Jump to content

Is It Save To Remove:


rado354

Recommended Posts


If you have an AGP graphics card in your system, do not remove AGP filters. In fact, even if you do not, leave them well alone - I experimented with an installation on my laptop and was unable to install the onboard ATI video card drivers.

I believe I even attempted to re-integrate the drivers using a driver backup tool.

The CPU driver is safe to install, provided you are not using an AMD CPU.

Take care,

James

x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's a bit self explanatory really.. if you have a pci-e grfx card, then the agp filters are safe to remove. if you have an intel chip, then the cpu driver is safe to remove. saying that, i have always used AMD chips, and haven't seen problems before when removing the cpu driver.. I suspect it's just an old cool n' quiet kind of implementation.. i mean, XP is what, 6 years old? whatever that driver did, no-one's gonna have that hardware anymore anyway :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have similar Q so won't start a new thread but ask here:

I have Intel Pentium 3 CPU and Intel BX chipser (i440BX). Also AGP gtaphics card (Geforce). Can I remove CPU Intel and AGP Filters - or leave them alone?

What "CPU Intel" is needed for? Do I need it for my P3 or is it for some newer (P4?)/mobile Intel CPUs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, no... I'm asking because I have Radeon AGP video card and Athlon 64 CPU :)

That's why I'm unsure to keep these components or remove them?

So if jmbattle is right, removing AGP Filters will brings me only problems.

Someone can confirm that?

More info is needed :yes:

Edited by rado354
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried to remove all CPU things and AGP filter.

In VMWare, there's an entry in setuperr.log about agp440.sys but otherwise no problem, VMWare Tools installed successfully. Did not used dxdiag though.

Have no agp test machine available. :(

About CPU things : I had no problem in VMWare and on real install (first emulates an AMD CPU, second is a dual-core 64bit).

Keep in mind XP (doesn't matter which SP) knows nothing about dual-core and 64bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well comrade, in your personal opinion, would it be more efficient and faster to execute 32-bit code on a 32-bit xp on a 64-bit cpu or 32-bit code on a 64-bit xp on a 64-bit cpu ?

there is no real proper 64-bit code anywhere so 64-bit code can be considered as does not exist, what does exist is a 64-bit winblows and 64-bit cpu, do any of these improve execution of 32-bit code (or 32-bit based code recompiled for 64-bit processor, all the same, as there is no compiler good enough anyway) ?

Edited by monohouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On IA-32 when a variable is longer than 32 bits (not sure it's really 32) it is split so the CPU can handle it. This takes some time.

On 64-bit, the var can be 64 bit without being split.

Also, I think 64-bit OS is needed in order to access additionnal registries.

But 64-bit means 64-bit memory address so you will need more memory (PAE has the same effect).

As far as I've understood, on 32-bit OSes a 64 bit CPU will behave in the same way as a 32 bit CPU.

64-bit OSes are probably faster (and even more for scientific apps) but they need more RAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so what you're sayin is that there is no point in using 64-bit OS or a 64-bit CPU for a 32-bit code ? as the additional memory requirements are just going to be wasted because the 32-bit code does not use the extra registers or the extra memory address space anyway ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...