P4C800 vs P4PE

"Nicolas SPORN" wrote in message
...
Hi all,
I'm using oldies, and am aware that P4 is not design for NT4 ans W2k...
but
still intersting to compare 2 MB...

So, I used a P4Pe, P4 2.6 (normal one), 256 standard ram, 40 Go 7200 rpm
hard drive, and installed Nt4. I made a test and was well surprised. The
app
I ran for test took 20/22 seconds for doing my test.
I really feel the system was running quickly, even at boot time... I had
my
blue screen, and then a couple of seconds after so, I had my winnt logon
screen. Really pleased... same for W2k.

As I wanted to get quicker, if possible, I choose a P4c800 deluxe... as
FSB
800 is supposed to be better than ever
So, P4C800 deluxe (running bios #1008), P4 2.6 fsb 800, 2*512 ram at 400
mhz
(certified, coming with the motherboard) (dual channel printed at boot
time).
I have neither a 20 Go 7200 rpd hard drive nor a raid 1 array running with
adaptec 2120s and 2 chetah 10.000 rpm dirves...
In this config, I disabled usb, firewire, promise... as I don't need
them...

A feeling, as I do no longer own the P4Pe, and did not printed boot time,
is
that it takes really more time to bootup !
Then, testing the same components as I did before, It now takes about
28/30
seconds

What does this mean ? P4C800 chipset is better for xp and worse for
previous
os (NT4 and W2k) ?
I'm missing something somewhere in the bios ? I have disabled
HyperThreading
as it just concern XP and I also disabled all I won't use...

A surpirse was that Intel Accelerator is not included in the P4C800... (I
took 2.23 at intel, and installed on thenide drive, I so get a BSOD...
running the scsi drives, makes no change...)

Any clues are welcome...

Kind regards

Nicolas


Nicolas,
The OS shouldn't be a problem at all as long as you have all the drivers for
it. XP is based on the NT kernel, so there is probably some other issue that
is causing the problems. I would check and make sure you are using the
correct and latest .inf drivers etc. I haven't built a system around the P4C
or P4P series yet, so there are probably folks here with a bit more info
than I.

Ed

"Ed Medlin" wrote in message ...
"Nicolas SPORN" wrote in message
...
Hi all,
I'm using oldies, and am aware that P4 is not design for NT4 ans W2k...
but
still intersting to compare 2 MB...

So, I used a P4Pe, P4 2.6 (normal one), 256 standard ram, 40 Go 7200 rpm
hard drive, and installed Nt4. I made a test and was well surprised. The
app
I ran for test took 20/22 seconds for doing my test.
I really feel the system was running quickly, even at boot time... I had
my
blue screen, and then a couple of seconds after so, I had my winnt logon
screen. Really pleased... same for W2k.

As I wanted to get quicker, if possible, I choose a P4c800 deluxe... as
FSB
800 is supposed to be better than ever
So, P4C800 deluxe (running bios #1008), P4 2.6 fsb 800, 2*512 ram at 400
mhz
(certified, coming with the motherboard) (dual channel printed at boot
time).
I have neither a 20 Go 7200 rpd hard drive nor a raid 1 array running with
adaptec 2120s and 2 chetah 10.000 rpm dirves...
In this config, I disabled usb, firewire, promise... as I don't need
them...

A feeling, as I do no longer own the P4Pe, and did not printed boot time,
is
that it takes really more time to bootup !
Then, testing the same components as I did before, It now takes about
28/30
seconds

What does this mean ? P4C800 chipset is better for xp and worse for
previous
os (NT4 and W2k) ?
I'm missing something somewhere in the bios ? I have disabled
HyperThreading
as it just concern XP and I also disabled all I won't use...

A surpirse was that Intel Accelerator is not included in the P4C800... (I
took 2.23 at intel, and installed on thenide drive, I so get a BSOD...
running the scsi drives, makes no change...)

Any clues are welcome...

Kind regards

Nicolas


Nicolas,
The OS shouldn't be a problem at all as long as you have all the drivers for
it. XP is based on the NT kernel, so there is probably some other issue that
is causing the problems. I would check and make sure you are using the
correct and latest .inf drivers etc. I haven't built a system around the P4C
or P4P series yet, so there are probably folks here with a bit more info
than I.

Ed

Hi,
I do understand, but why so slow system then ?
It's really slower on p4c then p4pe !

About inf, Intel has not relased them for NT4 !
In facts they were in 2.23 about a week or 2, and then suddenly were
no longer available !
I have them, but just get a nice bsod if uszed on ide (
So no .inf installed !
But I use scsi... so, should not be a problem ?
What are the inf for ?
just ide ?

My problem is really understanding why p4c800 goes solower on nt4 (and
w2k) than a p4pe !
(considering that I use ddr400 and ultra 320 scsi instead of basic ram
and disks ! so it might neither be equal, nor better !


BTW, Are you aware of tech support from the web, as the local
distributor does not find helps for me ?

Kind regards

The "INF drivers" are Intel chipset drivers. You defininitely need to
install them especially on older OS's that don't recognize the chipset
directly. I don't think NT4 had INF drivers, since NT4 doesn't have
support for a lot of hardware. You definitely should install it for
Windows 2000 though.

The Intel Application Accelerator (IAA) is something else. You don't
need it with SCSI drives.


On 28 Jul 2003 06:46:02 -0700, (Nicolas) wrote:

[snip]

Hi,
I do understand, but why so slow system then ?
It's really slower on p4c then p4pe !

About inf, Intel has not relased them for NT4 !
In facts they were in 2.23 about a week or 2, and then suddenly were
no longer available !
I have them, but just get a nice bsod if uszed on ide (
So no .inf installed !
But I use scsi... so, should not be a problem ?
What are the inf for ?
just ide ?

My problem is really understanding why p4c800 goes solower on nt4 (and
w2k) than a p4pe !
(considering that I use ddr400 and ultra 320 scsi instead of basic ram
and disks ! so it might neither be equal, nor better !


BTW, Are you aware of tech support from the web, as the local
distributor does not find helps for me ?

Kind regards