says, don't bother with Pro unless you need the extra features.

 

I think Windows 2000 runs faster than XP, so you could consider that, but your computer specs (except maybe the processor) are pretty good and should be no probs with XP.

 

So XP upgrade will only ask for the 98se disk, sort of like when the computer asks for the disk to grab drivers etc. for new devices?

That would be helpful, as it *should* be perfectly stable if installed in this way. I could understand how an upgrade from an independantly installed copy of 98 would cause problems, but it seems logical to assume that this way would work fine as there would only be the bog standard set of components and regestry entries installed during the XP 'upgrade' install. Will save me precious currency, too.

If I do go for an upgrade rather than the full version, I will probably get the pro upgrade rather than home, actually. As I would prefer pro to home, simply because I run my PC on a large network and I imagine the extra networking facilities will come in handy at some point. Better safe than sorry I guess.

 

I think the only extra feature in pro is the ability to use domains, although there is a hack for the home version to do this. Pro is slightly more expensive, and all the upgrade does is ask for a previous version of windows to prove that you can legitimatly upgrade. I Bought an upgrade version, and used the old Windows 95 disk which I kept from 1997!

 

i found xp pro to be a lot less bloaty in general

can't explain it but xp pro ran faster on my 1ghz athlon with 512mb of ram than home did....

 

Yea, I think XP pro upgrade is what I'm gonna go for, it's mid range of the prices of all 4 of the XP options and pro seems to be generally preferable to home. I'm gonna format the disk, and install pro clean, using my 98se disk if it asks for it.

Thanks for the help

 

Just to add my $0.02:
I just upgraded from Win2000 to XP pro here at work, and man my machine boots up in almost half the time! I definitely notice the 15% performance gain when going from 2k to xp. Of course, all of our machines have little "designed for Windows XP" stickers on them, so who knows, maybe they were.... dare I say it? designed for Windows XP?

But 2k is great, much better than 95/98 IMO, but XP pro should definitely give you a performance boost. I use an athlonXP 2500+ with only 512MB of RAM and play HL2 and CS:S with ease.

I do have an OEM copy, and I've replaced just about every part at least once, and now I have to call microsoft and stay on hold for 30min just to activate it. Kind of lame, but at least it works. So yeah, if you can afford the upgrade rather than the OEM, go for it. I might buy retail *ewwww* next time... but fortunately Longhorn shouldn't be out for another 5 or 10 years, and even then it won't adhere to any globally accepted standards...

 

XP or 2000 (but probably XP for hardware) would be much better than 98SE.

I'm suprised someone still wants to run 98, especially with a relatively powerful system like that....

 

lol, I don't *want* to run 98se, it's the only O/S I have at the moment, hence why I'm gonna get XP...

 

mine dosnt have any made for xp system, tbh i dont think any1 here has since we all built our systems (like l33t ppl do )

 

java you're not l33t... you're a "n00b" who contradicts himself

most probs running a P3 600mhz jobby anyway

 

im not a n00b

 

Oh grow up, you have nothing to contribute to this thread.

 

anyway... xp pro prices are set to come down in a month or two anyway. Wait till then if you can

 

Boot is better with XP compared with Pro. As long as you cut down some of the animated junk and take off indexing, XP seems to be faster. Unless I put it on a really low end machine, then 2000 seems to run better, like a 600mhz and lower machine. And unless you are using a AD I would use XP Home, like any MS Software, just cut out some of the bloatware and you are good to go.

 

I would advise buying the full version of XP as I've seen people get into a right mess after a while with an upgrade. Plus the fact that if you ever need to do a reinstall you won't have to install 98 first again.

As for the differences between Home and Pro, Pro has a few more network features (maybe one or two more in other categories) which you are not likely to need. The performance difference is zero, they are as fast as each other. As for 2000, as good as it is don't bother with it. XP is essentially an updated version of it with more useful and user-friendly features.

Basically, I'd say go full Home Edition. I've not had a problem with OEM versions, except the usual repetitive activation.