Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Question re dual processor differences.

Author: Matt Taylor

Date: 11:58:34 01/31/03

Go up one level in this thread


On January 31, 2003 at 11:48:45, David Rasmussen wrote:

>On January 31, 2003 at 02:53:19, Matt Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>>Supposedly Windows XP has increased performance due to a 10% lower system call
>>latency. It also comes with more bugs. Many more bugs.
>>
>
>I've heard that myth many times. I've never experienced it myself, though. Most
>often when people complain, it's when they're trying to use an old driver or old
>program that is badly programmed, and therefore doesn't work on XP. This is a
>good thing, IMO. What bugs have you experienced?

I don't mean the kernel. The kernel is roughly the same. There is an old bug
that dates back to NT4 days (or possibly prior) where Windows Explorer will lock
a file for no apparent reason and will not unlock it even across reboots. The
only solution I have found is to terminate explorer and use a command prompt to
move/delete the file. The bug is old, but I ran Windows 2000 for over a year
without experiencing the bug at all. I see it multiple times per month with XP.

There are also a fair number of graphical bugs, and the ZIP support in Windows
Explorer is awful. (I am glad I am accustomed to using InfoZIP on Windows.)

Personally, regarding the system call claim, I don't think that's really an
issue. Over a spanse of 2-3 minutes I observed roughly 400,000 system calls
starting from boot time. After boot time, the rate slows -dramatically-, but I
do not have any figures to substantiate that.

Drivers...heh. I do blame nVidia and Creative Labs for their own bugs. There is
no excuse for crashing in 2D mode. Creative Labs Audigy drivers are so buggy
that I crash hourly when using DirectSound.

>>My personal preference would be Windows 2000, but XP has the compelling Remote
>>Desktop and IEEE over 1394 features.
>>
>
>Windows 2000 is nice too.
>
>/David

Depends on your needs. I find Remote Desktop to be extremely useful for what I
do. If not for Remote Desktop, I'd definitely be using Windows 2000. (I can't
get IEEE over 1394 to work.)

For a computer that does nothing but compute Chess, Windows 2000 is probably
quite attractive since it does less behind your back.

-Matt



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.