Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: 98SE vs ME vs XP




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    Originally posted by Wiggo
    98SE is the best with older systems that have 256MB of memory or less but XP is better with more modern hardware and 512MB or more of memory.
    I hate to argue with you, but having modern harware is hardly relevant (with a few exceptions) so long as you get good 98 drivers. I would still use 98 for games with 512 MBs of RAM because it still works faster. XP doesn't simply fill all that extra RAM with nothing, it has to process a little more, enough to make stuff take tenths of a second longer than it would in 98. In a first-person shooter, a few tenths of a second is an eternity. I have heard that there are some stability issues on systems with more than 512 MBs of RAM in 98, but I would still use 98 unless huge problems started happening. I can't believe I forgot to mention that a lot of older (DOS-95) games simply don't work on XP, even if you mess with compatibility and hardware acceleration(sometimes there are fixes found online made by fans, sometimes. That was actually the initial reason I decided to dual-boot 98SE and XP. I discovered 98 was considerably faster in games.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fincastle, IN, USA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default

    98's known to throw fits at times with 512mb of RAM, at times.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    So I've heard, but depending on your BIOS (and overclocking) 98 probably won't even recognize all 512 MBs so you probably need to have more than 512 MB to have any problems. At least I have 512 and it hasn't given me any crap yet.

  4. #14
    Beefy Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amd_man2003
    98's known to throw fits at times with 512mb of RAM, at times.
    It usually plays up when you've got more than 512MB, but 512MB is fine most of the time.

    Yawgmoth, you've got a totally valid point there. However, I'm gonna throw in the old 'stability' argument. Yes, I know that if you can get 98 running smoothly it does run very well, but not a lot of people have that kind of success. For the majority of 98 users, the occasional blue screen and crash will happen. XP is, to put it simply, a bit more 'idiot proof'. Also, truth be told, when I was dual-booting 98 and XP when I initially installed, I found the game speed difference was negligible. That's why I gave my comment earlier about RAM vs OS. I try not to get anyone to run XP with only 256MB RAM. Yeah, it does work, but doing anything intensive just drags the system down. 512MB or more, then I'll suggest XP everytime.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    790

    Default

    When I first got this comp (I knew NOTHING about comps then), it only had 256MB. Wow, did I have fun surfing the web. I only played Rogue Spear and non-demanding games back then so it was fine. However, exiting out of a game to the desktop would take an eternity. Now it's instantaneous. However, most computers now (except barbones and really low oem's) usually come with or can be upgraded to 512MB of RAM easily. With that being the case, why not run XP? Seems rigid to hold on to an old OS when XP is much more convenient and stable. : peace2: Mista K6
    Modified Dell 8200 Case:
    -400MHz FSB i850 Intel mobo
    -P4 Williamette Socket 478, 1.9GHz
    -768MB 16-bit PC800 RDRAM
    -MSI GF4 Ti4200 128MB @ 284/581
    -7200 RPM Maxtors: 60GB (2MB) on mobo and 160GB (8MB) on ATA/133 PCI Card
    -Creative Inspire T7700 7.1 Speaker System on an Audigy 2
    -Windows XP Home Edition SP2

    Rock on : peace2: , MiStA K6

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefy
    It usually plays up when you've got more than 512MB, but 512MB is fine most of the time.

    Yawgmoth, you've got a totally valid point there. However, I'm gonna throw in the old 'stability' argument. Yes, I know that if you can get 98 running smoothly it does run very well, but not a lot of people have that kind of success. For the majority of 98 users, the occasional blue screen and crash will happen. XP is, to put it simply, a bit more 'idiot proof'. Also, truth be told, when I was dual-booting 98 and XP when I initially installed, I found the game speed difference was negligible. That's why I gave my comment earlier about RAM vs OS. I try not to get anyone to run XP with only 256MB RAM. Yeah, it does work, but doing anything intensive just drags the system down. 512MB or more, then I'll suggest XP everytime.
    Very good point there. For ppl who doesn't know their way around pc's XP is the 'safe' way.. :)

    I may be a lucky man but I never ever had any instability with the 98se os what so ever. Then again for power use I've only had the the Intel 815 or the newer Amd chipsets, like the NForce.. (have used Via for P3 though)

    I have not used mutch older platforms for anything other than routers/firewalls/servers etc.


  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pbatacan
    ok. Maybe I'll upgrade to Xp. All my hardware are modern except for my videocard which is a Geforce2 MX 400 but you think this card can still do much for me? By the way. Its overclocked @ 250/200. Pretty low Mhz compared to newer cards. hehehe.
    not really. dont get me wrong, the old GeForce2 MX's were great. i had a GF2MX @ 200/200: ran Counter-Strike, Diablo II etc great. but these days they just dont have the same kick as they used to.
    MSN Messenger - handy481@hotmail.com
    DC++ - handy481 :: Sweden Xperience :: BootCamp 02 :: Revolution xShare 01 :: Mp3Heaven

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    4,543

    Default

    Hmm.... One thing we haven't talked about at all is price. Do you even own XP as it is? If you don't I really can't see upgrading as a choice at all. XP isn't worth the money (I think it's $300 retail for Pro, although an upgrade disc is probably a bit cheaper) if your main use is gaming. I agree that it's worth it if you have over 512 MB of RAM or just can't manage to stabalize 98 to asatisfactory point, but spending money for worse gaming performance just doesn't make sense. And avoiding payment by doing something bad doesn't make much sense either. So unless you have very new harware or > 512 MB of RAM, upgrading to XP from 98 just wouldn't be a good option.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    46

    Default

    err, maybe I'll stick with Windows 98SE because yeah, Windows Xp is expensive right? 98SE's performance is still good.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24

    Default

    If ya got 512 Ram
    NO BRAINER IT'S XP
    LESS WIN 2000
    LOOK HERE!
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/p...eaturecomp.asp
    HERE TOO!
    http://www.computeruser.com/articals...0501%2C02.html

    As far as price I've seen XP pro & 2000 pro full version both under $140.00
    XP home fullversion $80.00 : online and at pc shows
    Way more stable than 98 /98 lossing support from microsoft
    absolutly worth the cost!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    you can even play dos games which they dont even make anymore, with a few fixes
    Every thing is or will be geared to modern day OS

    IF YA GOT OLD PC, MAKE YOU A BOAT ANCHOR TOSS IT IN THE BAY!

    Shop around lot's great deals on modern PC'S
    :shoot3:

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •