Nope, 2000 does not support Hyperthreading. This feature must be turned of in the bios to load and run 2000.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 9:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [hlds] Windows 2000 or Windows 2003? First off, I run a network of 180 servers, each has Microsoft Windows 2000 Server (Advanced) installed and running in a Forest/Multi Brain environment with 2 PDC's per node. Whoever stated that Windows 2000 Server does NOT support HyperThreading developed by Intel/IBM, has not the slightest idea what they are discussing. In fact, the reason Windows 2000 Server was released was primarily for technological advancement and deployment of active hardware management and utilization. Windows 2000 Server (of any flavour) supports HyperThreading (which is just a fancy name for "multi-threading") and it's sole purpose was to handle this advancement in particular. What's more, if you run Windows 2000 Server Datacenter Edition SP3m, you're looking at the ability to scale up to 64 uni-syncronous processors (physically) and up to 2 terabytes or more of RAM (either physical state or node on a by-wire NLB, GLB) The only difference between Windows 2003 Server (Enterprise or Standard, not including Datacenter, since Advanced was done away with years ago) is a included SQL server, SMTP/POP server, Lite Exchange, "out of the box" Active Directory and PDC / DC deployment, "being locked down" out of the box, and a few other minor UI touch ups and packet interface handling exchange methods (IPv6 anyone?) and the removal of NetBUI, etc. If you don't understand what you're saying, please let those who do gain the time to respond. Especially when what you're responding to will possibly have an adverse affect on how another individual spends his/her time and money. To whomever it was that asked earlier, Windows 2000 Server (Standard, Advanced, Enterprise, or even Datacenter) does support "HyperThreading" and in standard form up to 4GB of physical RAM, etc. as well as up to 2 physical processors (Standard), multiplied by a factor of 2 each step upward. Additionally, CALs for RDP are interchangeable between Windows 2000 Server and Windows 2003 Server, so administration should you decide to license one over the other thru a purchase (since Windows 2000 Server can be purchased for close to $2,500 USD depending on the license you choose) and may be more cost efficient if you want to re-use that license, especially if it is off network (as MS has already stated this will be free for everyone in the next 5 months and forward). As a note, every server we deploy is currently at a minimum specification of two or more 2800mhz "F" class Intel Xeon processors and 2048MB of PC2700 DDR (ECC). And the taskman does show a multiplicity of processors and system information which does indeed state that "Multi-Threading" is capable and active. Read a book people. You shouldn't be spreading misinformation simply because the thought crosses your mind. If you don't KNOW, then either find out or don't post. I long for the good old days of this list... -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Guido Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 9:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [hlds] Windows 2000 or Windows 2003? Wow, thought 2k did support HT. Is there gonna be anyproblems if i have a HT support processor and motherboard but not the OS? ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] Windows 2000 or Windows 2003? > nope, 2k does not support hyperthreading > > and as mentioned earlier, both 2k and 2k3 are basically the same os, > just with slight differences. theres more setup that has to be done on > 2k3 since > its server software, and has nothing set up on install. > > as for whoever said xp for win servers, i would like u to send me some > of that fine jamacian weed you're smoking, cuz im out at the moment. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Donald Holl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 7:34 PM > Subject: Re: [hlds] Windows 2000 or Windows 2003? > > > > > Wait. Does Win2k Pro support HT? > > > > I doubt it. HT wasn't around when Windows 2000 came out so it would > > seem > to make sense that Windows 2003 can take advantage of HT and therefore > perform better. > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > > archives, > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
