Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

I've just read the last Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison published today by Short-Media.

It's an interesting comparison focused on performance comparison on various fields, and the official results are that "Windows XP Professional with only Service Pack 1 installed is faster 2/3 of the time... The test PC equipped with Windows XP Professional Service Pack 1 was an average of 0.5% faster than the same hardware with Service Pack 2 installed. The percentage difference between faster and slower is insignificantly small".

Personally, I can't observ these results on my reality... I've installed XP SP2 on 3 different machines (on my desktop P4 3Ghz with 1Gb Ram, on my laptop P4 2,6Ghz with 512Mb Ram and on an Athlon XP at work) and all the machines have a terrible slow down on performances (plus other problems on some cases). Windows XP SP1 has (for me) better performances than XP SP2 and my personal machines are (at the moment) not upgraded to the last Service Pack.

Print | posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 8:16 AM

Comments on this post

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
To be honest, i can't say I've noticed any difference one way or the other. At work, the computer is just slow, no matter what.
At home, it's fast as ever. *shrugs*
Left by Geoff Appleby on Oct 18, 2004 5:39 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I'm really curious to see if there are performance differences between the installation of XP SP2 on a fresh machine (install XP and then XP SP2) and the installation of XP SP2 on a machine where XP SP1 is just installed. I think that this could be the key for the performance slowdown.
Left by Stefano Demiliani on Oct 18, 2004 5:43 AM

# An XP SP2 annoyance

Requesting Gravatar...
An XP SP2 annoyance
Left by An attempt at structured thought on Oct 17, 2004 11:47 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
.05% is truly negligible given the overall value delivered with SP2 by emphasizing security by default for a change.
Left by Paul on Oct 18, 2004 10:22 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I expierienced a severe slowdown with SP2 that appears to be unresolveable. NO MATTER WHAT the graphics settings on MS FS2004 are set to I get less than 7FPS, I got 20FPS with all settings maxed with SP1. I hate to loose all of the updated functionality like the popup blocker but I'm going to have to uninstall it. I DO NOT recommend SP2 to people who use thier PC for graphics intensive apps.
Left by Victor on Nov 24, 2004 4:17 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I totally agree with you folks sp2 it sux. If you are already using sp1 then just keep on with it......... You will be wasting your time trying to update your system to sp2..... I had it and within 2 weeks I had to remove it from my system...
Left by carlos papi angulo on Nov 29, 2004 1:07 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I've noticed on my corporate network that SP2 has caused significant slowdowns. This is true with legacy apps (designed before XP), and especially with Outlook and Outlook Express. Wait times for the inital load on these apps can be minutes, running on P4 machines.

So far, I haven't found any information on how to resolve this. I'm guessing Microsoft is working on something...
Left by Josh on Dec 01, 2004 6:16 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I find windows xp sp2 very, very annoying. everytime you install a windows update, a little popup comes up to prompt you to restart. and it pops up every 5 minutes or so! and it's so-called, "new and improved security centre" and popup blocker on ie aren't that helpful either. the windows firewall only blocks incoming connections. so if there's a trojan on your computer, it won't do anything about it. and the sp2 popup blocker blocks an awful lot of things that you want to see, and it leaves out an awful of of annoying popups. anyway, yeah, I got rid of sp2 and it's all good now
Left by cyblord on Dec 04, 2004 1:36 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Someone made the comment about SP2 being installed on machines with SP1 and those without SP1. I have SP1 installed and when I downloaded SP2 (for the 4th time, even requested the CD from Microsoft) all installs slowed me down. I have some friends who have XP Pro edition and they say they have no problems with SP2. Do most of you have XP Home Editions.
Left by opus on Dec 05, 2004 3:21 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
i have had sp2 for a month or so now and on the video games i play it always freezes and pauses for a second or longer. It never had done this until i installe sp2. So i thought if i mixed sp2 with my xp cd and did a full clean fresh install it'd work better but nope. same thing. I cant reformat my pc again to remove it because I'd hack to back up all my files and burn them and thats just more annoying. I hope that that released a patch to fix the slow down problem because it really sucks.
Overall i guess the system is fine. Just when i play games. even simple java games pause and freeze for a second.
very annoying especially when you are playin online multiplayer games and it freezes and when u r able to move again you are dead.
I wouldnt recommened it right now.
Left by josh on Dec 15, 2004 12:56 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
u all r stupid idiots!! go n learn to install xp! only then u wud know how to work with service packs ! no offence but that what it is ! u really need to brush up ur knowledge
of windows os !
Left by jontebond on Dec 24, 2004 4:25 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Hehe, this coming from someoe who can't spek english.
Left by DigiNep on Dec 30, 2004 4:03 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Service Pack 2 will OBVIOUSLY cause performance degradation as the "new features" are there to correctify any security holes Microsoft had overlooked upon their initial XP and SP1 releases. Overall people, if you're using that computer for Non-Online gaming, keep XP Fresh (SP1 is optional), if you must be online, SP1 with ALL windows critical and recommended updates will secure you from a large amount of the threats online. Service Packs are not mandatory, and in most cases will cause undesired operation of your computer, as you're used to your P4 going FAST, not loading extra security features and unncessary graphics to just notify you that pop-up blocking is enabled or to install antivirus software. Personally I believe Microsoft should revamp SP2 and come with a SP2.1 Final that fixes any loading problems and correct any loose ends that are causing this BS we are seeing on all our PCs today.
Left by Dale on Jan 03, 2005 12:18 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I hate sp2. When I installed it, and all my friends experienced the same thing, my window start and shutdown times went from 8 seconds to 4 minutes. That's unrealistic in todays fast paced computers. As for gaming machines, avoid sp2 like the plague. It knocked my fps from 200+ down to 70 and I paid a lot of money to have that 200+. As for me I'm sticking with sp1. :-)
Left by Josh in caliq on Mar 08, 2005 10:50 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Here is a link to someone who has supposebly tested out both sp1 and sp2 with videogames.
[url]http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/games/expert/durham_sp2perf.mspx[/url]

NOTE: these r all fresh installed copies of xp (my guess is with slipstreamed service packs).

I have tried the whole sp1 - sp2 that wuz a joke!! reforamtted and then use a slipstreamed version of sp2, no probs!
(Nlite)
Left by Brian on Apr 09, 2005 1:12 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Yes, I've observed too that slipstreamed version of XP SP2 works good.
Left by Stefano Demiliani on Apr 09, 2005 3:56 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
xp sp1 is much better than sp2, i observe that in many times!!
Left by freak on Jan 06, 2006 5:59 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
when i had sp 1 installed,everything ran smooth...now that i have sp2,the applications i didnt have a problem with earlier give me ahard time.Sometimes it just says that an error has occured and needs to close.Im tellin ya..if you got sp1 keep it that way.
Left by CJ on Feb 14, 2006 7:18 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
Most Multimedia programs require SP2 for Windows xp to run. While it might be hard to directly notice the difference between the two I believe sp2 has more advanced componets such as DirectX needed to support other programs.
Left by Emmanuel K. Ndiho on Aug 22, 2006 6:56 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
no matter how slow the computer as long as
you have a western digital harddrive with
80 pin cable,xp pro with NTFS format the
drive at least 100gig as 64kb clusters
this alone will speed up your roadrunner
internet TWICE as you are now getting...
me 10 times faster boot,twice internet
2134 to 4338

only disavantage if you move large files
use a usb external firelite-smart drive
with ntfs

Left by WOLF77 on Nov 03, 2006 12:18 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
real preformance is to scrap 32 bit os forever
AMD DUAL CORE X2 ROCKS with WINDOWS XP PRO
X64 with 4gig of ram there is nothing better
64 bit rocks...
Left by outdated os on Nov 20, 2006 7:46 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
my experience abt. xp sp2 is good/bad both i dont know how many copy of winxp sp2 is in market But when i decided to install winxp sp2 in my system i luckly got XP Cd was excellent this cd was full and it had no space this cd was 595 mb but unfortunatelly installation of six month my xp infected by a virus (i frequently used xp in this 6 month without n e antivirus of firewall) and i misplaced my xp cd i had to get another cd of win xp sp2 my problem started from that day when i installed win xp sp2 from another cd this cd was not full and it only 100 m.b. space used. my prob. is that my xp is getting infected by a virus called "win32 sdbot 4143" this idiot trojan slowdown my pc and i m not able to surf single page. i have reinstalled xp again and again in past week but i didnt find n e solution.

can n e one tell me how to solve this?
which antivrus will be best to remove tronaj adn work my xp properly.

Left by piyush trivedi on Jan 15, 2007 4:42 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
ive ran sp2 ALONG ime needed to shove it on due to dual core amd drivers, i find it sluggish alittle more, sp1 is alot less greedy towards the core os, recommend sticking to sp1
Left by james on Jun 01, 2007 2:42 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
win xp SP2 has a lot of troubles with VIA based motherboards between 2001/2002; after installation a lot of blue error screens appears in these system instead of AMD or Pentium processors.

Also I noticed a degraded in graphics capabilities over 50.000 verts at same time with 3D studio max, about 10 fps less than SP1 and the memory hungry is very up; a system based on 133 mhz SDRAM is worse than the same system with SP1
Left by Masteries on Dec 16, 2007 2:39 AM

# re:difrence between xp1 and xp2

Requesting Gravatar...
pls tell me what is the diffrence between both of them
i am still waiting.
Left by abhishek on Jul 01, 2008 9:42 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
PROBLEM!! Im not a real computer literate guy, but i can do a bit.I had the same on my old HP desktop unit. Formatted the HD and reinstalled just Xp. Mucho faster than the prior SP2, but heres my problem now- Ive installed the same copied XP cd to 3 computers now, dads hp, friends hp and mums compaq laptop. all of them were slow and had SP2 installed. Now after installing off the cd i have lost sound, and the computers wont even recognise the soundcard being there?? how can i find out what driver i need?? I managed to find the drvers on the net for the modem(using another computer obviously) but as for the audio drivers, who knows???? also i cant install AVG 8.0 or any windows update program as it doesnt recopnise the product key.. any thoughts?? where would i find an XP cd that will have the drivers i need and will have a key that is recognised by windows! Im not interested in paying $200 or whatever it is for a new operating system, the computer cost only about $150. cheers
Left by brendon99 on Aug 21, 2008 10:53 AM

# replica jewelry

Requesting Gravatar...

Requesting Gravatar...
pls tell me what is the diffrence between both of them
i am still waiting.
Left by replica jewelry on Apr 29, 2010 5:40 AM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information
Left by Vincere al Blackjack online on May 06, 2010 1:29 PM

# re: Windows XP SP1 vs SP2 Performance comparison

Requesting Gravatar...
st PC equipped with Windows XP Professional Service Pack 1 was an average of 0.5% faster than the same hardware with Service Pack 2 installed. The percentage difference between faster and slower is insignificantly small".

Personally, I can't observ these results on my re
Left by wholesale laptop adapter on May 23, 2010 2:38 PM

Your comment:

 (will show your gravatar)
 
Please add 8 and 1 and type the answer here: