Meatball wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:54:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:51:

original_meusli wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:48:

Thats good to hear, wondered how it would cope with two CPUs.

Perfectly windows 2000 is NT based. You can do up to 4 cpus with 2000 pro and alot more with the server variants.

2 CPUs for Professional, 4 with Server, 8 with Advanced Server, and 32 with Datacenter.

Yes that is correct thank you!!! It's been awhile since I had to use my 2k knowledge. Now I think I need to build a way over kill 2k pro system with my spare nforce 680i motherboard

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:54:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:51:

original_meusli wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:48:

Thats good to hear, wondered how it would cope with two CPUs.

Perfectly windows 2000 is NT based. You can do up to 4 cpus with 2000 pro and alot more with the server variants.

2 CPUs for Professional, 4 with Server, 8 with Advanced Server, and 32 with Datacenter.

Thanks for the info, I have seen theserver disk version at work and wondered what the differences were between pro. I didn't realise they sold Windows by the CPU number as early as back then, but then they did steal most of the code from OpenVMS. :p

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 15:57:

Windows 2000 is just fine for gaming. I played all my games with zero issues on a dual P3 machine for 4 years or so.

Same here! I remember running Windows 2000 instead of Win98 for a good while until XP came out.

effy wrote on 2022-08-02, 17:27:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 15:57:

Windows 2000 is just fine for gaming. I played all my games with zero issues on a dual P3 machine for 4 years or so.

Same here! I remember running Windows 2000 instead of Win98 for a good while until XP came out.

We had 98 for a little bit but as soon as 2k launched my dad installed it on all of the household systems. It was a vast improvement in speed and stability over 9x. I still love 2k I'm thinking of using my 680i with a c2d E8600 as a base for a really fun 2k system but that will probably be a late fall/winter project.

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 14:44:

liqmat wrote on 2022-08-02, 14:04:

Xicor wrote on 2022-08-01, 17:36:

Pulled the trigger on a Cooler Master Cosmos 1000. Its a massive case from 2007. It has potential to become a sleeper, reverse s […]
Show full quote

Pulled the trigger on a Cooler Master Cosmos 1000. Its a massive case from 2007. It has potential to become a sleeper, reverse sleeper /"troll machine", or even a time period correct flagship. Love it !!!!

IMG_20220801_182330.jpg

Near a uninteresting Acer Veriton for scale ...

IMG_20220801_182411.jpg

Amazing case. I imagine two people on either side picking this up by the handlebars and taking it to a LAN party as the game server. Are those handles load-bearing by any chance or just decorative?

The handles on that case are load bearing. Back in tbe day me and a friend went to a local lan party and two guys had that case are they both carried them with the handles. They are part of the structure of the case body.

Very nice. I love it when fashion & function meet.

effy wrote on 2022-08-02, 17:27:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 15:57:

Windows 2000 is just fine for gaming. I played all my games with zero issues on a dual P3 machine for 4 years or so.

Same here! I remember running Windows 2000 instead of Win98 for a good while until XP came out.

My experience was the same. I used Windows 2000 well into XP's lifetime until at least SP1. It was solid very stable and I didn't have any problems.

I did actually benchmark that it was a little bit slower in come games compared to Windows 98, but the difference was negligible. There was less DOS compatibility within Windows, but that sort of thing was already a hard sell within Windows 98. At this point, many of us are educated on what hardware to use with which combinations of drivers and configurations to make it work, but this knowledge was much rarer at the time for the average user like myself.

Even now, it's very complicated to get DOS sound working properly in Windows 98, as many of the settings are hidden away within the resources tab of Device Managers, maybe you need to reserve an IRQ in the BIOS, etc. I don't know how anyone who wasn't already experienced with both DOS and Windows could be expected to sort it all out back in 1999.

So with that kind of complexity, there really wasn't much difference between 98 and 2000 for DOS compatibility, since getting it to work out of the box was such a challenge anyways, at least for PCI sound cards. I can see an ISA sound card configuring itself properly, but most budget sound cards at this time were already transitioned to PCI anyways.

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:54:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:51:

original_meusli wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:48:

Thats good to hear, wondered how it would cope with two CPUs.

Perfectly windows 2000 is NT based. You can do up to 4 cpus with 2000 pro and alot more with the server variants.

2 CPUs for Professional, 4 with Server, 8 with Advanced Server, and 32 with Datacenter.

That's the official licensing policy. It's not hard to lift this limit on Professional with some registry tweaking 😉

GL1zdA wrote on 2022-08-03, 05:28:

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:54:

chrismeyer6 wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:51:

Perfectly windows 2000 is NT based. You can do up to 4 cpus with 2000 pro and alot more with the server variants.

2 CPUs for Professional, 4 with Server, 8 with Advanced Server, and 32 with Datacenter.

That's the official licensing policy. It's not hard to lift this limit on Professional with some registry tweaking 😉

Really? HOW? I want to install Windows 2000 on a Threadripper PC now 🤣.

I bought some pretty goodies 😀

Celeron : 633, 700, 800, 1000, 1000, Tualatin 1000A, Tualatin 1200
P3 : 667, 866, 1000, 1000
256MB Sdram PC133

AMD 486 DX4-100
AMD K6-2 300

Total 10$ 🥰

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 06:35:

GL1zdA wrote on 2022-08-03, 05:28:

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-02, 16:54:

2 CPUs for Professional, 4 with Server, 8 with Advanced Server, and 32 with Datacenter.

That's the official licensing policy. It's not hard to lift this limit on Professional with some registry tweaking 😉

Really? HOW? I want to install Windows 2000 on a Threadripper PC now 🤣.

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Windows 10/Server 2016.

You can install Windows 2000 Professional officially on a single or dual socket Threadripper PC without messing with the registry as far as licensing is concerned.

A PC with at least quad EPYC processor sockets
is what you’ll need to break the licensing agreement.

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-03, 12:54:

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Wind […]
Show full quote

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 06:35:

GL1zdA wrote on 2022-08-03, 05:28:

That's the official licensing policy. It's not hard to lift this limit on Professional with some registry tweaking 😉

Really? HOW? I want to install Windows 2000 on a Threadripper PC now 🤣.

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Windows 10/Server 2016.

You can install Windows 2000 Professional officially on a single or dual socket Threadripper PC without messing with the registry as far as licensing is concerned.

A PC with at least quad EPYC processor sockets
is what you’ll need to break the licensing agreement.

That's interesting. So Windows 2000 can tell the difference between sockets and cores on a modern motherboard? I thought an OS from 1999 would be unable to discern the difference!

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 14:00:

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-03, 12:54:

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Wind […]
Show full quote

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 06:35:

Really? HOW? I want to install Windows 2000 on a Threadripper PC now 🤣.

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Windows 10/Server 2016.

You can install Windows 2000 Professional officially on a single or dual socket Threadripper PC without messing with the registry as far as licensing is concerned.

A PC with at least quad EPYC processor sockets
is what you’ll need to break the licensing agreement.

That's interesting. So Windows 2000 can tell the difference between sockets and cores on a modern motherboard? I thought an OS from 1999 would be unable to discern the difference!

All of the cores or hyperthreading instances are treated like a CPU, but of course Windows 2000 (or XP pre-Service Pack 2 for cores) are not optimized for them. We're getting into the weeds, though. Whether Windows 2000 Professional can recognize 2 or 2 million cores isn't the issue at hand - it's whether licensing violations occur. And if you had a dual socket 2 million core machine, you'd be just fine with a Windows 2000 Professional license, heh, with no need to a hack if your intention was to violate the license. You'd have to move to a bigger setup with 4 sockets. Whether it will install with 2 million cores, I don't know, but Windows 2000 Professional installs on an X99 with a 10-core CPU for sure.

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-03, 15:31:

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 14:00:

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-03, 12:54:

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Wind […]
Show full quote

The licensing policy for NT 3.X all the way until Windows 8.1/2012 R2 is per CPU socket. Core licensing didn’t start until Windows 10/Server 2016.

You can install Windows 2000 Professional officially on a single or dual socket Threadripper PC without messing with the registry as far as licensing is concerned.

A PC with at least quad EPYC processor sockets
is what you’ll need to break the licensing agreement.

That's interesting. So Windows 2000 can tell the difference between sockets and cores on a modern motherboard? I thought an OS from 1999 would be unable to discern the difference!

All of the cores or hyperthreading instances are treated like a CPU, but of course Windows 2000 (or XP pre-Service Pack 2 for cores) are not optimized for them. We're getting into the weeds, though. Whether Windows 2000 Professional can recognize 2 or 2 million cores isn't the issue at hand - it's whether licensing violations occur. And if you had a dual socket 2 million core machine, you'd be just fine with a Windows 2000 Professional license, heh, with no need to a hack if your intention was to violate the license. You'd have to move to a bigger setup with 4 sockets. Whether it will install with 2 million cores, I don't know, but Windows 2000 Professional installs on an X99 with a 10-core CPU for sure.

Windows 2000 might install and run on a 10 core system, but can it recognise and use all those cores, or is it effectively using it as a high end single core system?

debs3759 wrote on 2022-08-03, 15:58:

Meatball wrote on 2022-08-03, 15:31:

appiah4 wrote on 2022-08-03, 14:00:

That's interesting. So Windows 2000 can tell the difference between sockets and cores on a modern motherboard? I thought an OS from 1999 would be unable to discern the difference!

All of the cores or hyperthreading instances are treated like a CPU, but of course Windows 2000 (or XP pre-Service Pack 2 for cores) are not optimized for them. We're getting into the weeds, though. Whether Windows 2000 Professional can recognize 2 or 2 million cores isn't the issue at hand - it's whether licensing violations occur. And if you had a dual socket 2 million core machine, you'd be just fine with a Windows 2000 Professional license, heh, with no need to a hack if your intention was to violate the license. You'd have to move to a bigger setup with 4 sockets. Whether it will install with 2 million cores, I don't know, but Windows 2000 Professional installs on an X99 with a 10-core CPU for sure.

Windows 2000 might install and run on a 10 core system, but can it recognise and use all those cores, or is it effectively using it as a high end single core system?

Speaking from out-of-the-box (no hacks or unofficial updates), hyperthreading is more of a problem for Windows 2000 than multi-core as far as performance and thread prioritization. 10 threads, in this case, can execute; but of course, it would not be as effective as a "core designed" operating system.

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-08-02, 19:09:

Even now, it's very complicated to get DOS sound working properly in Windows 98, as many of the settings are hidden away within the resources tab of Device Managers, maybe you need to reserve an IRQ in the BIOS, etc. I don't know how anyone who wasn't already experienced with both DOS and Windows could be expected to sort it all out back in 1999.

Thinking back on that time. The reality for me was that I did not care about DOS games anymore. I wanted to play current games and for that, none of the audio issues from DOS era games were of any concern. By this point it was easy as installing the Windows drivers for your sound card and you were good to go.

I was probably already running an SB Live! by that point.

Only today do I give a crap about getting DOTT working from DOS on a Windows98 PC.

NyLan wrote on 2022-08-03, 11:40:

I bought some pretty goodies :) […]
Show full quote

I bought some pretty goodies 😀

IMG_20220803_132750.jpg

Celeron : 633, 700, 800, 1000, 1000, Tualatin 1000A, Tualatin 1200
P3 : 667, 866, 1000, 1000
256MB Sdram PC133

AMD 486 DX4-100
AMD K6-2 300

Total 10$ 🥰

Good score, though you know they were effectively paying you $200 to take the cell 633 right? It woulda been $210 without 🤣

BitWrangler wrote on 2022-08-03, 20:30:

NyLan wrote on 2022-08-03, 11:40:

I bought some pretty goodies :) […]
Show full quote

I bought some pretty goodies 😀

IMG_20220803_132750.jpg

Celeron : 633, 700, 800, 1000, 1000, Tualatin 1000A, Tualatin 1200
P3 : 667, 866, 1000, 1000
256MB Sdram PC133

AMD 486 DX4-100
AMD K6-2 300

Total 10$ 🥰

Good score, though you know they were effectively paying you $200 to take the cell 633 right? It woulda been $210 without 🤣

Haha almost 😆
Starting to have a nice collection. Just trying to avoid PII, they take to much space to stock 😢

Here are the sound cards I've picked up over the past 1 1/2 months:

Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS (x5)
Creative Sound Blaster Audigy
Creative Sound Blaster Audio PCI128
Creative Sound Blaster AWE64 Gold
ESS Maestro-1 ES1948-F
ESS AudioDrive ES1869F
AZTech SC 338-A3D Aureal Vortex AU8820B2
Turtle Beach Montego Aureal Vortex 2 AU8830

NyLan wrote on 2022-08-03, 22:58:

Haha almost :laughing: Starting to have a nice collection. Just trying to avoid PII, they take to much space to stock :cry: Scre […]
Show full quote

BitWrangler wrote on 2022-08-03, 20:30:

NyLan wrote on 2022-08-03, 11:40:

I bought some pretty goodies :) […]
Show full quote

I bought some pretty goodies 😀

IMG_20220803_132750.jpg

Celeron : 633, 700, 800, 1000, 1000, Tualatin 1000A, Tualatin 1200
P3 : 667, 866, 1000, 1000
256MB Sdram PC133

AMD 486 DX4-100
AMD K6-2 300

Total 10$ 🥰

Good score, though you know they were effectively paying you $200 to take the cell 633 right? It woulda been $210 without 🤣

Haha almost 😆
Starting to have a nice collection. Just trying to avoid PII, they take to much space to stock 😢
Screenshot 2022-08-04 005729.png

What's the "hack" on the last Tualatin in your list meaning? Yeah Slot-1s are space hungry, but beautiful pieces of history ...

Been quiet on the retro junk lately but have bought a few things on the cheap, mostly to fill out gaps in my collection but also the lack of pure DOS/Win 3.1 cards I have.

Got these two cards fairly cheap and have the 512k ram chips for them in my spares bin, from what I have read these Ark Logic cards were very fast DOS cards.

Got a S3 Vision 864 to go with my Vision 968, not 100% sure what changes S3 made between them but they should both be great DOS/Windows cards, Also grabbed this Viper 770 for a tenner as it looked like it needed saving from the e-waste bin.

Then this big lot of cards popped up from a seller I have bought from in the past, appear to be a few multiples in there, the Trident and SiS cards will uhh likely go back to e-waste but the others should prove to be a few hours of fun testing and finding out what the heck they are, the PNY PCI card and the red one above it look interesting.

The Quadro2 MXR is not a bad little card either being a faster MX400.

I didnt pay much for this lot so the multiples dont bother me, heck might keep one of each for the spares bin.