wevsspot Posted May 12, 2008 I don't notice that my computer runs any faster. For me the primary advantage of SP3 has been the reduction of Hotfixes and Updates after a fresh install of XP. I've already got the SP3 Standalone, so I may try and create a slipstream installation CD and see if it works on the next build. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuppA-SnipA Posted May 13, 2008 hey guys, read http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2303830,00.asp if you want to i did get a 2 FPS increase in Counter Strike Source with sp3, using the stress test in the game Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ReelFiles Posted May 13, 2008 XP always has to be installed first, otherwise it just overwrites the bootloader, go figure it's MS afterall lol. If there is a speed increase with SP3 it's marginal for me, I definitely haven't noticed anything significant. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Waco Posted May 13, 2008 XP always has to be installed first, otherwise it just overwrites the bootloader, go figure it's MS afterall lol. I can't think of a single OS that doesn't overwrite the bootloader... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuppA-SnipA Posted May 13, 2008 (edited) If there is a speed increase with SP3 it's marginal for me, I definitely haven't noticed anything significant. ya theres hardly a difference, foxconn pc runs the same way it did on sp2 Edited May 13, 2008 by SuppA-SnipA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ReelFiles Posted May 13, 2008 I can't think of a single OS that doesn't overwrite the bootloader... Well let's see; Linux doesn't kill XP's bootloader, OS-X doesn't, Vista doesn't... but dare try to install XP after one of those... XP always gets installed first. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syngensmyth Posted May 19, 2008 I had the beta when it first came out. Seems harmless but no mysterious advantage. I slipstreamed the final just because it keeps me from having to update. Yes the updates to SP2 probably weren't even necessary (as mentioned) but I always gave in and did them eventually ... no good reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hardnrg Posted May 19, 2008 Well let's see; Linux doesn't kill XP's bootloader, OS-X doesn't, Vista doesn't... but dare try to install XP after one of those... XP always gets installed first. well, to be fair, 2 out of 3 of those OSs didn't exist when XP came out, so how could it detect an OS that didn't exist yet? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nemo Posted May 22, 2008 Some users are reporting issues with SP3 and Symantec/Norton security products - http://www.overclockersclub.com/news/22410/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LoArmistead Posted May 22, 2008 Also, ditch the SP3 beta and download the full version if you haven't already. SP3 beta screw with Remote Desktop. I had to uninstall it and install the final releae in order to be able to remote connect to anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syngensmyth Posted May 22, 2008 Some users are reporting issues with SP3 and Symantec/Norton security products - http://www.overclockersclub.com/news/22410/ I find this shocking! Someone still uses Symantec Security? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill_v Posted May 24, 2008 Over the past day I've installed SP3 on the two machines in my signature. After a defrag, I don't see much difference in performance; I haven't done any benchmarks as yet. As for stability it's so far, so good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
