• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How is Win2k for gaming?

C

Civic2oo1x

Senior member
I installed XP on my machine, but couldn't get it to recognize my Raid setup, so I had to install with one on Master and the other on Slave. It ran slow as hell, slower then 2k on my PC133 setup. I got a few write errors, saying it could not write to the directory and to write to another one, had a random restart, and now a permanent BSOD. So I'm going to give 2k a shot on my machine, hopefully that will help with some of the speed issues. XP would constantly slow up, even when I tried to search My Computer, and when it came to multi-tasking it was terrible. I had better speeds on my machine when it had 1024 megs of PC133, instead of 256 DDR. So my question is, does 2k play games as well as XP does? And will I lose any FPS off of Ghost Recon and Max Payne and the like? Thanks.
 
I am currently running 2000 and I run games like halflife and unreal tourny. I havent had a problem that was related to 2000 I had another problem but it was from bad hardware. 2k seems to be fine with games as long as if there is a patch for the game you have it installed.
 
I cannot speak for SP3, but I have been running W2K SP2 for years now and it works pretty darn well with most games. The notable exception was Black and White, I never got that game running. They have supposedly released a patch for it to work on W2K now, but I had to give it back to my friend quite some time before that was released.

Otherwise, games like Jedi Knight 2, Quake 3, GTA3, Warcraft 3 all run great. I have a Ti4200 which helps. My friend recently set up a couple computers with XP and both crashed and burned, he is going back to 2000 as well. I fear the day I am going to have to upgrade to a newer version on Windows... 2000 is the first Windows OS for which I can honestly say, if it aint broke...

 
Very similar situation here with Win2k. I've been using it, SP2, for years now. I don't have many games...but I play Unreal Tournament and Quake3 with no problems whatsoever.
 
Play Ghost Recon, MOH:AA, UT, Steel Beasts, etc. on Windows 2000, SP2 and now SP3. They all work fine for me.😀
 
Been running it for a couple years.
Only game I had problems running is Worms World Party.

Latest games I've run:
WC3
NWN
AA
Ghost Recon

no problems at all
 
If it makes any difference I felt that Win2k slows down some games. I don't know how WinXP handles games, but I have no doubt that some of my games run (quite a bit) faster in Win98.
 
Great for games. Been having a little trouble with XP though.

cdub, the patch for B&W does fix the problems most encounter with that game on 2K...

 
I found Win 2k to work fine with B & W with no patch, but I had problems with:
Toca 2
Dungeon Keeper 2
Viper Racing (got a patch though)
Baldurs Gate

Three of those still don't work, and I had a patch for BG but it didn't seem to work, the spec of my machine is fine for them so I think it's a Win 2k problem. (all tried under sp2)

UT, Deus Ex, HL, AOE 2, B & W, Gangsters 2, Thief 2 all work fine for me on Win 2k (sp1 because I haven't updated since a fresh install)
 
I've never had a problem with ANY game on win2k.

Not Black & White.
Not Worms World Party.
Not TOCA 2.


Everything worked perfect. 😀
 
So my question is, does 2k play games as well as XP does?
Click to expand...

My experience is that Win2K is slower but not significantly so. On my system it'll get ~300 points lower than XP when benchmarking with 3dMark2001 SE. It's up to you if that's significant enough to switch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top