lightninglord2000 Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 I currently have WinXP Pro SP2 installed in my PC with the following processor and memory:1.2GHz AMD Duron processor128MB 266Mhz DDR RAMI kind of notice that it doesn't respond well due to small RAM. That's why I'm thinking of switching into Win2000 Pro. Now what I want to know is that will Win2000 Pro run better in my current PC setup compared with WinXP? Does Win2000 consume less memory compared with WinXP? Is the performance of Win2000 better than WinXP?BTW, in case I use Win2000, I'm planning to update it using the latest USP found in this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liveengineer Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Personally for Xp i would double your ram to 256 or more...Take a look at the customizing windows/tips and tweaks forums to regain some ram,ie disabling services, modding registeryGood luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At0mic Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 yeah I think on first install, xp uses somewhere around 120Mb ram where as 2000 uses about 92Mb. to answer your question, yes, 2000 would be faster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickytwista Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 yes i agree...win 2000 is less demanding and would be faster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtwarrior Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 This is cool.... OK a properly nlited 2k and xp OS with the appropiate services turned off which 1 uses less ram? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At0mic Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 (edited) This is cool.... OK a properly nlited 2k and xp OS with the appropiate services turned off which 1 uses less ram?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>2k of course. gdogg had managed to get xp's memory usage down to 51.6Mb last time I looked. I however, have got 2k down to around 25Mb memory usage and my system32 folder is currently 37.2Mb. I've tested every single file in system32 and I only have left in there the files which are required for windows to boot with no errors. Of course, I'll need to add a few files back again for the functionality I need. For example, I'll have to put VDMDBG.DLL back again so I can run Taskmgr.exe (then I'll be able to see how much memory usage I'm really using). But there are still improvements to be made like giving minlogon a try. I assume minlogon will let me remove a few more dll files? I hope somebody knows which ones, otherwise I've got 84 DLL files to test. Although thinking about it, a lot of those files couldn't be deleted while windows is running. Maybe if I went through each file in safe mode, I could reduce it even more. Then theres all the registry pruning to be done. Edited October 1, 2005 by At0mic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InTheWayBoy Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Win2000 will always be faster...not as many 'features' sucking away your resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtwarrior Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 (edited) At0micThats fantastic. How did you do it with nlite, batch files, runonce.This is very cool. I need detailsMinlogon from 2k embedded would be cool but you can also patch winlogon with the patch for xp. The effects are not as profound but it does boot a little faster and also WFP is turned off for winlogon and allows further tweaking of this file with reshack etc. I need full functionality so I am wondering what could be done with 2k.I want to put the file winntbbu.dll from xp into 2k so I can get the setup billboard into it so I can edit it to say what I want. I will have to edit txtsetup and dosnet I think to make it work, what do you think? Edited October 1, 2005 by dirtwarrior Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At0mic Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 I've looked into winntbbu.dll before but I'm not sure how it could be done. 2k uses so many different files for the install screens, syssetup.dll being one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtwarrior Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 I am going to try. The classic setup is kind of boring. Is there a way to edit classic setup then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At0mic Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 I am going to try. The classic setup is kind of boring. Is there a way to edit classic setup then? <{POST_SNAPBACK}>well you may be able to edit syssetup.dll but that will only affect the post networking part of the install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtwarrior Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 At0micCould you post a guide what is safe to remove from 2k while keeping functionality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlo555 Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 For me it has always been the complete opposite. Windows 2000 has always ran incredibly slow on my computers (one of which is an athlon xp 3000+ with 1.5GB DDR400). On full load, XP has always consumed much less ram than 2000 with the default windows settings and services running. Whoever got their memory usage down to 25MB, I just have one question... how the hell did you do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now