Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

A little PSA for Windows 2000 and multi-core, multi-thread and multi C

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1
AnX

AnX

    Fighting for the right to OS since 2010

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined 20-June 12
  • OS:Windows 10 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

If you wish to properly use Windows 2000 on any multiple core, thread, or CPU system, you must not install Update Rollup 1.

This update has a bug which basically breaks proper Win2k multi-cpu support. it causes them to reach abnormally high temps.

 

Instead, use Gurgelmeyer's USP5 and then Update Rollup 2, and then UUR or BWC ext. kernel. That's how I do it, and Win2k runs great with any multi-core setup, recognizing upto 8 cores flawlessly.

 

qBx71WF.png


  • Tommy and 11ryanc like this

AMD FX-8320 8-core CPU (OC to 4.4GHz) with Hyper 212 Evo, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, 8GB 1600 RAM, 60GB SSD (OS) and 500GB HDD (Storage), Sapphire R7 260X 2GB Graphics Card, 620W Seasonic S12II, CM HAF 912 case.



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
JesseJH

JesseJH

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 67 posts
  • Joined 05-July 15
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

That's interesting... I thought W2K could only see 2 cores/cpu's/threads



#3
11ryanc

11ryanc

    Usability is an essential

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 55 posts
  • Joined 24-September 13
  • OS:Vista Ultimate x64
  • Country: Country Flag

That's interesting... I thought W2K could only see 2 cores/cpu's/threads

Welcome to MSFN :sneaky:


  • Tripredacus likes this

31824.png

 


#4
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

I love the smell of 8 cores in the morning.

 

Smells like...victory.


  • 11ryanc likes this

#5
AnX

AnX

    Fighting for the right to OS since 2010

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined 20-June 12
  • OS:Windows 10 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Yeah. i don't know what MS's intention was, but it certainly wasn't good. Especially considering they released this very rollup the same year the first multi core CPUs came out... :whistle:


Edited by AnX, 24 July 2015 - 07:52 PM.

AMD FX-8320 8-core CPU (OC to 4.4GHz) with Hyper 212 Evo, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, 8GB 1600 RAM, 60GB SSD (OS) and 500GB HDD (Storage), Sapphire R7 260X 2GB Graphics Card, 620W Seasonic S12II, CM HAF 912 case.


#6
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

Windows 2000 “Update Rollup” was always such an oddity.  Just what did they have in mind?  Someone obviously thought the idea would go somewhere or other (Update Rollup 2?) but the concept apparently never took off.  We know the rest, and what a turnaround:  no more service packs for W2K Pro, not even a final Service Pack.  At least there were some cumulative updates released later.

 

They short-changed XP on service packs as well, as their longer-term strategy took shape:  don’t compete with alternative operating systems, get rid of them.  So far they’ve more or less cut off both support and hardware (we here being a little less “cut off” than most computer users, buyers and builders, because of what we know).

 

Going forward (if you can call it that) the creep clearly intends to cut off installation of anything other than the Rolling Nightmare it calls Windows 10, which frankly looks to me like one long, evolving Service Pack to nowhere.  I’d rather fight than switch.


Edited by bluebolt, 24 July 2015 - 10:27 PM.

  • 11ryanc likes this

#7
MrMaguire

MrMaguire

    Designed for Microsoft® Windows® XP

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Joined 30-April 14
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

This is interesting. I've had a lot of problems with Windows 2000 on dual core and multi-threaded systems. For a while I just assumed that it was Unofficial Update Rollup causing the problems.



#8
sdfox7

sdfox7

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 55 posts
  • Joined 08-July 14
  • OS:95
  • Country: Country Flag

Windows 2000 “Update Rollup” was always such an oddity.  Just what did they have in mind?  Someone obviously thought the idea would go somewhere or other (Update Rollup 2?) but the concept apparently never took off.  We know the rest, and what a turnaround:  no more service packs for W2K Pro, not even a final Service Pack.  At least there were some cumulative updates released later.

 

They short-changed XP on service packs as well, as their longer-term strategy took shape:  don’t compete with alternative operating systems, get rid of them.  So far they’ve more or less cut off both support and hardware (we here being a little less “cut off” than most computer users, buyers and builders, because of what we know).

 

Going forward (if you can call it that) the creep clearly intends to cut off installation of anything other than the Rolling Nightmare it calls Windows 10, which frankly looks to me like one long, evolving Service Pack to nowhere.  I’d rather fight than switch.

 

Microsoft has gotten progressively lazier with each NT release. Every NT operating system since 4.0 has had subsequently fewer service packs.

 

NT 4.0 had 6, 2000 had 4, XP had 3, Vista had 2, and Windows 7 had one. Anyone who needs to install Windows 7 from Service Pack 1 to today (or in 2019) is going to have a boatload of updates to install.


  • Tommy likes this

#9
tomasz86

tomasz86

    http://windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,527 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

If you wish to properly use Windows 2000 on any multiple core, thread, or CPU system, you must not install Update Rollup 1.

This update has a bug which basically breaks proper Win2k multi-cpu support. it causes them to reach abnormally high temps.


I think this may be a solution to the problem:

http://www.msfn.org/...2000/?p=1103612
  • 11ryanc likes this
Updates Lists for Windows 2000 @ http://windows2000.tk
Unofficial SP 5.2 for Microsoft Windows 2000 @ MSFN
Please post all your comments, questions and suggestions regarding my work on Windows 2000 in the Hotstream forum @ MSFN.

#10
Phenomic

Phenomic

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 284 posts
  • Joined 31-July 09
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

My 8-core works fine with Unofficial Updates Rollup and Logical CPU Limit Break, but it doesn't throttle p-state. I posted in some thread here recently.

 

 

What's PSA?



#11
dencorso

dencorso

    Iuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 6,009 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

My guess is it means "Public Service Announcement," but I may be wrong. :)



#12
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,773 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

What's PSA?

It is an acronym. ;) :whistle:

 

 

My guess is it means "Public Service Announcement," but I may be wrong. :)

Or choose anyone from:

http://www.acronymfinder.com/PSA.html

either:

Perfect Slot Allocation

or:

Planning Scheme Amendment

 

might do nicely, and now, for no apparent reason :w00t: :ph34r::

http://www.acronympolice.org/

That would be a minor Questionable Violation, second part of point 1.1:

http://www.acronympo...org/?page_id=90

 

 

jaclaz



#13
dencorso

dencorso

    Iuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 6,009 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

... either:
Perfect Slot Allocation
or:
Planning Scheme Amendment
 
might do nicely...


Maybe.

But I really think "Psychedelic Syntax Application" is much better, in context, albeit somewhat retro.

#14
Phenomic

Phenomic

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 284 posts
  • Joined 31-July 09
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

 

... either:
Perfect Slot Allocation
or:
Planning Scheme Amendment
 
might do nicely...


Maybe.

But I really think "Psychedelic Syntax Application" is much better, in context, albeit somewhat retro.

 

 

That's a Pretty Stupid Acronym :D






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users