Which OS for my new computer?

[thirtythree]

I am thinking either Win2k or WinXP .. which would you guys recommend? Also, I am thinking about dividing my HD into a 30GB system partition, 40GB of file storage, and 10GB for Linux (probably Redhat 8.0). Which OS should I install first or does it even matter?

Thanks.

 

[igiveup]

Well if you are going to combine the operating systems I would recommend going with a fat16 or 32 partition for your filestorage (if you have no security concerns). If you make the filesystem NTFS you can mount it and read from it from linux, but you won't be able to write back to it. Make the Boot partition fat16 or 32 also.

What you choose for you windows OS depends on what you want to do. Lots of media access (scanners, digital cameras, etc) then I would choose XP. Also, if you have any legacy apps then I would choose XP also. It has a better compatiblity mode than 2000 Pro. You can also strip the visuals out of XP and improve performance.

If you don't have to have it I would also recommending disabling system restore and drive indexing. If something goes wrong its just an opportunity for me to clean install anyways. Then again, if you don't want all of these extra features then 2000 might be ok for you. Just remember XP will be supported for two years longer than 2000 will, including bug patches, etc.

Check this thread here at Anandtech for the consensus on NTFS partitions: LINKAGE

 

[thirtythree]

I would like to go with XP since it has newer drivers, more features, better support, etc. but my bro-in-law says XP is slower and uses up more RAM. I was thinking about trying both and comparing performance (3dmark scores perhaps), stability, etc.

 

[QuaiBoy]

Originally posted by: Deslocke
I would like to go with XP since it has newer drivers, more features, better support, etc. but my bro-in-law says XP is slower and uses up more RAM. I was thinking about trying both and comparing performance (3dmark scores perhaps), stability, etc.

As a long-time user of Windows 2000 (back to beta) and a current user of XP, I can confidently say that you will not take a major performance hit from XP Pro so long as it is to be installed on a current machine. I've had w2k running on machines as slow as P133 with 64mb RAM, but would recommend no less than a 500mhz with 128mb RAM (the more, the better) for XP. Anything less results in excruciatingly slow boot times IME.

Perhaps this will help you decide:

http://www6.tomshardware.com/consumer/02q3/020930/index.html

A breakdown of game performance between the current versions of Windows. Games aren't the only factor in overall system performance of course, but the data is something to consider nonetheless.

Good luck,
-Evan-

 

[thirtythree]

I am currently using Win2k and haven't noticed any headaches when playing OpenGL games .. just curious how many of you actually use one of those programs to resolve the 60 Hz problem (see conclusion).

 

[KingofFah]

before the new nvidia drivers, I just screwed around with the monitor registry to set the refresh rates I wanted for each res. The new nvidia drivers glitch for some reason, though, so I may be going back to what I was doing before.

 

[Challenger]

Comparison linked good reading