Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Sign in to follow this  
bluebolt

Windows 2000 Professional on the Z97 Platform

Recommended Posts

I tested W2k Pro installation using an MSI Z97 PC Mate (LGA 1150) motherboard with an Intel i7-4790K CPU in the socket, and 4 x 2GB G.SKILL DDR3 1600 RAM (F3-12800CL9Q-8GBZL).

 

I ran the HFSLIP package provided by tomasz86.  Then I used nLite to integrate Intel’s August 2013 chipset installation INF and blackwingcat’s 8.9d AHCI SATA drivers (for the Series 9 processor), and to create the OS ISO, which I burned to CD.

 

As an experiment, I left the onboard serial port at its default setting (enabled); as expected, installation stalled at the message, “Setup is starting Windows 2000,” so I disabled the COM port (BIOS / Settings / Advanced / Super IO) and proceeded to a new attempt.

 

This worked, no surprise (based on previous experience with the Z87), and W2k Pro completed the text-mode phase of installation.

 

Next up was “Windows 2000 Professional Setup”: “Installing Devices”: “Setup is detecting and installing devices on your computer,” and a progress bar, which dead-stalled approximately a third of the way there.  I eventually forced off the computer.

 

Returning to the BIOS, I disabled Parallel Port and proceeded to a new attempt.  This time, W2k Pro finished “Installing Devices” and, once again, the game was afoot (evidently many of the problems associated with using W2k Pro on modern hardware can be taken care of by disabling extraneous onboard peripherals).

 

From there, Windows 2000 Professional presented the same problem as on previous Intel motherboard iterations, in that there is no USB function until you use your (PS/2) keyboard and Device Manager to direct the system to other USB drivers.  However, with the Z97 no “Series 9” USB driver presented during this step; instead, the system started out with “Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller” (but still no USB function), so I tried:

 

          -Generic USB Hub

          -Standard Universal PCI to USB Host Controller

          -USB 2.0 Root Hub

          -USB Root Hub

          -Standard Open HCD PCI to USB

 

Finally I returned to letting Windows Update have its try, and it still wanted Standard Enhanced PCI to USB Host Controller.  It was quite a roundabout process, but by some combination of these, positive USB function was eventually obtained.  Maybe experience will smooth out the sequence, but wow, practically had to beat the thing into submission…

 

Everything seems to work fine.  Remaining Problem Devices don’t amount to much: SM Bus Controller, Universal Serial Bus (USB) Controller, PCI Bus.  I’ll see how things work once the software is installed.

 

Incidentally, I also ran an alternate test without Intel’s Chipset Installation Utility drivers, instead putting BWC’s custom Intel Matrix Storage Manager 7.6 Series 9 and INF chipset cabinet files in the HFCABS folder of HFSLIP, before using nLite to add BWC’s 8.9d AHCI driver.  The resulting OS install turned out the same, except BWC’s doesn’t nag about the problem devices at every boot-up.

 

post-375408-0-58266300-1427828237_thumb.

Edited by bluebolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not enable HT technology? Won't hurt to try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tested previously on Z77 and the marks took a nosedive.  Tomasz86 had warned me about that with W2k Pro…though I think BWC did report higher performance with HT however in one of his configurations.

 

The Z97 is just back from service, so I haven’t had the chance to do much else with it yet (of course it konked right in the middle of testing null “drivers” that Fernando was writing for it, so hopefully I can get that back on track, as I would prefer to de-list even the inconsequential “problem” devices). 

 

I would like to see some numbers with and without PAE, and when I test I’ll try HT as well and post those; like you say, won’t hurt to try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tested using CrystalMark 2004R3 Portable, SuperPi, and 7-Zip Benchmark.  I tested with hyper-threading disabled (4CPU) and with HT enabled (8CPU).  I tested with and without Physical Address Extension.  No special tuning on the system, not even installed in a chassis, didn’t touch the clock (turbo mode put it at 4.2 GHz).

 

In whatever configuration, SuperPi results were all about the same (e.g. 8.56 seconds to calculate Pi to a million digits), like so:

 

post-375408-0-83508200-1431450647_thumb.

 

 

With or without PAE (7-Zip would not work with HT enabled), 7-Zip results were about the same (e.g. 18,481), like so:

 

post-375408-0-86780300-1431450676_thumb.

 

 

The best CrystalMark top-line score was 405,077 with PAE enabled:

 

post-375408-0-04237300-1431450971_thumb.

 

 

Not quite as good without PAE:

 

post-375408-0-56088400-1431451020_thumb.

 

 

And substantially worse with HT enabled:

 

post-375408-0-41500600-1431451049_thumb.

Edited by bluebolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Win2k runs fine with a native 8 core CPU  (like the FX-8350). I wonder what's the deal with HTT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it turns out, to quickly obtain USB function with the 9-Series we first make Device Manager install the Standard Universal PCI to USB Host Controllers.  From there, use Windows Update in Device Manager to install the other USB drivers as it wants (seems ironic that the Standard Universal PCI to USB Host Controllers don’t show up in Device Manager when all is done).  Now this process is actually faster than doing the 8-Series or 7-Series (tidbit:  any time you run Intel’s chipset installation utility on the 7- or 8-Series you have to go through the USB install process all over again, but not so with the 9-Series).

 

The rest of the news is not so good.

 

I re-tested using a Gigabyte GA-Z97-HD3P motherboard, and there is a problem, as it stops at “Setup is starting Windows 2000.”  We’ve seen this before, but here I’d already disabled the serial COM port, the parallel port, and every other suspect I could get my hands on.

 

I thought the problem was the new M.2 interface.  The MSI board I originally tested on did not have an M.2 port.

 

I tested again, this time using Gigabyte GA-Z97-HD3 (which is like the GA-Z97-HD3P but without m.2 or SATA Express ports) -- but it still wouldn’t get past “Setup is starting Windows 2000.”

 

W2k Pro does install in Standard PC mode, whoop-de-do, though this at least provides a look at a completed installation:

 

post-375408-0-08112000-1433375521_thumb.

 

The “PCI Device” listing is just the SMBus.  The real problems are whatever W2k is misreading as a FDD and a PS/2 mouse.  Too bad.

Edited by bluebolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wonder what's the deal with the Windows NT4/2000 MPS kernel that causes these problems. On my ASUS M5A99FX Pro r2.0 win2k installed with all USB devices working (this is an AMD board mind you) and same with my mom's ASUS X200CA laptop. It seems ASUS (and MSI presumably) are the go-to brands for Win2k Support IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perosnally i think Win2k is best off on AMD CPU platforms. The classic chipset layout + real cores are what helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several members here have reported that W2k Pro installs better on AMD hardware, and at moments like this I find that easy to believe.

 

Intel is practically no help at all, and it’s sickening that MS has to discombobulate existing hardware and existing software and practically any extant alternative in order to sell its latest OS.

 

Then again, I watched a recent newegg video with a couple of guys from Intel talking about their latest SSDs (the 750 series), and how you would need to “play with” Windows 7 for it to work in even a “limited fashion” with that hardware.  So they may also not be far from the last generation of Intel hardware that will even take a full-fledged Windows 7 install.

Edited by bluebolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD retains a more compatible platform overall, and is less expensive, which benefits consumers more. Intel may have the latest tech but they like to lock out OSes. Windows 8.x is an atrocity IMO.

Edited by AnX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However AMD's Radeon is a different story. For graphics nVidia is the best in backwards compatibility by far.

Thing is Intel uses a newer layout which could potentially confuse Win2k. AMD still uses the old northbridge/HT link system which hasn't ever caused problems with Windows 2000.

Edited by AnX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...