To XP or not to XP...

Forum Windows XP : Windows XP General Discussion - To XP or not to XP...

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Word :    Username :           
 

First of all... shouldn't XP have it's own forum? Or has this already been asked?

Anyway...
Interesting reading from infoworld: <A HREF="http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml" target="_new">http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml</A>

Some highlights:
"...our initial baselining using Office XP and an optimized UI on the Pentium 4 system indicated a lag of a modest 11 percent, but things went downhill from there. The baseline reading for the Pentium III system showed that under Windows XP and Office XP, OfficeBench took 27 percent more time to execute than under Windows 2000 and Office XP."

"Except for a few instances, Windows XP increasingly ate the dust of Windows 2000 as load ramped up, regardless of machine specs or Office version. When the Pentium 4 client with Office XP was tested, script execution generally took between a quarter and a third longer with Windows XP as with Windows 2000, and as much as half again as long with the heaviest load and a stock UI. The Pentium III client fared even worse. Running Windows XP with our heaviest workload and the default UI raised script execution time to more than twice that of Windows 2000."

Also worth noting:
"Our tests on a dual-CPU system indicate that both Windows XP and Windows 2000 run better on an SMP (symmetric multiprocessing) configuration with relatively slow CPUs than on a single-CPU system with a screamingly fast processor. As we added more and more load, the benefits of a dual-processor configuration became more apparent. Both OSes (using Office 2000 and optimized UIs) handled the heaviest workload (scenario 3) nearly 40 percent faster on the SMP client machine than on the single-CPU Pentium 4."

- JW

Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.

so, what's the point: <b>To XP or not to XP...</b>

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...

Reply to blah

Well.. I'm not going to upgrade to an OS to have my apps run 25% to 30% slower.

And it's about time someone said something good about SMP systems.

- JW

Reply to JCLW

Not sure what the point was, but I have yet to hear something good about XP. I seen XP all ready as low as $97. I think the so called simple OS, is but that. And I think XP will get worst before it get's better. Some hardware and software aren't even ready for XP. Don't fix something that isn't broke.

defrage is child's play-fdisk

Reply to jiffy

so, the point is "<b>not to XP...</b>"?

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...

Reply to blah
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Windows XP > Windows XP General Discussion > To XP or not to XP...
Go to:

There are 877 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them