Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Professional Discussion / XP Sucks!

Author
Message
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 04:02
Link
I installed DBPro in windows 98, and in one of my games the normal framerate was around 100 fps. Then I "upgraded" to Windows XP and my framerate dropped to around 20 fps !! Is this normal? Has anyone experienced the same thing? Is there anything I'm supposed to do, but didn't?

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Genesis Rage
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 04:11
Link
in the project settings what is the screen option set at? Full-Screen Exclusive mode does not run the best on XP... the Windowed - Full Screen is the best method for XP... this might be the problem

==Main Computer==
Athlon XP 3000+, 1024mb, Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb 8xAGP, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Toilet Freak
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 04:12
Link
did you replace the crappy XP drivers with the ones your meant to have... always update the drivers of XP(cause they suck).

with the Xp drivers I got 4 screen rezolutions, with the nvidia ones i got over 20...

and yes, XP does suck in ,many ways... and download the msblast patch and other xp worm patches...

DreamersScars-Toiletfreak-
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/cnkyk8k2/index.html[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 05:22
Link
TKF15H:"Then I "upgraded" to Windows XP ..."

Best use of quotes in a while. Nice

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
james1980
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Sep 2002
Location:
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 05:31
Link
winXP needs more power than win98 look at the specs needed too run winXP,98. you might need a stronger cpu or more ram
intel p4 works better than amd athlon.

2xP4 2.4 GHZ,1GB ocz ddr pc4000 ram, radeon 9800 128MB
Back to top
Profile PM
Phaelax
DBPro Master
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 10:38
Link
Athlon better! unless you're talking about the brand new P4's that Intel has been talking about. The P4 extreme or whatever they call em.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
David T
Retired Moderator
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 11:16
Link
Quote: "Then I "upgraded" to Windows XP and my framerate dropped to around 20 fps "


I 'upgraded' and had no problem

"The trouble with the French is that they have no word for 'entreprenuer'" - Pres. George W Bush
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 13:19
Link
I allready re-installed drivers, and I've tried all the screen modes. One funny thing: When I change the resolution on fullscreen mode, I set it to 32 bit gfx, but when I click "OK", it changes to 16bit. The only way for me to run in 32 is to open the dbpro file in notepad and adjusting the mode there. There isn't any difference performance-wise from 16 to 32 but things look alot better...

I see you liked my quotes ...

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Genesis Rage
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 16:19
Link
i havent "upgraded" either, never used DBP in another OS yet... so im glad... dont have any reference to how much better it runs on other OS's

i also agree with Phaelax about the Athlons... for the price of AMD's you cant go wrong... plus they are a LOT better for overclocking than Intel's chips... this new Intel one might be good... but they are still going to have to compete with the Athlon 64 chips!

==Main Computer==
Athlon XP 3000+, 1024mb, Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb 8xAGP, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dreamora
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posted: 29th Oct 2003 16:29
Link
no althon 64 have to compete with intel 64bit not with the HT chips. 64bit chips are useless anyway before all software is written in 64bit.

and for your setting back: only exclusive fullscreen is allowed to have another screen depth than the desktop, so trying to set it can damage your graphics adapter.

Dell Inspiron 8200,P4-M 1,7ghz, GF4 440go (45.23 - DX9b), 1GB RAM
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 01:27
Link
I am using EXFS, and it still won't work. Unless of course, I change the mode manually. It's funny that, if my Linux had the drivers for my 3d card, DBC in linux would be running faster than DBPro in windows.

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Megaton Cat
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 03:26
Link
Lower framerates? You whine too much
try demolished modem, screwed up display (parts of text missing), loss of directX and 3d drivers, and serious hdd crashes resulting in reformating. Thank god all of thats over for me thanks to my brand new p4 powerhouse. Gave ol' xp a run for its money.


My site is delyaed for the 250th time!
If life is just one big joke...
then I must have missed the punchline.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Conrad
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 20:43
Link
1.8Ghz 64bit athlon runs around 20% faster than the FASTEST P4 (that's what I've heard anyway!) - And that's when running 'normal' 32 bit software! Get some optimised software on it and I'm sure it would fly.

- Conrad Brown -
Back to top
Profile PM
Codger
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 20:53
Link
It was mentioned last night on "Tech TV" "Screen Savers" that loading the Windows security Patches is slowing some systems but they never did define what system configuration was slowed by Patches.

It had no effect on mine I had a speed boost going from 98 to XP

System
PIII 650 MZ H.P. Pavillion
394 Mem GeForce 4 400MX
Back to top
Profile PM Email
heartbone
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 21:13
Link
Codger: "It had no effect on mine I had a speed boost going from 98 to XP"

That is impossible.

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Codger
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 30th Oct 2003 21:24
Link
I meant to say loading the security patches had no effect

System
PIII 650 MZ H.P. Pavillion
394 Mem GeForce 4 400MX
Back to top
Profile PM Email
swdave
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 06:15
Link
XP Sucks!

So do the makers, but its an acceptable $100 OS that can last you 2-5 years.
Back to top
Profile PM
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 07:11
Link
Acceptable? I don't think paying $100 for a system that has more holes than swiss cheese is acceptable! Every day I turn on my PC and it says there are updates/patches to be downloaded! All my games run slower and some programs that used to work are now crashing.

RULES!

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Genesis Rage
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 07:53
Link
yeah its all good... but nothing that i use on my computer runs under Linux... all has to have Windows... and there is only about 5% of what i do on my computer that i can do in Linux... check the forums!

now if someone made a program for Linux that could use any driver for certain hardware, and run all Win software... then i would switch in a heartbeat... but that just aint the case

==Main Computer==
Athlon XP 3000+, 1024mb, Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb 8xAGP, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 13:43
Link
Quote: "only about 5% of what i do on my computer that i can do in Linux..."

Why's that? I have Linux installed and it runs some windows programs. There are LOTS of programs for Linux free for download, so how come you can only do 5% of what you can do in windows?

The only down for linux is the drivers. Many companies don't care to make drivers for it. But still, there are drivers for lots of things.

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
SumpyGump
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 17:39
Link
Maybe if more people switched to Linux, then there would be more drivers created, because there would be a higher demand.

So switch to Linux today.
Back to top
Profile PM
heartbone
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 18:14
Link
If there were more programs created for Linux then
more people would switch to Linux, then there would be more drivers created, because there would be a higher demand.

Hence we NEED a DarkBASIC (or equivalent) running in Linux to get the ball rolling.

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
thedubdude
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th May 2003
Location: San Jose, Ca.
Posted: 31st Oct 2003 22:14
Link
So I'm going to upgrade my computer and was considering upgrading my OS from Win 98 to XP....from the above discussions upgrading the OS sounds like a bad idea...correct?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 1st Nov 2003 01:17
Link
For me it was a bad thing, but for others not, so I guess it depends on the hardware you got. But to be on the safe side, install linux too.

Quote: "If there were more programs created for Linux"

ummm, actually, there is ALOT of programs for Linux. But a DBPro port would be awsome.

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
heartbone
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 1st Nov 2003 01:31
Link
If you are getting XP with the computer for under $90 then you might as well check it out since most of the hardware will come with XP drivers and you may not be able to get 98 drivers for all of it. You should be able to reactivate it for at least the next 3 years.

But if you have to pay retail for XP, that makes no sense, stay with 98. How many ways do you need to load an application? Provided you can get the correct drivers, your new system should perform better speed wise running Windows 98SE than XP. Running Windows 95 it would run even faster but you would have practically zero chance of getting the drivers for todays hardware.

The number of patches required to make your system up to date are about the same with XP needing more MB to download unless you need to download IE6 and all it's fixes too.

The more you see, the more you know.
The more you know, the more you see.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Genesis Rage
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 1st Nov 2003 01:31
Link
@ TKF15H
Quote: "
so how come you can only do 5% of what you can do in windows?
"

its not that there arent programs for Linux i could use to replace what i use in windows... but that is the thing... i dont know if i would be able to replace my knowledge... i have been using the same style of windows based programs for almost 18 years now! so re-learning how to use programs might be a little hard for me...

now if i could use 3ds Max 5, Photoshop 7, Macromedia Studio MX, DB Pro, MS Visual Studio 6, MS Office, and EverQuest... i would switch over immediately!

i also have been using Microsoft's OS's for 18 years... if its not MS compatible... i dont know anything about it MS has made me stupid!

==Main Computer==
Athlon XP 3000+, 1024mb, Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb 8xAGP, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Red general
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Nov 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 1st Nov 2003 21:09
Link
98 is the only windows that works properly - in 5 years mine has only crashed 6 times

xp just drains your system - xp crashed 6 times in one day

RED GENERAL

My computer melts regulary - perhaps it likes being fondue
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 2nd Nov 2003 23:58
Link
Quote: "98 is the only windows that works properly - in 5 years mine has only crashed 6 times"

For me it's been the exact oposite. Windows 98 would get a hard crash around 10-15 times a day, and I've had to re-install it 4 times due to it's messing things up. XP on the other hand has only crashed once on me, but I had to sacrifice the speed.

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Genesis Rage
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2003
Location:
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 00:24
Link
same for me... XP has been a lot more stable than 98... XP has only crashed on me twice, and both times its because i was doing something that i shouldnt have

==Main Computer==
Athlon XP 3000+, 1024mb, Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb 8xAGP, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 00:41
Link
You know, when I first created this thread, I thought it would turn into a flamewar about how WinXP is superior in every way to the rest. I was prepared to get rancid vegitables thrown at me, and surprise! I got tonnes of agreements...

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
AlecM
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 09:47
Link
Thats odd that you lost that many FPS. You DID wipe your hardrive before installing, correct?

[P4 2.8C @ 3.03 with an 866mhz FSB:: MSI Neo-2LS running PAT:: 1gb Mushkin PC-3500 DDR High Perf level 2@ 2,2,2 :: ATI Radeon9800ProAIW :: 120Gb SeagateBarracuda 7,200RPM SATA HD :: Antec Plus1080AMG]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 15:24
Link
Now why whould I do that? It's not fragmented, and I've got too much stuff to backup.

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jedive
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Jan 2003
Location: Spain
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 16:43
Link
For me, Win2K has been the more stable and robust.

== Jedive ==
AthlonXP 1600+, 512MB, GeForce4200, Win2K/DX9, Mandrake Linux 9.1
Back to top
Profile PM Email
DB Maniac 164
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Nov 2003
Location:
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 23:36
Link
When I "Upgraded" (Good Use of qoutation marks) to Win XP About a year A go I was shocked. Every PC Game I owned ran on win 98 Brilliantly (This was when I only had a 750Mhz 128MB Ram GeForce 4 MX 420). I Shortly upgraded to A 1100Mhz Duron 256 Ram Same GFX and WinXP Bad mistake. Only 2 Of my games ran, and they both needed patches!! GTA III Gave up the ghost and showed some pretty freaky graphics glitches even in emulation mode. Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 ran, but wanted the patch. ReVolt didnt run, and the odd one or two struggled at a pants framerate. I suddenly realised how pants Windows XP was. However I recently bought a Laptop with Win XP 2000Mhz Athlon XP 256Mb DDr Mem 64Mb ATI Radeon IGP 320 (-64 from 256 shared) and GTA III Runs (All be it at lowest graphics setting so the game doesnt skip) And revolt works along with many others.
I am unsure on the situation win XP, So I went back to 98 and kissed goodbye to win XP. It basically sucks if you like games and have a pc built for games. (Like mine now is) But if you are in an Ofice or University then it is OK. My Advice = Win 98 Or Better yet Min ME

GameCube XBox PS2 N64 Dreamcast Mega Drive SNES NES GBASP Master System Speccy 128 +2 Commodore 64 Atari 2600 Atari Jaguar Mega CD 32-X Atari Lynx, Jees is there any I Don't Have?? (F-Zero GX Rules!!)
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
tomazmb
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Slovenia
Posted: 3rd Nov 2003 23:56
Link
Hello,

I saw some really bad judgments about XP. For me I'v been with Microsoft OS's for about 20 years. Starting with DOS 3,5,6, Win 3.1, Windows 95, Windows 98 and now Windows XP. And the winner in all categories is clearly XP (stability, easy for use, the look). I never had a chance to play a game which didn't work in XP. An operation system is as good as the user know how to use it. The words sucks describes only your ignorance and not knowing anything about OS.

Have a nice day,

Tomaz

Why some people take programming so seriously ?
Back to top
Profile PM
zao420
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Aug 2003
Location: Canada
Posted: 4th Nov 2003 00:06
Link
one thing i would like to see in winxp is better support for dos games. yes there old but it sucks having to boot into dos with a boot disk to play the old coolgames.

http://www.outwar.com/page.php?x=1655790
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
AlecM
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Concord, MA
Posted: 4th Nov 2003 01:29
Link
TKF15H

Its ALWAYS smart to wipe your hardrive before installing a new OS on the same partition. Even the winXP repair function is a little iffy.

[P4 2.8C @ 3.03 with an 866mhz FSB:: MSI Neo-2LS running PAT:: 1gb Mushkin PC-3500 DDR High Perf level 2@ 2,2,2 :: ATI Radeon9800ProAIW :: 120Gb SeagateBarracuda 7,200RPM SATA HD :: Antec Plus1080AMG]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
krannock
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th May 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 4th Nov 2003 02:21
Link
Hi,
What i want to know about XP is how comw it suddenly needs half a ton of space to do similar stuff as 98.
What about the good old days of Amiga 1.3 (Two 720k Floppies) for a windows based OS. LOL
By the time you've upgraded XP etc your nearly at 2GB. What does it need 2GB for anyway? Sounds like a bad case of bad, lazy and dirty programming to me.


Smile it could be worse....I smiled...it got worse!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TKF15H
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 4th Nov 2003 07:35 Edited at: 4th Nov 2003 07:41
Link
Quote: "I never had a chance to play a game which didn't work in XP. An operation system is as good as the user know how to use it. The words sucks describes only your ignorance and not knowing anything about OS."

Listen (or read, whatever), please show some information that proves something. I've used almost every Microsoft OS (dos,win 1.0, win 3.11, win 95, win 98, win NT, win 2k, win ME, win XP) and what I'm trying to say is despite all the hype, windoze XP is NOT as good for MY needs as win 98.
Quote: "And the winner in all categories is clearly XP (stability, easy for use, the look). "

HAHAHA. Ok, I agree in the stability thing, and "easy for use", but you can forguet the looks. Those looks have a price. They take up a load of system resources, and I couldn't care less about an OS's appearance. I really liked MSDos and I know how to use it well. Same goes for Win98. WinXP then came along and limited the user in ways Win98 didn't. Mabe for some, n00bs/you, it doesn't matter, but to me it did. DarkBasicPro clearly had a performance hit, so you can't say my (supposed) lack of knowlege on how to use the system is the cause. If you've never had problems playing your games, then believe me, you are one of the blessed few who haven't. Also, I agree with krannock: Windoze XP's use of 2GB of HD is more than rediculous. g'day.

@Froggermon: I wiped windows 98 from the hard disk, but I didn't reformat. Then I installed windoze XP. It is a clean installation, not a repair/update...

Morfy's Law - Enythink thet ken go rong willll.
Cole's Law - Thinly sliced cabbage.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2026-07-26 16:03:00
Your offset time is: 2026-07-26 16:03:00