Is Windows 2K Pro really better than Xp?

Try it and decide for yourself, it is only an opinion based on personal needs and likes that makes the "right" decision.

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...

Take a look at my post in the CPU forum. IF you could give me some insight on what is going wrong I would appreciate it.

Preface
More than one year ago Intel with the new Xeon processors on basis of the Prestonia core manufactured in 0,13µm presented a technology, which puts the processor into the position to process two Threads parallel. Here it should not naturally concern the last processor, which is equipped with the so-called hyper+ Threading technology. Thus hyper+ Threading was activated nevertheless for the first time and for many surprisingly with 3,06 GHz the Pentium 4 well a half year ago also for Desktop computers. Meanwhile there are 4 processors together with new 800 MHz Frontside bus Pentium altogether five CPUs with active hyper+ Threading (HT). This alone is not sufficient however, in order to be able to use HT; also the operating system must control this technology.

Since HT reveals itself in relation to the operating system like a dual processor system, it requires also after an operating system with dual processor support. Windows 2000 Professional and server, Windows XP Professional as well as Windows server offer this support here as well known 2003 (formerly Windows NET) and naturally older Windows NT based operating systems.

According to Intel the hyper+ Threading support for the Desktop processors is integrated however only in Windows XP Home edition and Professional. The use of Windows 2000 Professional is not recommended. This is to that extent amazing, since the first Xeon processors of Intel had to get along with hyper+ Threading quite a while with Windows of 2000 servers as operating system. Finally the new, server version based on Windows XP, Windows server was only released 2003, in the April of this yearly to the sales. If Windows of 2000 servers were allowed to thus co-operate long time with HT processors, why Windows 2000 Professional with them should not be able to co-operate? Does Windows offer 2000 the same performance with HT as Windows XP? We let begin Windows 2000 Professional SP3 against Windows XP Professional SP1 on a system with and without activated hyper+ Threading.


Bases
The idea of hyper+ Threading actually comes from the server range, where frequently computer systems with more than only one processor are used. With two processors it is e.g. possible to process two Threads (smallest executable part tasks) per clock cycle since each CCU can be employed independently with tasks. If a use of the programmer were divided into several Threads, so the speed can be increased clearly, if not even almost double.

The hyper+ Threading technology is here nothing different one, than the technology, which makes this simultaneous Multi Threading possible in a only one physical processor (with restrictions). This processor splits up thus into two logical processors, whereby the two logical/virtual processors a part of physical remark resources divide. A goal is it to use those available resources more effectively. But, as previously mentioned, naturally also the operating system plays a crucial role there. According to Intel HT of the Desktop processors becomes only under Windows XP (Home or Professional) or Linux supported starting from Kernel version 2.4.18. However Microsoft thought also own concerning hyper+ Threading, and published these in a Word document.
Quotation:

Although Windows 2000 is compatible with hyper+ Threading Technology, incoming goods expect customers wants GET the best performance from hyper+ Threading Technology using Windows NET server. This is because the Windows NET server Family is engine-talk ton take full advantage OF the logical processors created by hyper+ Threading Technology.
Who would like to thus use the full potential from hyper+ Threading, according to Microsoft based Windows NET server, which in the meantime with the designation Windows is available server 2003 in the trade, needs the Windows XP. Thus thus also Microsoft recommends the employment of Windows XP to based products, if it concerns the employment Intels of new technology. However one could imply an sales figure-oriented intention here naturally also. But there are indeed differences with the recognition of dual processor system between Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
Quotation:

Because Windows of 2000 servers of does emergency distinguish between physical and logical processors, Windows 2000 simply fills out the license limits using the roofridge processors counted by the BIOS. [ … ] In, Windows NET server of distinguishes between logical and contrast physical processors, regardless OF the way they’RH counted by the BIOS.
Windows XP is to be differentiated thus for the first time in a the position between virtual and physical processors. Therefore it is possible e.g. also with Windows XP Home edition to use a processor successfully with HT support although the Home edition on supports a material CCU for itself only. But this meant is not naturally still enough that there are achievement differences between Windows to 2000 and Windows XP with the employment of HT.


_____________________________________________
<font color=red> And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign </font color=red>

Just use Windows XP already.

eh, I've never had any problems w/ xp that I didn't have in 2k. With all the flashy crap turned off it is pretty much just 2k with more drivers, lol.

<A HREF="http://www.folken.net/myrig.htm" target="_new">My precious...</A>

I think all windows OSs suffer the problems I've had and I'm sure everyone has had them. Just the normal application crashing to desktop and BSOD. Those are about the only windows problems I've faced on my personal computers, I'm one lucky bastard lol. I've seen all kinds of crazy stuff on client computers but on my own machines I don't really suffer. I usually end up formatting my machine once or twice a year (or more) so I don't really experience any old windows install woes.

On client computers I think the most popular things are network problems, driver problems, usb problems, and spyware/viruses. Those happen on xp and 2k machines.

<A HREF="http://www.folken.net/myrig.htm" target="_new">My precious...</A>

I have stuck with W2k and will continue to until my core applicaitons no longer work on it. I hate all the stupid bloatware being pumped into software like XP. Even though you can revert to Classic mode you still know all the code is sitting in the OS. XP is a dumbed down OS for the masses. W2K just feels faster meaner and leaner. And so far I have not come across any software that that is XP only. Although I'm sure some exists. W2k gets my vote. I'm a seasoned web developer and am on my computer probably 10 hours a day so this is very important to me. So that's my 2 cents.

<A HREF="http://www.ericstoffers.com" target="_new">(My little web site)</A>