Will Quad Core work on XP SP1?

[Initial D]

I'm currently building up a system which will use a Q6600. I was wondering if XP SP1a will support it or will I have to upgrade to SP2 or even Vista?

TIA

 

[A554SS1N]

I would assume it works, you'd probably need the multicore patch from MS anyway for best performance, not needed to work, but just make it work better.

 

[Initial D]

Thanks,

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=936357

Looks like Service Pack 2 isn't a requirement.

 

[tdawg]

I'm curious why you wouldn't update the OS to SP2. It's not like Microsoft charges to update to SP2.

 

[kb2114]

Seriously, you're missing out on a lot of important security updates and such by not getting SP2.

 

[JAG87]

He probably has some hardware issue with SP2. No other way to explain it.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

SP2 has been out since Aug 04. I would hope that any software worth using (broken by SP2) would have been patched by now. I guess you are using a specialized non-commercial application?

 

[Silversierra]

Quad works in xp pro sp2 at least.
http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/2038/quadpl9.jpg

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: JAG87
He probably has some hardware issue with SP2. No other way to explain it.

sssssuuuurrrreeee...there wouldn't be any other reason why someone wouldn't want to download Microsoft's validation tool as required in order to update an SP1 installed OS to SP2...simply no other explaination can be found...

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Idontcare, FWIW, a guy who needs a quad-core CPU has enough Google-know-how to install XP (pirated) and keep it updated.

 

[A554SS1N]

SP2 can be downloaded from Microsofts site without validation, just by getting the re-distributable. Not exactly hard. So I doubt legality of his OS copy is an issue.

 

[tdawg]

Now, where'd I put my tin foil hat?

 

[JustaGeek]

New XP Home OEM w/ SP2 from Newegg - $90.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16832116056

New Q6600 Quad Core from Newegg - $480.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115017


Peace of mind running a Quad on a compatibile OS - PRICELESS.

 

[Initial D]

Actually,

http://icrontic.com/articles/d...e_pack_2_slow_you_down

http://forevergeek.com/article...ormance_comparison.php

This basically explains why that when I upgraded to SP2, I felt that the performance loss was noticeable enough for me. Flame if you want, but it's what made me stay with SP1a and never go back (err... forward to SP2). And yes, I will be purchasing another SP1 CD w/ a valid key and will make another slipstream'd SP2 version CD of it just in case.

 

[themisfit610]

Yeah, some older machines are a lot faster with only vanilla XP or SP1, especially with 128 or 256mb. I know, its a hideous thought, but I sometimes do this with specific usage systems that never connect to the internet. For example, I have a system that runs a teleprompter. No need for internet there..

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Initial D
Actually,

http://icrontic.com/articles/d...e_pack_2_slow_you_down

http://forevergeek.com/article...ormance_comparison.php

This basically explains why that when I upgraded to SP2, I felt that the performance loss was noticeable enough for me. Flame if you want, but it's what made me stay with SP1a and never go back (err... forward to SP2). And yes, I will be purchasing another SP1 CD w/ a valid key and will make another slipstream'd SP2 version CD of it just in case.

Yes, but compare performance of all the Athlons XP and Pentium IV's w/ Northwood cores and 512kB cache in 2004 with your Core 2 Quad core with massive 2x4MB caches now.

The performance hit (if you can even tell the difference...) will be smaller than between XP SP2 and Vista, if that. You will also be limited to 137GB hard drive capacity, and many other security and performance improvements available for XP SP2 only.

IMHO, it's not worth it, but ultimately it is your choice after all...

 

[Initial D]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek
Yes, but compare performance of all the Athlons XP and Pentium IV's w/ Northwood cores and 512kB cache in 2004 with your Core 2 Quad core with massive 2x4MB caches now.

The performance hit (if you can even tell the difference...) will be smaller than between XP SP2 and Vista, if that. You will also be limited to 137GB hard drive capacity, and many other security and performance improvements available for XP SP2 only.

IMHO, it's not worth it, but ultimately it is your choice after all...

If you want to turn this thread into a SP1 vs SP2 thread, I don't really mind. Knowledge is power, after all.

In terms of limited 137GB hard drive capacity, I don't really need because of my external hard drive (300gb, which seems to be fine running under SP1.)

In terms of security improvements, SP1 has been working for me flawlessly. You aren't forced to download SP2, you can still download later security updates.

Performance improvements - a link would be nice to see of what kinds of these improvements are.

 

[JustaGeek]

"Support for Windows XP Service Pack 1 and 1a ended on October 10, 2006.[24]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP

Again, it's up to you...