Windows 2000 Performace issues...

[The_Other_One]

Not sure if this would be hardware or OS related...

Anyway, I recently wanted to reload my system, so I decided to try 2000 on it. It all seemed to work pretty well, but then I noticed some minor performace issues that bagan to bug me. Stuff like when I click IE, it takes about 1 minute for it to open! And this is on my Athlon 1.4!

I also found a few other things...mostly seems to just be lagging more then with 98. Dose anyone else have problems like this? I know I was having similar problems before, thats what I've stuck to 98 so long.

I had new drivers installed...all for 2000. My HD was running in UDMA mode(that was an issue before...) got DirectX 9 installed(same ver I used with 98...) Newest via 4 in 1(same ver with 98) formatted the HD to NTFS...but it still seems much sloer then with 98.

I've already decided to reload 98, and will probably start as soon as I post this message, but I'd like some ideas about this. I really like 98, but it gets annoying when your kinda stuck with an OS...

[Uranium-235]

try not to install DX9 unless absolutely nessecary

[The_Other_One]

Well...just a little late now... I installed DX9 because I tried it when it first came out, and could see a speed increase on my 3D games...probably about 5-10FPS... Probably the only time I really could tell a difference after installed a new version of DirectX...

Either way, I'm now back to 98SE, and my computer seems much happier :nod: But I'd still like some ideas on why it was acting like it was... I mean...it's almost embarassing when my Server(that POS Duron 850 that almost never works) runs 2000 server better then my Athlon 1.4 runs Pro... :shake:

[Jason425]

i hope you didnt install server on your primary machine.. then i would understand why it's so slow.. and 98 of any flavor sucks unless you cant get a hold on the much easier to use and more stable xp/2000..

[The_Other_One]

it's almost embarassing when my Server(that POS Duron 850 that almost never works) runs 2000 server better then my Athlon 1.4 runs Pro... :shake:

I had 2000 PRO on my Athlon...

[eviltechie]

:shrug:
lol who knows what he was reading

[accurateimage]

my 2Kpro runs rock solid and fast! takes about a hundreth of a second to open IE *LOL* and I also run dx9 which has run flawless and fast! I think you may have had a bad install..

[eviltechie]

format and reinstall will probably fix the problem

ive used win2k since it came out
i first used it on 866MHz machines couple of years ago

it was fast even on those

and ive used 2k pro on my own comp for the rest until recently

no complaints
except i formated and got winxp pro because there was a bad sector on the hdd or something
couldnt load

so i had to do a low level format
and i think it fixed the problem because my system is running super fast with winxp pro tweaked to bone

[The_Other_One]

I couldn't be a bad install because this isn't the first time I've tried 2K on my Athlon... I will give it some credit, it was VERY solid. Oh, and the hundreth of a second to open IE, heh, thats how my system is now with 98 back on it...

I did a format to NTFS(not just the conversion) when installing 2000, so that shouldn't be the problem.

I run 2K on my video machine, which is a PIII 733MHz, and it runs great. Of course, some things are slower considering it's about half the speed of my Athlon, but just getting around Windows, it zips right along.

Well, I plan to update build a new computer this summer, so I think 98 will server me until then...

[BobyJo]

I have been using W2k Pro since it became available.
Still have a copy of it. Is your version the Pro version?
I can't believe that you are having this OS run slow.
It is probably the fastest OS available today.
Even more than XP Pro.
You had to have something wrong. If you installed DX9 for W98 that will not work. You will have to go to MS website and download the DX9 for W2k/XP. You will be amazed at the difference, with DX9 for W98 installed in W2k.
It is a wonder the system will ever make it through boot up. Usually the slider bar will stop moving about 70% across and may not move any farther.
Believe me there are NO drivers or Software for W2k that is the same as W98se.
There is a vast difference between these two OS.

[eviltechie]

or u can try booting with the win2k cd
and go to the repair options

then cross ur fingers and hope that it will fix whatever the problem is if it is OS related

[The_Other_One]

Well, I love 2000...like I said, I use it on my video computer, and it runs great. Even that POS Duron 850 runs very well(once it actually boots...)

Yes, i use PRO...are there any other versions out there other then PRO, Server, and Adv. Server?

Heh, glad someone relized one of the many reasons I dispize XP ;) 2000 is an extremly fast OS...well, on all my computers other then my main one...

I had DX9 for 2000. Didn't have much of a choice anyway, MS has a program that detects your OS and downloads the appropriate software... As for other drivers, I either downloaded the newest versions avaliable for 2000, or used the 2000 versions off my CD's/disks... And considering this isn't the first time it was like this, I don't think it's somthing I did wrong.

Well, the repair option isn't much of an option anymore as I'm back to 98...however, as I said before, that wasn't my first time installing 2000 on my machine, so I REALLY don't think it's a bad install/bad drivers...

Either way, I'm pretty happy with 98. All of my software still works, all my hardware still works(it was a pain to get my capturecard going with 2000, and I could not find ANY drivers for my scanner!)

[BobyJo]

The main thing about 98 or 98se is NO memory managment, BSOD at least 3-4 times a day. What I like about 2000 is super memory managment and no bsod's ever. So I want to say, the problem with your installation being slow, has to be your fault. It just can't be anything due to MS Windows 2000 Pro. Cause all of us that use it say it is a fast OS. That proves it. No denying the word of all three of us. That would be unheard of. Besides we are the high realm of the fourth quarter of the last of the moheakeans. That makes us all right.

[eviltechie]

actualy ive had many BSODs in win2k w/ memory dumps

maybe it was because i was being such a poweruser that i messed too much with it
and it was on FAT32

now my XPpro SP1 is on NTFS, super stable
only had BSOD once in a month of use now

[The_Other_One]

I get no BSOD's on my main system...or if I do, it's VERY rare.

I usally get no BSOD on my 2K machines, but when I do...it's usally very serious...not somthing a simple restart will fix ... Yet another reason I stuck with 98 so long.

You say the problem is my fault...but I've installed the same version of windows one 3 different computer(many of them more then once) and have absolutly no problems. Then I get to this one, installed it many times with different hardware setups, but always get the same lagging results. I REALLY dont think it's somthing I'm doing.

[BobyJo]

Probably a great deal of these BSOD's in W2k is caused by a driver or software that is not compatable with W2k.
That is my expierence with that fact.
Replace that driver or remove the software and be sure you run W2k on NTFS not fat32.

[The_Other_One]

The last BSOD I got was from some form of virus...it was on one HD, and it infected the one currently in the system, causing BSOD's when I'd try to boot with 2 HD's. Since then, I don't think I've gotten any on either of my machines that still run 2000 in a while. Then again, the server just sits there, and the video comptuer isn't used too much...

[BobyJo]

Why do you not install a good antivirus software on your system.
I use the 2002 Nortons AntiVirus and that program has been granted the best of the year 2002.
I have been told the new 2003 version of the same software is not the quality of the 2002 program. FYI::

[The_Other_One]

I have Norton 2002 on my main system, but nothing on my server. For a while, it was barly used, but maybe I should put somthing there as I'm using it constantly(now that it has some storage...)

Somthing else, I tried to scan that infected HD from my main computer, but it never detected anything... It dosn't really matter now, that HD isn't even being used at the moment... but I guess I should still put somthing on that computer to protect it...

[Sparkz]

do you have msn explorer installed? If so, there is some bug with it that it freezes for like 45 seconsd when you pull up IE.

Also, 2000 is bad. seriously. XP is pretty poor as well, but better httan 2000.

[The_Other_One]

Nope, I can't stand MSN...I just used the IE that came with it...5.0 I think..

As for XP being better then 2000...you'll REALLY have to work hard to make be beleive that... I used XP Pro on a brand new computer at school(I was the only user) P4 1.8, 512M DDR, 40G HD...etc... I was constantly having problems, lags, etc. Though, my computer wasn't nearly as bad as the ones beside me that had 3 different users... Then some of my friends use XP Home...uh...I'm not even going to get into that...