Resource Differences between Pro and Home?

[Fr@nk]

Hi. Trying to decide whether I want to go with XP Pro or Home for my next
box. I've learned most of the "published" differences (from MS's site), but
was wondering what the difference is when it comes to resource usage. I
mean, I'm assuming there's a performance difference between the two, if
using the same RAM/HD speed/etc.

Is there a performance penalty at all if you go with Pro as opposed to Home?
Thanks.


Fr@nk

 

[R. McCarty]

The "Kernel" is the same in both Home & Professional. I've never
noticed a performance difference between them. As far as system
loading I think you'd find that a fresh Home and Pro install uses the
same core services. The feature differences are under the hood &
not really discernable.

 

[Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers]

Hi,

There is no difference in performance and resource usage. The core is the
same, it's the advanced security functions, and a few added features like
IIS, that are different.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Malke]

Hi. Trying to decide whether I want to go with XP Pro or Home for my
next box. I've learned most of the "published" differences (from MS's
site), but was wondering what the difference is when it comes to
resource usage. I mean, I'm assuming there's a performance difference
between the two, if using the same RAM/HD speed/etc.

Is there a performance penalty at all if you go with Pro as opposed to
Home? Thanks.

There is no difference in the operating system speed itself. Naturally,
there will be a difference if you are running something like an IIS
webserver on Pro (which you cannot do on Home). But for normal use, if
you had a Pro and a Home with the same programs installed on both on
identical machines, you would see no difference between the two. You
say you've read the comparison chart on the MS site. You should make
your choice depending on how you plan to use the computer.

Malke

 

[Guest]

I've got 3 XPPro systems and 6 XPHome systems. There's more of a difference
in the performance settings that you'll choose than there is between the 2
OS's. Don't let the names fool you, Home is a full-fledged OS and is fine if
you don't need the extra features that Pro offers.

I rarely use the extra features myself and I've been running Pro for many
years now (since it was in Beta).

 

[Ken Blake]

Hi. Trying to decide whether I want to go with XP Pro or Home for my
next box. I've learned most of the "published" differences (from MS's
site), but was wondering what the difference is when it comes to
resource usage. I mean, I'm assuming there's a performance difference
between the two, if using the same RAM/HD speed/etc.

Is there a performance penalty at all if you go with Pro as opposed
to Home? Thanks.

No, your assumption is wrong. There is no difference in performance or
resource usage between the two.

The only difference is that Professional has some extra features. If you
need or want some of those features, buy Professional. Otherwise, save some
money and buy Home.

 

[NoStop]

begin  trojan.vbs ... On Saturday 20 August 2005 01:42 pm, Ken Blake had
this to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

No, your assumption is wrong. There is no difference in performance or
resource usage between the two.

How can you make that statement when Pro obviously offers services that Home
does not? This would suggest that resource usage would be different.

 

[Fr@nk]

How can you make that statement when Pro obviously offers services that Home
does not? This would suggest that resource usage would be different.

Well, folks, which is it? Yes, it seems to me that if more _features_ are
actually used (assuming using a feature means another process has to run at
some point), more resources will be used.

Now, I understand if the extra "features" were things like extra programs:
as if Pro had a bunch more admin/power user/etc. utility programs. Of
course, if you don't use those programs, you don't inflict additional
program code on your system. But if you choose to run them, of course your
system is using more resources.

So does Pro contain any additional utilities such as advanced
diagnostic/tweaking programs?


Fr@nk

 

[Alias]

Your answer is quite vague (although I know exactly what each item refers
to), so it doesn't contribute to this thread at all. You also obviously
didn't read my last sentence/question prior to your post.

I'll spell out specific questions. Here's what I'd still like to know:

- Is there a speed/performance difference between Pro and Home, assuming
equal hardware?
- Does Pro take up more disk space? How much more usually?
- (repeat) Are there additional utility/diagnostic/etc. programs included
with Pro?
- Are there ANY utility/diagnostic/etc. programs included with Home?

Here are some reasons why I don't think I need to go with Pro: I do not
need
to join a domain. I do not need to connect to my computer via Remote
Desktop. Extra file security would be nice, but not essential.

However, here are some Power User things that I'd still like to have: A
Backup utility.

The one that comes with Pro sucks. Acronis is much better.

The usual DOS-type programs: ipconfig, ping, DOS Prompt,
etc.

In XP Home and Pro, it's called "cmd". No IPCONFIG in either. No DOS in
either. Both have MSCONFIG, unlike W2K.

I also like to "prune" the system down to only use resources I really
want to use. Can I do these things (in THIS paragraph) in Home?

Being as you haven't told us what you want to prune or what you want to use,
it is impossible to reply.

Probably most important: what about that speed difference? (I've read at
other sources that Pro is much faster)

Thanks.


Fr@nk

Being a bit anal, aren't you? The difference, if any, is not noticeable. I
have Pro on one machine and Home on another. The Home has an AMD XP 2200 and
the Pro has an AMD XP 3000+. Both have 1 gif of memory. The Home boots five
seconds faster than the Pro but it doesn't have an external modem and
Multitask Printer/Scanner attached. Big deal.

Alias