I am looking at buying an AMD XP system (probably an Asus  266V-e - or Soyo Dragon plus motherboard) with a Gf3 ti200 at a clone shop. Is Windows 98 SE still better for gaming than XP?  I like war based and other strategy game, flight simulators and sport simulator. I have a lot of game that says they do not support window NT.  XP may be more stable but it may not play all my game title. My previous system had run on Windows 95 OSR 2 so I do not want to spend the extra money for windows XP including extra memory right now.  Windows XP supposedly run best with 512 MB of ram whereas Window 98 SE run best with 256 MB. I will buy window XP, when they come with a second release and when the PC2700 memory is readily available from Micron. I plan to start with 256 MB stick of PC 2100 memory and replace it with 512 MB of PC2700 when I eventually run Window XP.  I hope to use this motherboard with 166/333 MHz FSB AMD CPU.

XP is pretty good at gaming.  I haven't found anything that won't run yet.  I think 98 might be a tad faster for some games but you won't be able to tell the difference with the naked eye...you'll need a benchmark score.
 
If you have never run anything based on NT (NT,w2k,XP) you OWE it to yourself to try it.  It won't run for years like linux but it will go months without a crash, unlike 95/98/ME which is lucky to go a few days.

A few days?  Yeah you would be lucky.. lol.  I've been running XP for over 6 months now and I'm happy to report that all my games work well with it and I haven't had a single crash.  A far cry from 98SE.. (ME especially).  Yes, the memory requirements for XP are a little steeper, but you will get by sufficiently with 256MB.  Up until Christmas, I was running 256MB...  it all depends on your particular game.  EverQuest, for example, required 512MB to enable all the new character textures with their newest expansion.  For the games you're running, you'll be just fine with 256MB and can upgrade to 512MB at your leisure.

I don't own XP, but if gaming is your thing and your question above is Win98se stll better then WinXP for gaming. I would have to say yes Win98se would kick XP butt up and down the street all day long.  
 
Complicated Nit Picker

I would have to disagree there. Being a person who has every version of Windows since Win3.1, I know the ups and downs of every OS. Win98SE/Me are not longer the best OSs for gaming. You will be equally served with WinXP. Sure, Win98SE will win benchmarks,but unless you care about the highest benchies possible, WinXP is the way to go. I can make Win98SE crash in under 2 min on any system (lol, try opening over 30-40 IE windows)! I can't say the same under Win2K and WinXP. They are far more crash-proof than Win9x has ever been.  
 
I don't think anyone can argue that the extra couple of FPS isn't worth the 10-20 crashes a day (yes, I do open 30-40 IE windows all the time!)    
 
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

What does

that have to do with it?
 
 
You just said

 
And here I am building a another computer to put Win2000 on it for stability, and plan on using Win98se on my other computer to play games.  
 
And your telling me I don't need to do that I can just run WinXP and get the same results I'm getting now with Win98se?
Bull
 
 
Complicated Nit Picker

Hmm... why are you so annoyed jiffy. the guy never said that XP is better than Win98SE. He said that performance wise it's pretty much there and I have to agree. I have both systems and I can't notice any differences in performance.
 
About the only thing I use Win98SE instead of XP is for the games that I play with my bro using gamepad.  
 
The reason for that is the fact that I there are no XP drivers for the gamepad. If the pad worked on XP I'd be getting rid of Win98SE so fast the HD would get dizzy.
 
I prefer XP Stability much more than I care for those few lost FPS that I would get on Win98SE.
 
- Tekumze

It must of been (lol try opening 30 IE)
haha
<font color=red>the guy never said that XP is better than Win98SE</font color=red>
<font color=blue>Win98SE/Me are not longer the best OSs for gaming.</font color=blue>
I would beg to differ.  
I understand WinXP is a good OS, maybe a few bugs, but still good and look forward to a newer version. But the question was which is the best OS for gaming. And where WinXP shines I don't think it has anything to do with games.To me that is which is faster, smoother and plays all games. As for crashing, sure Win98se can crash,so do the others, but it's not that bad, I don't have a problem with it, I could change settings if it was and I don't lose any important info. if it does. hehe  
If someone wants to give up performance go with WinXP. Some say with WinXP there is a price you pay, what do they mean by that?
 
Complicated Nit Picker

Well I never noticed any difference in performance on XP and 98. Maybe I don't have the latest games that would make the difference more obvious.
 
I also didn't notice any games not working on XP. WHen I buy a newer pad or a joystick that the manufacturer cares anough o make XP drivers than 98 is a goner. 98 may work OK for you but I also use my machine for work (Printer Driver Developer) from time to time and I don't fancy an occasional crash. I need my machine as stable as possible.
 
Ignoring a crash here and there than for Gaming only I think 98 is better... but not by that much. Not by enough of a margin for me to want to have it installed.
 
- Tekumze

I agree, as I said, you'll get better benchmarks with Win98 but you won't get better noticable gaming performance. WinXP was designed to be the future gaming OS, and obviously everyone is going to be supporting Microsoft.  
 
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

"I don't own XP but..."
 
hehe.  Then don't offer an opinion.

Well if there is a price you pay for running XP, I have yet to notice it.  In fact, a lot of my online games actually run better with XP since it's networking is a hell of a lot more efficient than what passes for networking in 98/ME.  The system requirements are indeed steeper, but if you have a fast enough machine with enough RAM you'll be very hard pressed to notice them.  Stablility is VERY important to me since I play two MMRPGs... nothing worse than having your character die because 98/ME decides to barf...

>><font color=red> I also use my machine for work (Printer Driver Developer) from time to time and I don't fancy an occasional crash. I need my machine as stable as possible.</font color=red><<
 
<font color=blue>What does that have to do with which OS is best for gaming?</font color=blue>  
 
  I'm not the only one that posted that Win98 is best for games, or XP played a game like crap.  If you guys are going to deny how bad your games run in WinXp, then I'm going to deny my system never crashes.  
Lets brake this down and get to the end of this. Take a particular game, if Win98 runs faster and doesn't crash while playing it, then that's the best OS for that game. Now we can take all the games, see what runs faster, plays smoother and compare any crashes to speed difference.  
 
Since the question is which OS is best for games, and that is present. I don't think using the computer for work or how many I.E. you can open at once or how stable your system is doing anything other then games would be relevant.
 
By the way, the comment about >><font color=blue>What does that have to do with which OS is best for gaming?</font color=blue> << I'm just kidding... O and kidding about the (I don't have nothing better to do) remarks above too.  
To each his own.
 
 
Complicated Nit Picker

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm certainly not denying anything.  Having used every MS OS from Win 3.1 on up (if you can call Win 3.1 an OS)...  I know how my games are running.  A five percent increase in frame rates just ain't enough to convince me to go back to Win 98.  Am I going to notice that?  Not unless I have an FPS counter up on my screen 24/7.  The only thing slowing my games down right now is a slightly dated video card (ATi Radeon 64MB VIVO).  If I were to install a Radeon 8500 or GeForce 3, I doubt the difference between 98 and XP would be all that significant.
 
Stability is an important factor in playing games.  Almost as important as FPS.  Now Win98 may not crash as often as some people might lead you to believe, but it still crashes more often than XP does on my machine.  When I play online, I don't want to lose because of some damned Windows glitch.  Stability cannot simply be dismissed... I'll take a machine that never crashes over one that crashes daily yet gives me a whole 5% more performance.

I never said that. I own retail (read: legal) copies of almost every MS OS.  
 
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

Yeah, it was in response to a post a few above yours.  My bad.

Please, please one at a time.
You did not start this post. madmickey did and didn't say only user of WinXP reply. Just because I don't own it, doesn't mean I don't know anything about it. Just from the information each of you have posted I can conclude Win98se is faster, and WinXP is more stable and doesn't crash as much as Win98se. But how many people here don't know this all ready? This subject has been drag out before. And how many people and how many times does someone offer a subjection of a hardware or software without even owing it. Maybe more then not.  
If the difference is speed over stability, then it's each his own.  
 
Complicated Nit Picker

That Asus mobo you listed might not run at 333MHz. You need an IWill XP333 to guarantee a 333MHz or 400MHz FSB.
 
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

Give it time,more games will come out with better XP support and the XP will have made it past its teething troubles therefore it will succeed 98se as the optimum OS for games