-WinXP vs Win2k3 Server - Benchmarks - DONE

[batmang]

-DONE-

--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Test Setup
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-Abit IS7-E ( Bios 14 )
-P4-2.6c Retail @ 3.11Ghz (1.65vcore 2.8vdimm)
-GeiL 3500 Ultra Platinum 2x256
-GeForce 4 MX 440 @ Stock Speeds
-Western Digital Hard Drive(s) 5400 RPM
-Game Acceleration Turbo/Normal/Auto/Disable/Disable
-DirectX 9.0b
-Nvidia Detonator FX 44.03
-Windows XP Pro
-Windows 2003 Server Standard


*********************RESULTS********************
===========================================
Quake III Arena - Default Settings - Misc Resolutions / 32 Bit
===========================================
Resolution

1024x768 32 Bit
-WinXP Pro - 175 FPS
-Win2K3 Server - 175.1 FPS

1280x1024 32 Bit
-WinXP Pro - 113.1 FPS
-Win2K3 Server - 113.1 FPS

1600x1200 32 Bit
-WinXP Pro - 79.3 FPS
-Win2K3 Server - 79.3 FPS

wasnt much of a difference at all in quake 3.

===========================================
Unreal Tournament 2003 - Default Settings - 800x600 / 32 Bit
===========================================
Antalus
-Bot Match
WinXP Pro - 69.25 FPS
Win2K3 Server - 73.78 FPS

-Fly By
WinXP Pro - 112.43 FPS
Win2K3 Server - 109.33 FPS

Asbestos
-Bot Match
WinXP Pro - 81.01 FPS
Win2K3 Server - 82.16 FPS

-Fly By
WinXP Pro - 229.66 FPS
Win2K3 Server - 216.42 FPS

Anubis
-Bot Match
WinXP Pro - 90.57 FPS
Win2K3 Server - 95.47 FPS

-not really much of a significant difference in ut2k3 either.

===========================================
SiSoftware Sandra Standard MAX3! 9.73 Benchmarks
===========================================
Windows XP Pro

Memory Bandwidth
-Inf Buff 5063MB/s
-Float Buff 5128MB/s

CPU Arithmetic
-Dhrystone - 9122 MIPS
-Whetstone - 2687/6002 MFLOPS

File System
-Drive Index - 18233kB/s


Windows 2003 Server

Memory Bandwidth
-Inf Buff 5121MB/s
-Float Buff 5080MB/s

CPU Arithmetic
-Dhrystone - 9394 MIPS
-Whetstone - 2755/5971 MFLOPS

File System
-Drive Index - 21362kB/s

now in sandra, there was a increase in performance in every benchmark i ran.
both of these os's were tested on fresh installs and done with the newest drivers.
overall, winxp pro and win2k3 server are basically the same for gaming. theres no significant
frame rate increase or decrease. as for sandra benchmarking, it definitely scored higher
for me in win2k3 server over winxp pro. showing that win2k3 server could be a good general os.
the main reason i wanted to conduct this little benchmark was to show that win2k3 server is a little
better then xp pro. doesnt mean your gonna have money to buy it, god no, but it doesnt suck for a
general os in my opinion. it loads everything faster for me, even games. its noticeable compared to
winxp, win2k3 server even boots faster for me. it runs smoother because theres not alot of junk
running like their is in winxp pro. it runs clean and smooth compared to winxp pro. i also had no
problem at all installing winxp/win2k drivers on win2k3 server, since its basically the same os, just
a cleaned up version with alot of server features.

Benchmark Images From Sandra/CPU-Z
CPU-Z General Information
CPU-Z Memory Information
Windows XP Pro Sandra Results
Windows 2003 Server Sandra Results

 

[sman789]

and how is 2003 in general...i may just have to go get this

 

[spyordie007]

How about you run some Win 2K3 Server vs. Win 2K Server benchmarks so we can have something useful.

Windows 2003 Server is not a desktop OS, if you put as much time into Windows XP Pro turning off the stuff you dont want to use as you spend messing with Windows 2003 Server getting it to act like XP Pro than your benchmarks are going to be roughly equivilant.

Go do something useful.

and how is 2003 in general...i may just have to go get this

It's a server OS, it is the replacement for Windows 2000 Server. This is not a desktop OS.

-Spy

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: spyordie007
How about you run some Win 2K3 Server vs. Win 2K Server benchmarks so we can have something useful. Windows 2003 Server is not a desktop OS, if you put as much time into Windows XP Pro turning off the stuff you dont want to use as you spend messing with Windows 2003 Server getting it to act like XP Pro than your benchmarks are going to be roughly equivilant. Go do something useful.

and how is 2003 in general...i may just have to go get this

It's a server OS, it is the replacement for Windows 2000 Server. This is not a desktop OS. -Spy

I agree with you fully. Server OSes are not meant to be used as a desktop OS (by the way it's set up, or the price). spyordie007, I have used Windows 2000 Advanced Server, and Windows Server 2003 Enterprise (both obtained through my MSDN Universal subscription. Me wubs subscription card), and I find that 2003 is faster in nearly every task. I don't have benchmark,s just my feeling. I use 2003 for Active Directory, SQL, .NET development using IIS 6.0, DNS, DHCP, WINS, and most every other role. I find it much faster, and easier to setup. Also, Shadow copies are a great feature.

 

[batmang]

hrmmm.. its just a benchmark that no one has done. the whole point is not having to sit there and tweak your os just so its smooth, id much rather run win2k over xp, then to sit there and turn services off..... do u get the point now smartass? so yes, id rather use win2k3 server over winxp, because im not gonna sit there and turn services off, tweaking my registry, and so on just so it runs smooth like win2k/win2k3 does stock. you idiot. go watch carebears.

 

[batmang]

hell, if linux got better performance in all games vs windows anything, id be running linux right now. i actually did for quake3/rtcw, cause their linux native, and i got a 30% increase in fps. its not all about what the os is made for, to me it comes down to how it performs for what i use my computer for, gaming.

 

[spyordie007]

Stuff Windows 2K3 does stock, you mean like play games that require 3D? Oh wait, you have to tweak Windows 2003 Server just to get it to do 3D "stuff"

I would go watch carebears but I'm too busy managing real servers.

-Spy

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: batmizang
hrmmm.. its just a benchmark that no one has done. the whole point is not having to sit there and tweak your os just so its smooth, id much rather run win2k over xp, then to sit there and turn services off..... do u get the point now smartass? so yes, id rather use win2k3 server over winxp, because im not gonna sit there and turn services off, tweaking my registry, and so on just so it runs smooth like win2k/win2k3 does stock. you idiot. go watch carebears.

This benchmark is absolutely useless. No one who knows anything about the IT field would use Windows Server 2003 as a desktop OS (unless you are doing .NET development and need to actively test IIS 6.0). Windows XP is just as fast as WIndows 2000 on machines above 500 MHz. Most companies and home users nowadays are buying computers with 2.4 GHz or above. For instance, the school district I work for just purchased 600 new Dell computers in which the stock processor speed is 2.4 GHz. I personally prefer XP over 2k. Also, there is no need for you insulting everyone who tells you that this is a useless benchmark, because in reality it is. I also don't condone warez; which if someone was going to randomly conduct a "benchmark" on an OS, they wouldn't go and purchase a license ($1000+) just for a test.

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: batmizang
hell, if linux got better performance in all games vs windows anything, id be running linux right now. i actually did for quake3/rtcw, cause their linux native, and i got a 30% increase in fps. its not all about what the os is made for, to me it comes down to how it performs for what i use my computer for, gaming.

Now you're going to turn this into a Linux vs. Microsoft thread? Both OSes have there own abilities and niche's, leave it at that. I am experienced in Both Windows and Linux, and know that neither is actually better than the other. I can make Windows do everything Linux does, and vice versa.

 

[spyordie007]

most linux distributions allow for installing packages that set them up as a desktop, as such they are designed to be a desktop.

BTW "Windows XP Corp. Ed." is generally what the people who pirate Windows XP Pro volume licences generally refer to it as. If you legally owned that license you should at least know what to call it.

-Spy

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: spyordie007
most linux distributions allow for installing packages that set them up as a desktop, as such they are designed to be a desktop. BTW "Windows XP Corp. Ed." is generally what the people who pirate Windows XP Pro volume licences generally refer to it as. If you legally owned that license you should at least know what to call it. -Spy

Exactly. As I said, no one will spend $1000+ just to conduct a benchmark, and no workplace will easily give out a license to Windows XP Pro, and Windows Server 2003.

 

[batmang]

heh. hey, he insulted first, and this isnt some random crap benchmark, as for warez... come on. did u buy all your games... besides the point entirely. this is about gaming performance, and general use. just cause its called win2k3 SERVER and has special server features, dont mean it cant be a good general os. Its basically win2k mixed with winxp and added features. it could be a general os just as win2k pro was.

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: batmizang
heh. hey, he insulted first, and this isnt some random crap benchmark, as for warez... come on. did u buy all your games... besides the point entirely. this is about gaming performance, and general use. just cause its called win2k3 SERVER and has special server features, dont mean it cant be a good general os. Its basically win2k mixed with winxp and added features. it could be a general os just as win2k pro was.

spyordie007 never insulted you. Second of all, yes I purchased every game I own, and every OS (Why in the hell would I buy a MSDN subscription if I wasn't buying my software? I could have easily found it on warez, but am against that). Third of all, Windows 2k Pro is not Windows 2k Server. Yes, they share an almost exact code base, and server editions are just add-on's to Pro, but Pro is meant to be used as a workstation. No one will go out and buy Windows 2k Advanced Server for $3000 and turn it into Windows 2k Pro. Also, Windows XP Pro and Windows Server 2003 are more like distant cousins while Windows 2k Pro and Windows 2k Servers are like brothers. Face it, this benchmark is moot. There is no need for it.

 

[batmang]

hrmm, let me see you use photoshop/dreamweaver/flash/maya/studio max on linux. you guys are missing the point entirely. i was using linux as an example, im basing this on performance in games and sandra benches. linux runs ID games WAY better then any windows/mac os does. i had a duron 800 with a gf4mx 440, i got 50-70 frames at best on windows. i installed suse 8.2, updated the drivers and i got a constant 130+ all the time. a lot of people would find this benchmarking crap useful, people who want the most out of their computer. if your a gamer and you love playing but you lack performance, if you knew installing linux would give u a 30% increase in performance im pretty damn sure you'd install linux. this isnt about technical knowledge nor friggin piracy so stop bringing that crap up. this is about gaming/general benchmarking, wtf is wrong with that? stop flaming peolpe for trying something new, especially you spyordie007. all you do is rag on people.

 

[batmang]

i dont think the two of you understand what the phrase " do you get the point ? " means.

 

[spyordie007]

I suggested you did something useful, it wasnt an insult just a suggestion. I dont have many games but those that I do have I did buy.

Win2K Pro was built as a desktop OS, a server OS was released shortly afterwards (Win2K Server). Windows 2003 Server is to Windows XP Pro. as Windows 2000 Server is to Windows 2000 Pro.

-Spy

 

[batmang]

aight, well, enough with the text arguing, its getting away from the topic. i just hope these benchmarks go in my favor, if not, then oh well. maybe ill go buy windows xp, im sure buying it gives me at least a 50% increase in performance.

<-- pirated rolling eyes.

 

[spyordie007]

Originally posted by: batmizang
hrmm, let me see you use photoshop/dreamweaver/flash/maya/studio max on linux. you guys are missing the point entirely. i was using linux as an example, im basing this on performance in games and sandra benches. linux runs ID games WAY better then any windows/mac os does. i had a duron 800 with a gf4mx 440, i got 50-70 frames at best on windows. i installed suse 8.2, updated the drivers and i got a constant 130+ all the time. a lot of people would find this benchmarking crap useful, people who want the most out of their computer. if your a gamer and you love playing but you lack performance, if you knew installing linux would give u a 30% increase in performance im pretty damn sure you'd install linux. this isnt about technical knowledge nor friggin piracy so stop bringing that crap up. this is about gaming/general benchmarking, wtf is wrong with that? stop flaming peolpe for trying something new, especially you spyordie007. all you do is rag on people.

No offence, but just because one game ran better for you in Linux than it did in Windows doesnt make Linux a better gaming platform. It may be because the Linux port of that game has better optimized code, it may be because you are running better video card drivers under the linux install (you are running 44.03 and not the 29.63 drivers that Windows XP will try and install for you right? That's likely a 30% performance differance right there, once more if you are running the old drivers it is going to lock your frame rate at your refresh rate and wont let it go any higher (again a good way to make FPS worthless as a benchmark).

There is allot more to this "benchmarking thing" than you are putting into it.

-Spy

 

[PowerMacG5]

Originally posted by: batmizang
aight, well, enough with the text arguing, its getting away from the topic. i just hope these benchmarks go in my favor, if not, then oh well. maybe ill go buy windows xp, im sure buying it gives me at least a 50% increase in performance.

<-- pirated rolling eyes.

Just remember, this forum doesn't condone warez.

 

[Twista]

yes 2k3 is faster than xp because its not bloated. Run he bench dont listen to wut "some" others are saying.

 

[batmang]

i know all about the different driver versions, performance differences, and refresh rate's. i use refresh lock which works great. the thing is, i tried them all. the reason i attempted the linux install for one game, is because thats the only game i played at the time. im a big quake gamer ever since quake 1. i play it compeditively so every gain in performance matters to me. the increase performance has nothing to do with what drivers i was using in windows cause it didnt give a significant amount of fps no matter what driver i used. it had to do with the game being linux native, and quake3 is based off a linux infrastucture, thats why it runs soooo much better in linux. the same goes with return to castle wolfenstein. i literally got a 30-40% increase in framerate. went from 50-70 to 130 constant in quake 3. thats so awesome imho! and i even ran linux, which is open source, you guys should be proud of me.

 

[spyordie007]

I'm glad that you are keeping an open mind, if only this forum had a cookie emoticon.

 

[Panther505]

Originally posted by: batmizang
hrmm, let me see you use photoshop/dreamweaver/flash/maya/studio max on linux.

No problem http://www.codeweavers.com I know for a fact that it will run Photoshop.. Look at their info for what else they support.. if not then try winex

you guys are missing the point entirely.

No their not.. You are. A legit license for w2K3 SERVER is more expensive then ~10 XP licenses and if you understand that then you would know that you would have to have CALs for every system that attaches to the system. Not so with XP. You are talking about a comparison that a "normal" user would not give a damn about. Why because of the cost! Why hack the hell out of something to get it to work, pay 10xs what you need to for something that will not work out of the box? A no Brainer there. DUH!

i was using linux as an example, im basing this on performance in games and sandra benches. linux runs ID games WAY better then any windows/mac os does. i had a duron 800 with a gf4mx 440, i got 50-70 frames at best on windows. i installed suse 8.2, updated the drivers and i got a constant 130+ all the time. a lot of people would find this benchmarking crap useful, people who want the most out of their computer. if your a gamer and you love playing but you lack performance, if you knew installing linux would give u a 30% increase in performance im pretty damn sure you'd install linux.

Another NOT with capitals. If you are a gamer you will read about the amount of trouble that linux has, the amount of learning that you have to do, and the amount of time that it will take and then you will do a cost analysis... 100+ hours to learn linux to set it up and get a 30% gain in performance or go spend the money. Simple math and how much you value your time. I value my time at $35 per hour(what I want to do vs what I get paid to do) that 100 hours = $3500 I could buy a lot of cool HW for that.. IF you want a better comparison then take your summer job hourly rate and multiply it times 100 and that is what you would have if you worked rather then dorked around trying to learn an OS to game with.

this isnt about technical knowledge nor friggin piracy so stop bringing that crap up. this is about gaming/general benchmarking, wtf is wrong with that? stop flaming peolpe for trying something new, especially you spyordie007. all you do is rag on people.

No it is about piracy. The question that I have for you is how did you get W2K3 server? if the route was legit then state where it is from? If it is not then you clearly proved Spyordie's point. This is not a flame. This is making an arguement for you to get over your indiginity and move on.

BTW- be kind to strangers (especially on forums where everyone is a stranger) because insulting people never gets you anything but a lot of grief and then most people put you in filter mode.

 

[batmang]

hrmm, well i know linux already, it took me about 2 hours to set everything up. im not some idiot that doesnt know what hes doing. i already stated i installed linux for one game, quake 3. winex lags, and its not 100% stable. if i was an artist, i wouldnt trust an emulated program to run photoshop. and no, i didnt buy my copy of win2k3 server, i downloaded it, you wanna buy it for me? piracy has nothing to do with me benchmarking it. and i do have legit copies, about 20 evaluation discs sitting in my closet. ive leared a lot about linux through curiosity, trial and error over many attempts. you guys are saying im acusing, saying this, doing that, when im being targeted for trying to do a simple benchmark comparison. i dont need to be insulted about my intellectual status or my occupation. i graduated from college and i work as a pc technician at a hospital taking care of over 1,400 computers, financially im pretty stable. i know what im doing with linux and windows. get away from the piracy issue, this isnt about piracy for the 5th time. its about benchmarks and getting the most out of your computer.

 

[Panther505]

Originally posted by: batmizang
hrmm, well i know linux already, it took me about 2 hours to set everything up. im not some idiot that doesnt know what hes doing. i already stated i installed linux for one game, quake 3. winex lags, and its not 100% stable. if i was an artist, i wouldnt trust an emulated program to run photoshop. and no, i didnt buy my copy of win2k3 server, i downloaded it, what piracy has nothing to do with me benchmarking it. and i do have legit copies, about 20 evaluation discs sitting in my closet. ive leared a lot about linux through curiosity, trial and error over many attempts. you guys are saying im acusing, saying this, doing that, when im benig targeted for trying to do a simple benchmark comparison. i dont need to be insulted about my intellectual status or my occupation. i graduated from college and i work as a pc technician at a hospital taking care of over 1,400 computers, financially, i know what im doing with linux and windows. get away from the piracy issue, this isnt aout piracy for the 5th time. its about benchmarks and getting the most out of your computer.

I'll bite again.

My point- you are an experienced (to some degree) linux user. I have a guy that would try setting up linux and it would be the most painful thing on earth for him. Put him on a windows box and you will have yourself an AV studio that you could master DVDs on.

For your information A LOT of the DCC studios use photoshop on linux using codeweaver or wine. I know this for a fact. If they are not using Photoshop then they are using Gimp or FilmGimp.

Not talking about buying it... If you download it via any p2p then you are wrong and you know it. If you downloaded it via MSDN then fine.

Benchmarking- You are comparing Apples and Oranges so it is useless. If you want to do it then fine BUT the point that I have is that you are wasting your time and 'promoting' a solution that most people will not be able to use.

Finally I am not busting on your intelligence. or on your grammar skills (like correct case). I am glad that you work as a PC Tech. I work as a Window/Linux test lead, testing Video Solutions for a major OEM. And I don't have a college degree. I know that you dont' want this to be about piracy and it isn't but the mods may not look at your "downloading" purely for test purposes as legit.