Check out this CNet article: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1551163.html
Intel is saying that you need 250MHz of more CPU power to get roughly the equivalent performance in W2K as in NT4 or W9X. *ouch* So if I just overclocked my Athlon to 850, if I also "upgrade" to W2K, does it make it effectively an Athlon 600? Holy cow what a waste!
Also check out this other CNet article for the extra licensing costs if you actually want to network with W2K: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1553352.html
No thanks. I'm trying to tune my PC for gaming. Where do you want to go today? Let's downgrade you by 250 MHz, eh?
Intel is saying that you need 250MHz of more CPU power to get roughly the equivalent performance in W2K as in NT4 or W9X. *ouch* So if I just overclocked my Athlon to 850, if I also "upgrade" to W2K, does it make it effectively an Athlon 600? Holy cow what a waste!
Also check out this other CNet article for the extra licensing costs if you actually want to network with W2K: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1553352.html
No thanks. I'm trying to tune my PC for gaming. Where do you want to go today? Let's downgrade you by 250 MHz, eh?
Comment