windows xp or windows 2000

[t1955feb]

Hello to you all
is it true that windows 2000 is faster for encoding than windows xp
Mi buddy says he is going from 1270 encoding speed in win xp to 1400 in win 2000:)

[Clixo]

it depends of how good the machine is tuned best tune means best results eve with the same hardware if you hae xp better optimized than win2002 you will get better results and vice versa. personaly i like win 2000 better but as i said is personal

[markrb]

There are way to many "X" factors to be able to compare somebody else's machine to yours. Subtle differences can add up to make a large difference in speed. Even as far as small differences in Bios version etc.. If you want to see what is faster for you create a dual boot system and try both.

Personally I prefer XP over 2000. I have encoded in XP, 2000, and 98SE and I have not see any significant difference except in 98 I cannot do other things nearly as easily, but this is to be expected.

The best we can ever hope to be able to do when comparing machines is a rough idea of performance.

Mark

[badbert]

I saw no differences in win Xp than 2k. Possibly his machine is a dual processor, and the XP version is home rather than pro. XPHome does not support dual processors....I found this the hard way!!

[mrbass]

just remember 2000 or xp NTFS is required for video capturing if you wish your .avi not to split. I capture 60min tapes (63min) and it's 13GB avi file. I noticed no speed difference at all with win98, win2000, winXP. Win98 was stable with CCE etc. I prefer winxp now over win2000 since I no how to turn off the massive amounts of junk like system restore, error reporting, file indexing, ui effects, cd burning, etc.