2000 or XP and Games?

[fastman]

It's been awhile, which has faster performance these days for playing games?

 

[Viper GTS]

XP, by far.

Viper GTS

 

[Budman]

2000 ,by far.

Budman

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

both, by far

ChampionAtTufshop



i like xp for games

 

[DaveSimmons]

XP. If you have any DOS games or even some old Win9x games you still want to play you might want to dual-boot with W98SE (or whatever 9x you have) and have at least one FAT32 data partition.

I've read of people being unable to run classics like Planescape: Torment under XP, and I know XP is as hostile to DOS soundblaster emulation as Win2000 is.

 

[fastman]

Nope no classics here, XP, been awhile on that too.

 

[eaadams]

For my I had an old celery pII system and then upgraded. Now I find out a lot of games between then and now I cant play because of XP. Make sure to setup a good fat 32 partition for older games that might not even be that old

 

[fastman]

Been running 2000 for a couple of years now, so that shouldn't be a problem as everything I play now runs on it.

 

[Bovinicus]

There is no noticeable difference between either of them. XP eats some more memory though.

 

[HalfCrazy]

For some reason I like XP better. When I was running win2k I could not get NFS games to get past the loading screen. Got no problems playing the game under XP. I heard a few people did get the game to play under win2k. But I could not get it to load on my system.