Compatible Support Forums: Windows .NET gaming

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Windows .NET gaming

#1 User is offline   dream_theater84 

  • stranger
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 16-February 02

Posted 16 February 2002 - 06:24 PM

hey.

does windows .NET Support gaming (Direct X)

I looks alot like XP, and the code name for it was whistler server, so if a game supports XP, will it support .NET as well?

email me please,
Thanks
Danny

dream_theater84@yahoo.ca
0

#2 User is offline   SHS 

  • veteran
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 1245
  • Joined: 16-July 99

Posted 16 February 2002 - 11:59 PM

Windows.NET is a server what world are you going do with server.
0

#3 User is offline   Brian Frank 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3088
  • Joined: 21-January 01

Posted 17 February 2002 - 09:12 AM

And if history is correct, the OS will be more expensive than XP Pro or Home. A big waste of money unless you are actually gonna use the features. I sure wouldn't. $400 for an OS to game on, no thanks!
0

#4 User is offline   clutch 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3859
  • Joined: 29-March 00

Posted 17 February 2002 - 11:17 AM

It's a server OS, not a desktop OS. By the way, why the need for someone to email you the answer?
0

#5 User is offline   Four and Twenty 

  • Pooh-Bah
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1623
  • Joined: 25-March 00

Posted 17 February 2002 - 04:40 PM

games work on .NET for me.
.NET is like XP server all the XP features and all the server features. Best OS i have ever used
0

#6 User is offline   Edguy 

  • stranger
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 24-October 01

Posted 21 February 2002 - 07:31 PM

Agreed Four and Twenty, just like w2k server, it's not much more than the "desktop" os with all the server features available for install, clean install and u dont see much difference, and u can use it just like the "desktop" counterpart....

4&20... what games do ya have running?... all i get when i try to run the DxDiag test... is N/A on D3d and Ddraw... and disabled on DirectDraw... if i try to enable it... it becomes N/A.

i tried it on .NET Enterprise build 3590, got a GeForce2 GTS and tried it with the 23.11 and 23.12 drivers.... same results...tried it with a Matrox G400MAX aswell... latest(5.82)drivers... same results.

Video overlay is also disabled... not so strange since Ddraw is disabled... frown
0

#7 User is offline   DosFreak 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3885
  • Joined: 04-February 00

Posted 21 February 2002 - 07:47 PM

Accekeration is decreased by default. Run dxdiag and move the slider all the way to the right.
0

#8 User is offline   Edguy 

  • stranger
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 24-October 01

Posted 21 February 2002 - 08:05 PM

i should've thought of that wink

Thanks Dosfreak! cool
0

#9 User is offline   insaNity 

  • member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 09-November 01

Posted 23 February 2002 - 07:11 PM

To optimise it for desktop performance, you would have to change some of the server optimsations back. What I can think of so far:

[list]
[*]You would probably have to tweak the cache (use something like CacheMan

[*]Process Priorities: Server is set to give priority to background apps rather than foreground. Find (the equivelent of) Control Panel > System > Advanced > Performance/Settings > Advanced Processor Scheduling.

[*]DirectX acceleration (thanks DosFreak)

[*]Logging. The server is probably set up for heavy logging/crash dumps. There are a few different locations to change this.
One is Control Panel > System > Advanced > Startup & Recovery/Settings, There's also NTFS logging I believe, and dr Watson (drwtsn32.exe) and I'm willing to bet there's some other performance meters, etc running that you will have to find a way to disable.

[*]Services. There would be a lot more services enabled by default that do nothing usefull for a desktop OS than chew up resources.
[/list:u]

Maybe we could get a more detailed version of this... any others?
0

#10 User is offline   Four and Twenty 

  • Pooh-Bah
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1623
  • Joined: 25-March 00

Posted 23 February 2002 - 09:02 PM

on my computer you don't even really have to tweak it like that at all aside from the hardware acceleration. I notice no difference in desktop or game performance on .NET
It probably makes more of a difference on a sigle processor machine to disable the extra services. Once you go dual you never go back.
0

#11 User is offline   yakkob 

  • addict
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 461
  • Joined: 14-March 00

Posted 24 February 2002 - 03:24 AM

Quote:

.... Once you go dual you never go back.


Bang on there m8 smile
0

#12 User is offline   insaNity 

  • member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 09-November 01

Posted 24 February 2002 - 04:57 AM

Yeah but there will be people with slower machines, and one day your machine will be considered a slower machine...and you will want all the game performance you can get...
0

#13 User is offline   Four and Twenty 

  • Pooh-Bah
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1623
  • Joined: 25-March 00

Posted 24 February 2002 - 08:05 PM

when my machine gets too slow i am getting dual p4 xeon
0

#14 User is offline   DosFreak 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3885
  • Joined: 04-February 00

Posted 25 February 2002 - 06:45 PM

Quote:

on my computer you don't even really have to tweak it like that at all aside from the hardware acceleration. I notice no difference in desktop or game performance on .NET
It probably makes more of a difference on a sigle processor machine to disable the extra services. Once you go dual you never go back.


frown I never thought I'd say it but I did. frown This Athlon XP 2000+ is faster than my Dual P31ghz@1166 at the desktop. Games above 1280X1024+ run at about the same fps...below that res the XP is about 50fps faster. This is with all the same hardware except CPU/MOBO/RAM.

Going to get a duallie though when I get back from TDY/Leave!
0

#15 User is offline   clutch 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3859
  • Joined: 29-March 00

Posted 25 February 2002 - 07:18 PM

What mobo was your dual P3 running on anyway? Oh, and as for the performance difference, that shouldn't be a big surprise for you anyway since most games are going to only use one proc, and any that *do* use both aren't going to double their performance. Now, going from my P3 933@1084 to my P4 1.6a@2.13 has given me about an 80fps jump in Q3 (which is the only game that I bothered to benchmark so far, but I'll try Aquanox in the next day or so), and that has been good enough for me. I now have a system that is worth getting a GF4 for, assuming that there is anything worth playing that would use that level of hardware...

laugh
0

#16 User is offline   DosFreak 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3885
  • Joined: 04-February 00

Posted 25 February 2002 - 08:16 PM

Oh I was quite aware that the game performance would be the way it was between the 2 systems but the desktop operations was VERY suprising. It's nice to see that even tho everyone else say's that you can't see the difference between between a couple of hundred megahertz at the desktop level are WRONG. Every single time I've upgraded my processer desktop operations have increase speed DRASTICALLY. It does make me wince every now and then tho to see my processor spike at 100% on this....thing. frown laugh
0

#17 User is offline   Alien 

  • addict
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 599
  • Joined: 28-January 02

Posted 25 February 2002 - 09:48 PM

Seeing as you guys are having a nice chinwag about CPUs, performance, & overclocking, I wondered if you'd seen this article:
3GHz barrier broken!!!
Kinda makes me feel a bit inadequate with my machine only running @ 500Mhz frown
0

#18 User is offline   clutch 

  • Carpal Tunnel
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3859
  • Joined: 29-March 00

Posted 25 February 2002 - 10:50 PM

Yeah, I saw that one. Pretty cool, huh?

laugh
0

#19 User is offline   Alien 

  • addict
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 599
  • Joined: 28-January 02

Posted 26 February 2002 - 12:34 AM

yeah - I wonder what the current record for an Athlon is?
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users