Computer Problems? Computing.Net has over 1,000,000 posts about all things technology related! Click here to start participating now! Also, check out the New User Guide.
Windows 2000 NTFS
Name: Jesse Date: November 28, 2003 at 19:04:17 Pacific OS: Win 2000 CPU/Ram: 233mhz/96mb of RAM
Comment:
My computer has 233mhz and 96 mb of RAM, and I am currently running Windows 2000. I have a 40GB drive and I was wondering if I converted my current FAT32 to and NTFS would I see much improvement, or is my computer to old to handle the NTFS file system?
Name: wanderer Date: November 28, 2003 at 22:52:29 Pacific
Reply:
You won't see any performance difference converting to ntfs, which if you're running W2K, is supported
0
Response Number 2
Name: Glen Date: November 28, 2003 at 23:17:26 Pacific
Reply:
Agreed. It's not a matter of whether your computer will support it, the OS has to support and as Wanderer says, Window 2000 does. And no, you won't notice any performance improvement.
0
Response Number 3
Name: trvlr Date: November 28, 2003 at 23:45:02 Pacific
Reply:
For a given system adding RAM is the simplest/(cheapest?) way to improve performance - regardless of the OS involved. Logically, more current OS demand higher spec systems... (e.g. W2K, XP, W2K3).
A CPU upgrade may not be that startling an improvment/a benefit - if the bus speed etc. is not that current... Sometimes a Mobo etc. upgrade may be more cost effective...
A P2/233 is getting to be a little dated... My Dell is a P2/233-128Meg, and it runs OK with W2K - but obviously it's no flier compared to more current kit - but it does for me at present...; even will handle XP-Pro - although it is "a litle pedestrian..." for that OS.
Summary: Couple things... I agree with nu_design, more spelled out: If you use an NT kernel based system (NT, 2000, XP) use NTFS. They were designed for it and it is better than FAT32. The one and only reason...
Summary: Currently, I have 2 30GB 75GXP IBM Hard Drives striping RAID 0 with 64K stripe sizes. The cluster sizes on each of my partitions are default. I have been told by quite a few people that the cluster si...