The Ultimate Win2K Rig

[.NETLover3790]

I've been thinking and I'm wondering what the ULTIMATE Windows 2000 rig would be, the most powerful hardware that could run it. I'd imagine it would run Windows 2000 Datacenter Server to access the most memory, but I'm curious about other things. Of course our memory ceiling is 64GB, but I'm not sure what the fastest CPU & GPU would be.

I'm thinking the fastest CPU would be a Pentium 4 or Core 2 Duo-based hyperthreaded Xeon in a dual CPU config to make for four virtual processors. If the C2D-based Xeon was dual core, that would make for eight. With Win2K's HT issues (recognizing one hyperthreaded physical CPU as two CPUs), a Core 2 Quad or simply dual dual-core Xeons with HT disabled could be pretty fast.

From what I've read the fastest GPU for Windows 2000 would be a GeForce 9800 GTX+, but with some hacking, running newer GPUs with Windows XP support may be possible. One issue is I'm not sure how well the GeForce 9800 GTX+ works with PAE as it was probably intended for client Windows 2000/XP/Vista systems running 32-bit with 4GB RAM or less (though it did support 64-bit Windows XP and Vista so I'm not completely sure).

This seems like a system that COULD run Windows XP, 2K3, or even Vista/7 well, but I'm sure it would make Windows 2000 fly! Most C2D-era motherboards have PCIe, and many even have built-in SATA, so that gives great SSD options, as well as fast (gigabit) NICs.

I am genuinely curious if such a system would be usable as a main system these days.

[win32]

The Windows 2000 extended core can eliminate the hardware limitations of Professional and the lesser servers. I'm using win2k pro on an HP Z600 Workstation with 12 GB DDR3-1333 and a Xeon X5670 (12 threads).

Official NVIDIA drivers support up to the GeForce 400 series or Quadro 2000/4000/6000. For the former, use 258.96 (listed as XP-only but the installer recognizes win2k and the driver works great), and the latter has a different version number but it's listed as for win2k. And they work with PAE unlike Intel graphics drivers.

BWC's unofficial NVIDIA drivers support up to the GTX 980TI. His SATA drivers support up to Kaby Lake! Realtek and Broadcom audio/NIC drivers officially supported win2k until about 2013/14 so they're good in that department.

If you wanna see the ultimate win2k rig, check this X99 beast out: https://msfn.org/board/topic/175368-win ... nt=1162142

There are some caveats though: any Intel boards newer than X58/55xx will require you to install with PS/2 input devices then install the USB drivers manually.

And due to the way win2k loads drivers at startup (consecutively instead of concurrently like XP and up), boot time will increase with the amount of threads. With my 12 threads, my boot time is extended by over a minute (the boot screen freezes until all of the processor drivers are loaded).

But it does pay off. I can load Photoshop CS5 in 1.6 seconds when cached on a 5400 rpm HDD

[.NETLover3790]

The Windows 2000 extended core can eliminate the hardware limitations of Professional and the lesser servers. I'm using win2k pro on an HP Z600 Workstation with 12 GB DDR3-1333 and a Xeon X5670 (12 threads).

Official NVIDIA drivers support up to the GeForce 400 series or Quadro 2000/4000/6000. For the former, use 258.96 (listed as XP-only but the installer recognizes win2k and the driver works great), and the latter has a different version number but it's listed as for win2k. And they work with PAE unlike Intel graphics drivers.

BWC's unofficial NVIDIA drivers support up to the GTX 980TI. His SATA drivers support up to Kaby Lake! Realtek and Broadcom audio/NIC drivers officially supported win2k until about 2013/14 so they're good in that department.

If you wanna see the ultimate win2k rig, check this X99 beast out: https://msfn.org/board/topic/175368-win ... nt=1162142

There are some caveats though: any Intel boards newer than X58/55xx will require you to install with PS/2 input devices then install the USB drivers manually.

And due to the way win2k loads drivers at startup (consecutively instead of concurrently like XP and up), boot time will increase with the amount of threads. With my 12 threads, my boot time is extended by over a minute (the boot screen freezes until all of the processor drivers are loaded).

But it does pay off. I can load Photoshop CS5 in 1.6 seconds when cached on a 5400 rpm HDD

Dang! This rig is awesome! In my experience, Nvidia's Windows XP 32-bit driver (at least for their Quadro NVS 110M) runs on Windows 2000 just fine, and Dell's version even advertises that fact. And when I run it on Vista, it complains about only working on 2000/XP. Strange that "winxp" is in the filename and not "win2k", "win2000", or "winnt" anywhere in the name, and it only says it works with XP on their website.

Awesome you can run Windows 2000 on a system like that. Keep it alive!

[Moline]

Have you tried running Windows 2000 on a full 500 GB hard drive? It is possible, and doesn't even require anything special to be done to the disk. Just pop it in and install Windows normally, though if you get a quick format option, you must chose that, otherwise it may not work. If you don't, then it means regular format will work. You can also install DOS 7.10 and Windows 3.1 on a 500 GB HDD as well. Just install normally, and if you get a quick format option, chose that.

[DVINTHEHOUSEMAN]

I don’t run 2K but I do run XP on my Z420 Workstation. I know it’s not the same, but I could just go and enable the Classic theme and it would run like 2K just slightly different. I have a Xeon E5-1620, 6GB of DDR3 12800E-1600, and a GTX 650. It runs very fast. Logging in is virtually instant after I enter my password. The animation plays and then I’m in the desktop. It’s very fast, taking barely any time at all to load IE (1-2 seconds) and same with Chrome but it’s more resource intensive. It’s very fast at everything and it could be improved by adding the SATA driver but I have no idea where to get one for XP x64 and the one on HP’s website locks up my computer when I run the installer, and I have to use LKGC mode. It sucks and I hope to find the F6 Textmode driver so I can run it in AHCI.

EDIT: I have realized that Windows XP internally is very different from 2000. Please excuse my mistake.

[win32]

blackwingcat has largely bridged the gap between 2000 and XP. You could theoretically run win2k on the Z420 with his SATA, NVIDIA, and Intel LAN drivers (http://www.w2k.flxsrv.org/wlu/wluen.htm ; click "Manual Update"). Official realtek audio drivers exist, but I'm not sure about USB 3.0, and there will be initial problems with getting any USB to work until the proper drivers are installed manually. The workaround is listed here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/179665-run ... sb-issues/

And you may also want to avoid standby to keep your CPU temps cool, due to the lack of a processor container/speedstep driver.

If you want an AHCI driver for XP x64, you should try one here:
https://www.win-raid.com/t11f23-Modded- ... igned.html

But yeah, XP x64 is on the second HDD on my HP Z600 and it runs awesome. Whether it be Windows 2000 or 7, it will run great, but x64 stuff really benefits from the lightweight nature of XP x64.

And for installing Windows 2000 (SP3+) with 48bit LBA support, you have to slipstream USP 5.1, run the latest HFSLIP 2000 package from tomasz86 on MSFN, or modify SETUPREG.HIV to include the EnableBigLBA=1 reg entry. There is no quick format available in Windows 2000 setup (though it doesn't matter on an SSD, as a regular format takes little time)

[DVINTHEHOUSEMAN]

I run 7 Ulti as my primary and XP x64 as my secondary. I’ll be sure to try those drivers for AHCI out.

[Optimusprime2]

I run 7 Ulti as my primary and XP x64 as my secondary. I’ll be sure to try those drivers for AHCI out.

Whatever the outcome,please let us know.