I am in the process of starting to build a dedicated gaming rig.
A while back I thought there was a thread here regarding a minimal XP installation. This system will only ever see GW. I plan to keep my other computer for internet usage, office suite, etc and tie them together via a KVM.
Does anyone have suggestions or links that I can research to fiind out exactly what will work for me?
I have yet to build the machine, however I have 4 XP licenses and only 2 are being used. Until the world embraces Vista I prefer to stay with XP.
Minimal XP installation
pkodyssey
L33TNeMiSiS
hmm .. can you clarify ?what will work for me?
as in:
How the KVM would work for me..
What kinda hardware i need..
What kinda XP installation and software i would need
ect
as in:
How the KVM would work for me..
What kinda hardware i need..
What kinda XP installation and software i would need
ect
pkodyssey
I guess the root question pertains to what is the minimum XP components and services that would be required to run GW on hardware as listed below:
Quad core processor
2GB Ram
Nvidia 8800 video card (possibly dual)
DVD R/RW
Raid configured HD's (Considering Raid 0)
NIC (Not wireless)
XFi audio card
I want to eliminate as much "microfat" as possible. Remember that this system hasn't been built yet. I am just in the planning phase. The goal is to cut as much fat from XP as possible. For example why would I need Fax support when I would never use it on this machine?
Quad core processor
2GB Ram
Nvidia 8800 video card (possibly dual)
DVD R/RW
Raid configured HD's (Considering Raid 0)
NIC (Not wireless)
XFi audio card
I want to eliminate as much "microfat" as possible. Remember that this system hasn't been built yet. I am just in the planning phase. The goal is to cut as much fat from XP as possible. For example why would I need Fax support when I would never use it on this machine?
Yanman.be
I know there are several stripped version of XP ( illegal ) out there, specifically for gamers...Search for TinyXP.
L33TNeMiSiS
That system is really overkill for guild wars 
Only recommendation i can offer on that is:
Make sure that you have a Raid controller (Microsoft XP doesn't like software raid setups).
And instead of Raid 0, if you have the money, consider going for raid 5. You will need a minimum of 3 hdd's(unlike 2 for raid 0) but atleast you will have some redundancy and a nice speed increase.
Only recommendation i can offer on that is:
Make sure that you have a Raid controller (Microsoft XP doesn't like software raid setups).
And instead of Raid 0, if you have the money, consider going for raid 5. You will need a minimum of 3 hdd's(unlike 2 for raid 0) but atleast you will have some redundancy and a nice speed increase.
pkodyssey
Thanks Yan..
L33T...
I am under the impression that Raid 0 has the fastest drive access speed. Am I right? Redundancy and backup isn't that important since I am planning on just playing on this machine. Even with onboard Raid on the MB you would suggest a PCI Raid controller? This is my first Raid endeavor.
If the machine I am thinking about is overkill for GW, what would you suggest? I have the coin to go for top speed and eye candy, however extreme speed at high cost just for the sake of having the cutting edge is a waste. Value and speed works fine for me.
L33T...
I am under the impression that Raid 0 has the fastest drive access speed. Am I right? Redundancy and backup isn't that important since I am planning on just playing on this machine. Even with onboard Raid on the MB you would suggest a PCI Raid controller? This is my first Raid endeavor.
If the machine I am thinking about is overkill for GW, what would you suggest? I have the coin to go for top speed and eye candy, however extreme speed at high cost just for the sake of having the cutting edge is a waste. Value and speed works fine for me.
L33TNeMiSiS
If you are part of the working class why not .. I myself is looking into buying another 2 3870's so i can add another 4 screens to my collection.
The MB controller is fine. I'm running one that came with my MB as well. If you dont have that though you can do a software RAID. Lets just say it gets tricky when trying to run Windows XP on top of a software RAID. In other words if you motherboard supports Raid dont worry about it.
In my practical experiance with Raid Arrays on Home PC's and Servers. Ive found that they are under much more strain than just running a normal Hdd without raid. Because of this they do tend to fail more often than the normal 1 hdd machine. With Raid 5 you get the speed increase (a bit less, but still allot more than just 1 hdd) and you get the redundancy of 1 hdd. Meaning that if a hdd decides to give up, you wouldn't lose ALL your data like in a Raid 0 setup. You will still retail all your data. You pc will still be able boot and you'll be able to play your games(the systems will be a bit slower due to it having to compensate for the lost drive) but this way you can replace your drive without losing valuble gw time :P. Not to mention the great performance increase.
If you decide to run raid 0 on 2(Minimum requirement for raid 0) 80 Gb hdd's you will lose 1 drives space for the performance gain. Meaning you'll have 80Gb of space. If you have 3(Minimum requirement for raid 5) 80Gb hdd's in Raid 5 you will lose 1 drives free space. Meaning you will have 160Gb space and redundancy.
The MB controller is fine. I'm running one that came with my MB as well. If you dont have that though you can do a software RAID. Lets just say it gets tricky when trying to run Windows XP on top of a software RAID. In other words if you motherboard supports Raid dont worry about it.
In my practical experiance with Raid Arrays on Home PC's and Servers. Ive found that they are under much more strain than just running a normal Hdd without raid. Because of this they do tend to fail more often than the normal 1 hdd machine. With Raid 5 you get the speed increase (a bit less, but still allot more than just 1 hdd) and you get the redundancy of 1 hdd. Meaning that if a hdd decides to give up, you wouldn't lose ALL your data like in a Raid 0 setup. You will still retail all your data. You pc will still be able boot and you'll be able to play your games(the systems will be a bit slower due to it having to compensate for the lost drive) but this way you can replace your drive without losing valuble gw time :P. Not to mention the great performance increase.
If you decide to run raid 0 on 2(Minimum requirement for raid 0) 80 Gb hdd's you will lose 1 drives space for the performance gain. Meaning you'll have 80Gb of space. If you have 3(Minimum requirement for raid 5) 80Gb hdd's in Raid 5 you will lose 1 drives free space. Meaning you will have 160Gb space and redundancy.
makosi
A little off-topic but I believe normal XP with GW wouldn't perform any more or less than a stripped version. With your system stats, you could probably run GW on Windows 3.11 with max settings and top FPS. 
pkodyssey
All good iinformation. The biggest reason behind thinking about a Raid system and utilizing a "TinyXP" type OS, was specifically to reduce as much computer induced lag. GW is bad enough without XP and hardware adding to it.
It appears from what I am hearing is that both of these are unnecessary. I just hate how Microsuxor's forces all this extra crap at us.
It appears from what I am hearing is that both of these are unnecessary. I just hate how Microsuxor's forces all this extra crap at us.
Knifex4
Don't forget to slipstream SATA drivers into your XP install otherwise it won't recognize the SATA HDDs. Unless you don't need it with the RAID controller? I'm not sure :[
gone
you'll be able to run just about anything you can throw at that rig, with all the 'stock' processes running in either Xp OR Vista.
ctrl+alt+delete = xp....kill unwanted processes
ctrl+shift+escape = vista...Kill Kill Kill
My Computer >>>Manage>>>Services and Applications(>>services/vista). Kill>Kill>Kill
google tweak Xp, you'll be surprised.
ctrl+alt+delete = xp....kill unwanted processes
ctrl+shift+escape = vista...Kill Kill Kill
My Computer >>>Manage>>>Services and Applications(>>services/vista). Kill>Kill>Kill
google tweak Xp, you'll be surprised.
TEB Elite
Quote:
| All good iinformation. The biggest reason behind thinking about a Raid system and utilizing a "TinyXP" type OS, was specifically to reduce as much computer induced lag. GW is bad enough without XP and hardware adding to it. |
As for your lag problem, a 2003 tech machine can handle GW at maximum with no lag, I and about a million other people have problems with lag in GW specifically because of our isps being worthless, or having a terrible connection to GW servers.
I wont comment on raid as theres a fanclub for each. (with/without)
pkodyssey
TEB,
Thanks, that is exactly the kind of info I was hoping for. I will give GameXP a look.
Just checked out GameXP, has anyone tried this recently. It appears there are multiple issues. The Forum doesnt work and the archived forum has numerous complaints about minor bugs. The dates are 2004 however.
Thanks, that is exactly the kind of info I was hoping for. I will give GameXP a look.
Just checked out GameXP, has anyone tried this recently. It appears there are multiple issues. The Forum doesnt work and the archived forum has numerous complaints about minor bugs. The dates are 2004 however.
gone
why pay for a proggie when you can do everything that said proggie can do yourself?
dont feel no pain
I've considered game xp until l i found that it acauly reduces performance overall XD
EmptySkull
This takes al little more end user work but I have always used this person's guide. Broken down and tells you what every service does. And gives you a from the start install guide to optimize.
Black Viper website
Black Viper website
TEB Elite
Quote:
| Just checked out GameXP, has anyone tried this recently. It appears there are multiple issues. The Forum doesnt work and the archived forum has numerous complaints about minor bugs. The dates are 2004 however. |
http://www.theorica.net/GameXPHelp.htm
All it does it make some of the most common changes that you will probably find in nearly every system optimization guide.
The pay version (dunno why) doesnt provide any benefit over the free one.
Quote:
|
What's New Version 1.6.1.20 - Jan 20, 2006 * Added some Memory optimization to improve performance. * Some minor bug fixes. |
Quote:
| I've considered game xp until l i found that it acauly reduces performance overall XD |
pkodyssey
Black viper seems to be the "best" resource I have found so far. I guess it is time to learn, learn, learn. Actually, this seems easy, I just didn't want to reinvent the wheel if there was already a compiled answer.
Thanks for all the responses.
Thanks for all the responses.
gone
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TEB Elite
proof?
|
BlueNovember
pkodyssey, you have an admirable hatred of microsoft bloat. Respect++.
I would recommend you looked into nLite, which allows you to tailor an XP CD/DVD to your exact needs. I've used many times with much success. I've not come across BlackViper guies before, but it does look like you could use both together, at the install level. (The obvious advantage that you only need to do the setup once, then can build as many pcs as you like with the same disc, or whipe and reinstall the one with very little hastle).
RAID is another kettle of fish altogether. I would not recommend it in your situation. If you're that fussed about performance get a small raptor drive to run your games off; will be better performance than raid 0. And yeah, Raid 0 would be the most applicable in your case; no much need for parity. Raid 1 is awesome for reads, but need an os that supports the read requests properly. No idea if xp does.
GL with your setup.
I would recommend you looked into nLite, which allows you to tailor an XP CD/DVD to your exact needs. I've used many times with much success. I've not come across BlackViper guies before, but it does look like you could use both together, at the install level. (The obvious advantage that you only need to do the setup once, then can build as many pcs as you like with the same disc, or whipe and reinstall the one with very little hastle).
RAID is another kettle of fish altogether. I would not recommend it in your situation. If you're that fussed about performance get a small raptor drive to run your games off; will be better performance than raid 0. And yeah, Raid 0 would be the most applicable in your case; no much need for parity. Raid 1 is awesome for reads, but need an os that supports the read requests properly. No idea if xp does.
GL with your setup.
TEB Elite
Quote:
| since it's gonna run at startup of windows to manage tasks, it's going to be running in the background, unless you kill the process. in the end, you'll be manually ctrl/alt/delete>>>end process. |
Please try the program before you try to call it bad.
Even if that were true, what are you trying to say? That manually asigning a priority to a process is bad? Or that it may take up to many resources doing what it needs to do?
gone
/endpissingcontest
either way, it's going to be running in the background, taking up ram and HD space lol.
see the update to it?
*Added some Memory optimization to improve performance
that is what you don't want. even if it is improved. using a program to optimize isn't really optimizing, when you can do it all yourself.
either way, it's going to be running in the background, taking up ram and HD space lol.
see the update to it?
*Added some Memory optimization to improve performance
that is what you don't want. even if it is improved. using a program to optimize isn't really optimizing, when you can do it all yourself.
TEB Elite
Quote:
| either way, it's going to be running in the background, taking up ram and HD space lol. |
Quote:
| that is what you don't want. even if it is improved. using a program to optimize isn't really optimizing, when you can do it all yourself. |
gone
no thanks i don't need that clutter. it won't do anything more than a few .reg files and double clicking will do lol.
that and I'm to lazy to swap out my drive to Xp.
that and I'm to lazy to swap out my drive to Xp.
dont feel no pain
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TEB Elite
proof?
|
Following registry editing guides like these helps and also lets you understand what you are doing
http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/
http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/supertweaks.htm (thanks i checked it out... was good!)
L33TNeMiSiS
I can definatly say that raid aids ALLOT in xp performance.. There was a poster a bit earlier that seemed a bit high on something .. trying to explain some of the raid concepts.
have a look here http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...id=830&page=10
Apart from that he said rather use a single 10k hdd. I would like to say why not use 3x 10k hdd's in a Raid 5?
Unfortunatly I cant seem to find a graph showing the performance difference between Raid 0, raid 1, Raid 5 and no Raid.
But this is also a nice graphical demostration:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/sto...0_5.html#sect0
EDIT: Maybe have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID
Another EDIT: Had alook around .. check out: http://www.shub-internet.org/brad/Fr...num-dpt-rr.png
Rather do a Raid 10 or a raid 0 depending on wheather or not you dont wanna lose all your data when you loose a disk
have a look here http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...id=830&page=10
Apart from that he said rather use a single 10k hdd. I would like to say why not use 3x 10k hdd's in a Raid 5?
Unfortunatly I cant seem to find a graph showing the performance difference between Raid 0, raid 1, Raid 5 and no Raid.
But this is also a nice graphical demostration:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/sto...0_5.html#sect0
EDIT: Maybe have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID
Another EDIT: Had alook around .. check out: http://www.shub-internet.org/brad/Fr...num-dpt-rr.png
Rather do a Raid 10 or a raid 0 depending on wheather or not you dont wanna lose all your data when you loose a disk
snikerz
as BlueNovember said, nLite is what you want, you can strip XP installation down to its bare minimum and re-create the orginal CD.
you can also do the same with vista, its called vLite
you can also do the same with vista, its called vLite
BlueNovember
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by L33TNeMiSiS
I can definatly say that raid aids ALLOT in xp performance.. There was a poster a bit earlier that seemed a bit high on something .. trying to explain some of the raid concepts.
have a look here http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...id=830&page=10 Apart from that he said rather use a single 10k hdd. I would like to say why not use 3x 10k hdd's in a Raid 5? ... |
I agree that 3 10k raptors in r5 would be faster, but also 3 times as expensive. One 10k raptor may not be as fast as two 7,200 drives in a raid, but it would be simpler to setup and I'd imagine approximately equivalent in cost.
TEB Elite
Quote:
| I looked up some reviews a few months ago, it seems that the benchmark scores were lower after using it in any kind of way. |
BFG
I have used the Blackviper site and would recommend it if just for a guide to provide information about what you're about to "break" on your machine. It has a basic feel about it and the explanations are thorough enough that you can make your change decision with some confidence.
I've never been too keen on using tweak programs to apply changes to my machine. My experience has been that they make no noticeable difference or diminish performance or disable something and causes a headache later. I've never used GameXP, so I cannot offer an opinion on it nor categorize it as the same as the programs that I've used in the past.
I've never been too keen on using tweak programs to apply changes to my machine. My experience has been that they make no noticeable difference or diminish performance or disable something and causes a headache later. I've never used GameXP, so I cannot offer an opinion on it nor categorize it as the same as the programs that I've used in the past.