Better framerates with SP1

[GlobalExplorer]

I can definitely prove that SHIII+GWX and other simulations (LOMAC) give better framerates with SP1 than with SP2. I did have ample time to test that because I use exchangeable harddisks, and I have different os installations on them, for gaming, work, internet, etc. Some of them have SP1, others SP2.

SP2 is a must have if you go the internet. But for gaming you should use SP1. I sometimes forget it and I can always see a visible difference when I accidently run a game under SP2.

[bigboywooly]

Interesting find GE
:hmm:
May have to have a dual boot
I dont normally access the net while playing

[Gizzmoe]

I can definitely prove that SHIII+GWX and other simulations (LOMAC) give better framerates with SP1 than with SP2.
How much better? The XP SP2 you tested it with, was it a fresh installation? Did you use the same video, audio and chipset driver version?

[GlobalExplorer]

Interesting find GE
:hmm:
May have to have a dual boot
I dont normally access the net while playing

I recommend everyone to get an exchangeable hard disk mount, and buy 2-3 cheap hd's in the range of 80GB. It's not that much of an investment, but combined with well planned imaging of system partitions (see Acronis, etc) it will help you overcome all probs with deterioting OS's, conflicting configuration demands, or uninstalling things.

I can definitely prove that SHIII+GWX and other simulations (LOMAC) give better framerates with SP1 than with SP2.
How much better? The XP SP2 you tested it with, was it a fresh installation? Did you use the same video driver version?

How much better .. I would say enough to stay clear of SP2 for gaming.

I always use fresh installations as I install my OS from an image file every couple of weeks.

Let me say again that everyone must use SP2 as soon as he/she goes to the internet. Let me also say that results may vary, but on my machine, the results are definitely visible.

To clarify, SP2 is not causing fps to drop per se, but it is causing obvious stuttering with hardware intense games. That might be because of the additional processes running in the background, security, hard disk access, etc.

Of course no one should uninstal it rashly, as this is not a solution for everything.

I was just posting an observation I made over the last 2 years, and I would like to discuss what others have experienced.

[Gizzmoe]

To clarify, SP2 is not causing fps to drop per se, but it is causing obvious stuttering with hardware intense games.
First you said that SP1 gives better framerates, now you said it doesn´t. :hmm: There´s no obvious stuttering in the hardware-intensive games I play on XP SP2.

Did you use the same video, sound and chipset drivers and did the same background services run on SP1 and SP2?

[GlobalExplorer]

Sorry if I was confusing this. The fps do not drop quantitatively, but find the stuttering very annoying. Practically it's very similar.

As to the drivers. At the moment I am using the 93.x drivers, and mostly other drivers that are relatively recent, as well as the last Dx9. But I have not based my observation on one version of any driver, it's rather something I found out again and again.

[GlobalExplorer]

Gizzmoe, none of this is important if you are running a high-end system, which I don't. I have:

Mobile Athlon XP Barton overclocked @2200 Mhz
Abit NF7-2
1GB DDR400
Geforce 6800 overclocked @ 375/800 Mhz

So by no means a state of the art system. Still I am able to run all modern games like SHIII GWX with mid to high settings on 1280*1024 (which is a requirement on an LCD).

[Gizzmoe]

Gizzmoe, none of this is important if you are running a high-end system, which I don't.
It is very important! To make a fair comparison you need to use fresh Windows installations and use the same exact versions of the video, sound, chipset and DirectX drivers. You also need to make sure that the same background programs are running on both installations and possibly also check if the same Windows services are running. The swapfile setting also need to be the same, fragmentation possibly also plays a role.

After you´ve done all that that you can make some tests, compare the results and then post about how SP1 runs better on your system, preferably you should then also posts some benchmark numbers. Sorry, but without all that your observations are pretty irrelevant for the general public. ;)

[GlobalExplorer]

Did you copy that text from an automated support mail?

I don't want to argue .. the point of my post was not to say "I know everything" .. I just wanted to post my observations and let the opinions roll.

To me it just seems to be like everyone slapped SP2 on your system for fear of viruses, and because they were told so. And a great many many people come crying to me cause they have messed up their system, when they shouldn't having a firewall and lots of other unnecessary stuff running in the background, or just learn to not treat their computer like a garbage bin.

[Gizzmoe]

Did you copy that text from an automated support mail?
No, 25 years of IT experience... ;)

I don't want to argue .. the point of my post was not to say "I know everything" ..
Then don´t write that you can definitely prove that SP1 is better for gaming! :)

[GlobalExplorer]

OK uncle. I have only 20 years IT experience so you win :oops:

I was not wise enough with chosing words. But I can definitely prove it on my system, and I have sound reason to claim that there is some relevance in what I say.

[GlobalExplorer]

Tests were done here, so no need to repeat that:

http://www.short-media.com/articles/does_service_pack_2_slow_you_down

FPS differences are there but not really conclusive. Stuttering however is what I meant and as this is a somewhat subjective thing, it is hard to measure. I have seen SP2 stutter much more with at least the following games: SHIII + GWX, LOMAC FC, GT Legends, GTR2.

I would like to hear what other people have found. Or is everyone already running SP2?

[bradclark1]

I know my computer starts a whole lot slower with SP2.

[Einbaum]

Another one who can vouch games work slower on SP 2. I installed it a couple of years ago, hated it (big fat bloat-ware in my opinion), went back to SP1. Apart from anything, you're losing anything from 60MB-80MB in memory just by running SP2...try it. As long as your careful on the net, you should be fine with SP1. So what's the point of it? I don't care if Mr. Gates wants to force me to use SP2 seeing they wont let me download Windows Media 11 without SP2 (Microsoft = Software Mafia), I'll just keep Media 10, thank you for nothing, silly geeko Gates. :down:

So now please...someone tell me the benefits of having SP2 over SP1. Anyone? You IT "experts"?

[Gizzmoe]

Apart from anything, you're losing anything from 60MB-80MB in memory just by running SP2...try it.
SP2 installs and runs all kinds of things in the background I don´t need. In that regard XP SP2 isn´t different from a default installation of a professional Linux distribution. After I install an OS I disable those things I don´t want or need, which can save quite a lot of memory. My optimized XP SP2 needs more memory than my old optimized SP1 system, but maybe only 15-20MB. That´s negligible.

XP SP2 runs all my games fine, there´s no stuttering, no nothing. Perhaps there are some games that run 5% faster on SP1, but what´s a 5% higher framerate? Nothing!

So now please...someone tell me the benefits of having SP2 over SP1. Anyone? You IT "experts"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_xp#Service_Pack_2

For the general public SP2 is a good thing, it´s more secure. If you know what you´re doing you don´t really need SP2.

There are applications that require SP2, some games as well, like FSX.

[Camaero]

Apart from anything, you're losing anything from 60MB-80MB in memory just by running SP2...try it.
SP2 installs and runs all kinds of things in the background I don´t need. In that regard XP SP2 isn´t different from a default installation of a professional Linux distribution. After I install an OS I disable those things I don´t want or need, which can save quite a lot of memory. My optimized XP SP2 needs more memory than my old optimized SP1 system, but maybe only 15-20MB. That´s negligible.

XP SP2 runs all my games fine, there´s no stuttering, no nothing. Perhaps there are some games that run 5% faster on SP1, but what´s a 5% higher framerate? Nothing!

So now please...someone tell me the benefits of having SP2 over SP1. Anyone? You IT "experts"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_xp#Service_Pack_2

For the general public SP2 is a good thing, it´s more secure. If you know what you´re doing you don´t really need SP2.

There are applications that require SP2, some games as well, like FSX.

How can one disable some of the excess crap?

[Gizzmoe]

How can one disable some of the excess crap?

Start/Run/services.msc

There you can disable many services, I´ve disable more than 30.

"Optimize XP Services":
http://www.beemerworld.com/tips/servicesxp.htm

My computer isn´t in a network, so I´ve disable these services:

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/3235/disablegv2.gif

[Camaero]

Cool, thank you sir!

[Einbaum]

Apart from anything, you're losing anything from 60MB-80MB in memory just by running SP2...try it.
SP2 installs and runs all kinds of things in the background I don´t need. In that regard XP SP2 isn´t different from a default installation of a professional Linux distribution. After I install an OS I disable those things I don´t want or need, which can save quite a lot of memory. My optimized XP SP2 needs more memory than my old optimized SP1 system, but maybe only 15-20MB. That´s negligible.

XP SP2 runs all my games fine, there´s no stuttering, no nothing. Perhaps there are some games that run 5% faster on SP1, but what´s a 5% higher framerate? Nothing!

So now please...someone tell me the benefits of having SP2 over SP1. Anyone? You IT "experts"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_xp#Service_Pack_2

For the general public SP2 is a good thing, it´s more secure. If you know what you´re doing you don´t really need SP2.

There are applications that require SP2, some games as well, like FSX.

Ok, thanks for the reply....by the way, I know you're an IT expert, I was referring to everyone else as "expert" because everytime I mention on a forum I'm not using SP2 they make out like I'm mad, but they can never come up with a good explanation why I should change to SP2.

[GlobalExplorer]

Gizzmoe: Very good tips for disabling processes and such. That is certainly the way to go to setup SP2 for gaming. If you say SP2 does not slow down your hardware intense games however, I wonder what hardware you are using. If you look again at the kind of specs I posted, do you realize that on that kind of system you are always very close to dropping under the needed 20-30 fps with 2xAA/ 4xAF, 1280x1024 etc ..

Ok, thanks for the reply....by the way, I know you're an IT expert, I was referring to everyone else as "expert" because everytime I mention on a forum I'm not using SP2 they make out like I'm mad, but they can never come up with a good explanation why I should change to SP2.

Well, if you go to the internet without SP2 your computer it will be only a matter of hours before your computer is updated with all of the newest viruses and stuff - never do that!
A lot of new programs won't install anymore on SP1.
The new control center in the Detonator Drivers won't work without SP2, but it's crap anyway.

All of that can be handled if you are able to run SP2 for internet and work, and SP1 for gaming only.

Most people prefer using a bootmanager for that. I however prefer to put every OS/SP config on a different harddrive and swap them when I need.

As this might not have been precise in my first posts: I'm not saying I am sure that this is like that on any computer. But on my computer I am in the situation to compare SP1 and SP2 in a way that 99.9% of people can't, because:

- For two years I have been using image files and transfer them on different harddrives => after that the systems are 100% the same.

- Then I install SP2 (and some other programs) on one, while SP1 was already installed on my image.

After that I forget and start some games under SP2 : I see definite stuttering in SHIII (leaving port with GWX), a measureable drop of framerates in GTL / GTR2 of about 10-20 %.

Of course Gizzmoe is correct that this is caused by some of the background processes that SP2 adds. But for me the easiest solution for that is to play my games under SP1.

I always tried to play it down and think, there can't be more than 2-3 % difference, but in practice I always see and feel the difference, no matter if it's cause is fps or micro stutters.

[Gizzmoe]

If you say SP2 does not slow down your hardware intense games however, I wonder what hardware you are using.
Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
AMD X2 4600+
2GB RAM
ATI X1950XT
Terratec Xfire 1024 soundcard

Before Christmas:
Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
AMD 64 3500+
1GB RAM
ATI X800XL
Terratec Xfire 1024 soundcard

After that I forget and start some games under SP2 : I see definite stuttering in SHIII (leaving port with GWX), a measureable drop of framerates in GTL / GTR2 of about 10-20 %.
Mate, first you said that SP1 gives better framerates than SP2, then you said the fps does not drop quantitatively, only that you find the stuttering very annoying, now you say that GTR2 is 10-20% faster. That´s confusing... ;)

Like I said, since you don´t use the same versions of the above-mentioned drivers your comparison isn´t valid. I´m not saying that I generally doubt that SP1 is faster, all I´m saying is that you need to follow some very basic rules if you wanna make a fair comparison.

[GlobalExplorer]

I already said four or five times I am using the same image file on three different harddrives with the only relevant difference being SP2, so I don't know what you mean about the driver. With that kind of nitpicking you can unease 99.9 % of people because they can't compare, and I know how that works, but I said I can compare, because I can run SP1 or SP2 on exactly the same hardware.

With the exception of the first post where I was blaring out a bit too much (sorry for that 3rd time), I was consistently saying that I see definite stuttering plus fps drops and listing the games. I was taking my initial statement a bit back because the differences in fps might be misleading, as you will know. One game might give better fps on SP1, another on SP2, that's why didn't want to misinform by insisting on the fps gain.

I have looked at your specs and I would say no suprise that SP2 doesn't cause you trouble. Even if it costs you 10% performance you would still be on the safe side.

So please let's not lecture one another - what you said about background processes / configurations etc is correct but I think I's better I'd not post anymore in this thread if you insist on the hair in the soup. I'm sorry.

[Gizzmoe]

I already said four or five times I am using the same image file on three different harddrives with the only relevant difference being SP2, so I don't know what you mean about the driver.
How did you install it?

Was it that you installed an XP that included SP1, then you installed all drivers (video, sound, chipset, DX9), made an image of the XP SP1, and then updated to SP2 and created an SP2 image?

If so that way is not correct. SP2 overwrites parts of the drivers you´ve originally installed. The correct procedure would have been to install XP+SP1, then update to SP2, then install the drivers.

So please let's not lecture one another - what you said about background processes / configurations etc is correct but I think I's better I'd not post anymore in this thread if you insist on the hair in the soup. I'm sorry.
This is not about looking for a hair in the soup, this is about making sure that you followed basic testing procedures. If you did and if you then can post some benchmark numbers that show that some games run up to 20% faster than on SP2 I would be willing to downgrade to SP1.

[GlobalExplorer]

I installed XP about three years ago and always make a new image as soon as I have installed new drivers or made important changes like setting up RivaTuner.

After that I install applications / games etc until the system is the usual mess and the first problem comes up. I then reinstall the image, make changes if necessary and create a new image. And repeat.

To answer your question, I installed SP1 and most of the drivers in no particular order, and installed SP2 on top of that (clean) system. I would assume this is a relative good way to compare the two SP's, otherwise I would never have posted.

Well that SP2 should be installed before the drivers is new to me. Which drivers exactly do you mean get updated by SP2? I could list the NForce (5.1), Detonator (93.71) and SIL (1.0.0.40) driver version I am using from the top of my head, and I would notice if they were changed by SP2. Last time I checked I was also using the latest Dx (October 2006 release), which runs very well. Mind I also often install newer drivers and use them a bit but don't save them into the image, because I prefer the older versions,

If you mean did I install Windows, drivers and the SP in the exact order that you suggest, then the answer is no. If that makes a difference you might know something that I don't.

Hey, you're asking tough questions man. Had I known what I was up for, I would have been a bit more careful with what I say ;)

GE

P.S. I stand behind the fps differences in GTL and GTR2 demo because I compared it with the fps counter. With all other games I cannot remember the numbers and I would expect fps differences usually not to exceed 5%, but the jerkieness was there. I would also expect that to go away if I disabled the 30 processes like you suggest, but it might be easier if I stick for SP1 for gaming.

[Gizzmoe]

Well that SP2 should be installed before the drivers is new to me. Which drivers exactly do you mean get updated by SP2?
I wish I could give you an exact answer, but I can´t. I´d installed SP2 more than two years ago, I recall having to reinstall at least the chipset and sound drivers because of some problems. SP2 (re-)installs/replaces a truckload of drivers, and to be sure that SP2 hasn´t downgraded some of essential drivers in some way the best thing is to install/reinstall the drivers after the installation of SP2.

[GlobalExplorer]

Thanks for the info about the network processes is a good idea and I will try that soon - on SP1.

[SUBMAN1]

Tests were done here, so no need to repeat that:

http://www.short-media.com/articles/does_service_pack_2_slow_you_down

FPS differences are there but not really conclusive. Stuttering however is what I meant and as this is a somewhat subjective thing, it is hard to measure. I have seen SP2 stutter much more with at least the following games: SHIII + GWX, LOMAC FC, GT Legends, GTR2.

I would like to hear what other people have found. Or is everyone already running SP2?
All those number in you link are within the margin of error by the way. WHat I gather from his testing is - inconclusive.

I have not seen the slowdowns myself in games like SH3. The only annoyance I get is a music pause once in a while in DW 1.04. THis could be caused by crappy drivers though, or bad sound module in the game. THen again, maybe it is because I typically run a host of services in the background.

-S

[GlobalExplorer]

All those number in you link are within the margin of error by the way. WHat I gather from his testing is - inconclusive.

I agree - but that's what I said when I posted it. If the question could just be settled by running a few benchmarks - we would know the answer by now.

My theory so far is that SP2 out of the box installs several services that can lead to slowdowns on a lot of systems, and must be disabled. SP1 is generally more lightweight and gives better performance out of the box, at least on systems like mine. Raw performance in terms of fps is about the same, with a neglectible difference of about 2-3 %. I did see differences of up to 20% on my computer, but it might be an extreme value.