# Windows XP?



## Dave-H (Aug 9, 2021)

Hi, GPU-Z 2.41 won't run on Windows XP.
When I run it, nothing happens.
2.40 seems to be fine.
Has XP support been dropped, I can't see anything in the changelog for 2.41 to that effect?
Thanks, Dave.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 10, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> Hi, GPU-Z 2.41 won't run on Windows XP.
> When I run it, nothing happens.
> 2.40 seems to be fine.
> Has XP support been dropped, I can't see anything in the changelog for 2.41 to that effect?
> Thanks, Dave.


XP support has been dropped. No real need for continued XP support as no hardware supporting XP has been released in a few years. So if you need to run GPUZ on XP, just stick with an older version and call it good.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 10, 2021)

Use older version


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 10, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> Has XP support been dropped, I can't see anything in the changelog for 2.41 to that effect?


GPU-Z fully supports Windows XP and will continue to do so for as long as possible.

Just to confirm, 2.40 works fine, 2.41 does not?


----------



## pavle (Aug 10, 2021)

I tested it and v2.41 starts and dies (as observed in Task Manager). In Windows XP Pro of course.


----------



## qubit (Aug 10, 2021)

pavl3 said:


> I tested it and v2.41 starts and dies (as observed in Task Manager).


Which operating system did you try it on?


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 10, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> XP support has been dropped.


Better say nothing if you don't know....


----------



## Dave-H (Aug 10, 2021)

I unpacked the 2.41 file with Universal Extractor, and when I run the unpacked version I get the message "The helper module .NET Framework 4.6 could not be found" so I guess that's the problem. I don't think .NET 4.6 is available for XP.
Also I'm getting in the Windows System Event Log "Application popup: GPU-Z 2.41.0_unpacked.exe - Entry Point Not Found : The procedure entry point AcquireSRWLockExclusive could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.DLL."


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 10, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> GPU-Z fully supports Windows XP and will continue to do so for as long as possible.
> 
> Just to confirm, 2.40 works fine, 2.41 does not?


Wow, really? Ok. My bad.


P4-630 said:


> Better say nothing if you don't know....


To be fair, I tried running the latest version on my install of XP and it wouldn't run either. It's not unreasonable to conclude that XP support had been dropped as new hardware support for same doesn't exist anymore.


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 10, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> AcquireSRWLockExclusive


Grrrr .. all I did was update my Visual Studio 2019 version to the latest, without touching the compiler (still using v141_xp). But apparently they made some change that uses this API call, which isn't available on Windows XP. Will search for a solution


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 10, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Grrrr .. all I did was update my Visual Studio 2019 version to the latest, without touching the compiler (still using v141_xp). But apparently they made some change that uses this API call, which isn't available on Windows XP. Will search for a solution


Wait, microsoft pulled a sneaky? What a shock...


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 10, 2021)

STL/stl/src/primitives.hpp at c76042bb32ecc838f40eac4374fc412b4c7374ef · microsoft/STL
					

MSVC's implementation of the C++ Standard Library. - STL/stl/src/primitives.hpp at c76042bb32ecc838f40eac4374fc412b4c7374ef · microsoft/STL




					github.com
				




there's the problem


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 10, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> STL/stl/src/primitives.hpp at c76042bb32ecc838f40eac4374fc412b4c7374ef · microsoft/STL
> 
> 
> MSVC's implementation of the C++ Standard Library. - STL/stl/src/primitives.hpp at c76042bb32ecc838f40eac4374fc412b4c7374ef · microsoft/STL
> ...


So does this force your hand or is there a workaround? Let's be fair though, there's not much point in supporting XP going forward.. It's not for a lack of users, but for a lack of new hardware.


----------



## pavle (Aug 10, 2021)

Classic systems are good to have around, lightweight and working. Microsoft and their primitives can go fly a kite.


----------



## Audioave10 (Aug 10, 2021)

pavl3 said:


> Classic systems are good to have around, lightweight and working. Microsoft and their primitives can go fly a kite.


I swear, my offline XP 32bit PC is quicker to load than my Windows 10 Pro main PC.


----------



## Naki (Aug 10, 2021)

Audioave10 said:


> I swear, my offline XP 32bit PC is quicker to load than my Windows 10 Pro main PC.



SSD for both?


----------



## Audioave10 (Aug 10, 2021)

Naki said:


> SSD for both?


WD 640GB Black for the XP........WD 2TB Gold for the W10 Pro
no SSD for either of these


----------



## pavle (Aug 10, 2021)

Sweet - classic fast and industrial disks - I use such meself. Good stuff.


----------



## Naki (Aug 11, 2021)

Audioave10 said:


> WD 640GB Black for the XP........WD 2TB Gold for the W10 Pro
> no SSD for either of these



Horrible!  Lousy comparison too.
Get a proper SSD, even a medium priced SATA 3 SSD will be MUCH better/faster than any "Enterprise HDD", be that 15K RPM, 20K RPM or even 30 (if those existed).
Then compare the loading time of WinXP in MBR mode with loading Windows 10 64-bit in UEFI mode on your new PC.  You should see a big improvement.

IF you had an enterprise SSD then I would be really impressed, as those cost a fortune and the mobo+CPU to support them also do. 
But a HDD as main drive!? -- this is bad use in the 21st century, not impressed.
You are using your new PC the wrong way. 

NOTE: I am not against HDDs. Some folks switched to only SSDs for internal drives.
I don't do that, all my PCs + laptop here have at least ONE SSD on them, as well as at least ONE HDD (often, several of them except on laptop, for understandable laptop limitation reasons) .


----------



## Audioave10 (Aug 11, 2021)

Naki said:


> Horrible!  Lousy comparison too.
> Get a proper SSD, even a medium priced SATA 3 SSD will be MUCH better/faster than any "Enterprise HDD", be that 15K RPM, 20K RPM or even 30 (if those existed).
> Then compare the loading time of WinXP in MBR mode with loading Windows 10 64-bit in UEFI mode on your new PC.  You should see a big improvement.
> 
> ...


I was implying that a modern MS OS has so much junk & telemetry it sometimes starts slower. Both PC's are plenty fast enough. This is a Hobby for me.


----------



## Naki (Aug 11, 2021)

This is work & hobby for me too.  I am a disk drive maniac, I probably have 3-4 times the disk space I really need (across several PCs of mine)... 
(Don't forget external storage, I have plenty of that too - USB 2.0/3.0 enclosures, USB 3.0 docking stations of various sizes & port numbers, USB flash drives ranging from very old 1 GB Corsair up to 512 GB expensive Kingston HyperX Savage, and lots more in between).

Lacking an SSD is an issue, especially on the new PC -- SSD in UEFI mode will be very faster to boot Windows 10 OS, compared with the 2 TB WD Gold HDD you use now. 
And you can always put the HDD, or several HDDs as secondary drives.
You will find that SSD prices have went considerably down since 5-6 years, or even 10 years ago.


----------



## Dave-H (Aug 11, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Grrrr .. all I did was update my Visual Studio 2019 version to the latest, without touching the compiler (still using v141_xp). But apparently they made some change that uses this API call, which isn't available on Windows XP. Will search for a solution



I don't know if this will be of any help.
https://msfn.org/board/topic/182888-how-vs-makes-working-code-still-incompatible/
It's obviously a problem that others trying to keep things XP compatible have run into!


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 11, 2021)

Yeah this is exactly the issue, no solution in that thread though. Worst case is I go back to the last working version of the CRT library


----------



## GerKNG (Aug 11, 2021)

pavl3 said:


> Sweet - classic fast and industrial disks - I use such meself. Good stuff.


yeah who doesn't love boot times counted in minutes and an overall barely useable system


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 11, 2021)

GerKNG said:


> yeah who doesn't love boot times counted in minutes and an overall barely useable system


I mean I boot in less than 15 seconds but who counts anymore.


----------



## Cheese_On_tsaot (Aug 11, 2021)

After moving fully to SSD I can't live without them, I do still own HDD's but just for data storage.
The noise cut down is worth it also.

A side note, I use a HDD on my XP computer and it is fast. But that's because it is XP.


----------



## Splinterdog (Aug 11, 2021)

This thread has now inspired me to install XP on an SSD in one of my retro Pentium 4 machines.
That's going to be fun


----------



## Naki (Aug 11, 2021)

Splinterdog said:


> This thread has now inspired me to install XP on an SSD in one of my retro Pentium 4 machines.
> That's going to be fun



For sure!  If it lacks SATA ports, you can use a PATA <--> SATA adapter.


----------



## Splinterdog (Aug 11, 2021)

Naki said:


> For sure!  If it lacks SATA ports, you can use a PATA <--> SATA adapter.


Yes, it has two SATA ports (Intel D865GBF) and it's interesting because I've never tried this before.
*Probably way off topic, since the thread is about GPU-Z, lol.

I've never seen XP run this fast before and it was a very simple install - MBR and SATA drivers on a floppy, nice!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 11, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Yeah this is exactly the issue, no solution in that thread though. Worst case is I go back to the last working version of the CRT library


Will you lose anything reverting back?


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

I want to ask Can GPU Z 2.42 be executed on Windows XP?


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 27, 2021)

Yes. 

Bah, I forgot to mention it in the changelog


----------



## Naki (Sep 27, 2021)

This is great!
But does Installer work too!?


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 27, 2021)

Naki said:


> This is great!
> But does Installer work too!?


The installer does not work due to Innosetup's design choices and is not available under Windows XP


----------



## pavle (Sep 27, 2021)

As a sidenote for XP: everyone disable *"lastaccessupdate"* of the filesystem.


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 27, 2021)

pavle said:


> As a sidenote for XP: everyone disable *"lastaccessupdate"* of the filesystem.


Filesystem writes are cached and combined into one larger write when going to disk, this won't have a significant impact on anything. Do you have any data to support this change?


----------



## Naki (Sep 27, 2021)

pavle said:


> As a sidenote for XP: everyone disable *"lastaccessupdate"* of the filesystem.



I agree with W1zzard on this one. Just use a quick, 7200 RPM HDD instead of very slow one, and/or use an SSD and then you need not break your NTFS system to get "better speeds". 
(No need to go to any 10K, 15K RPM HDDs, as most of those are very old now, so not worth the risk for too little gain.)


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

Does TechPowerUp provide GPU Z version that does not need to be installed


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 27, 2021)

As far as i remember 
When you first Run the executable  your offered the choice of running the installer or running it as a stand alone program ie no install


----------



## Dave-H (Sep 27, 2021)

Indeed so.
There is also an option in the settings to run the installer, which now pops up a message saying that it needs at least Windows Vista if you try to run it on XP.
All works fine as it is though, thanks @W1zzard!


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> Indeed so.
> There is also an option in the settings to run the installer, which now pops up a message saying that it needs at least Windows Vista if you try to run it on XP.
> All works fine as it is though, thanks @W1zzard!


In GPU Z 2.40 version, these two installation methods Can still be executed on Windows XP Is it?


----------



## puma99dk| (Sep 27, 2021)

Maybe it's about time to start up my Windows XP Retro Gaming PC and test out the newest version of GPU-Z.

Running Intel Core i3-4130, Asus P9D-I, 4GB DDR ECC RAM, MSI GeForce GTX 750 Ti TF, KingFast 240GB SATA SSD


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 27, 2021)

regorwin56 said:


> Does TechPowerUp provide GPU Z version that does not need to be installed


You can just copy the GPU-Z exe onto your system, run it, and never install it



regorwin56 said:


> In GPU Z 2.40 version, these two installation methods Can still be executed on Windows XP Is it?


Our installer uses InnoSetup. At some point they updated their Visual Studio compiler, which results in EXE files that don't run on Windows XP anymore. For GPU-Z it's getting increasingly difficult to continue supporting Windows XP, but it's an important capability for me, so I go the extra mile to make this work


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 27, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> For GPU-Z it's getting increasingly difficult to continue supporting Windows XP, but it's an important capability for me, so I go the extra mile to make this work


I'm curious, with XP now completely out of support, hardware wise, and most software having moved along as well, why the effort to support it? Feature set updates that you want to ensure are backported? Or is it a bit of a nostalgia thing maybe?


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> You can just copy the GPU-Z exe onto your system, run it, and never install it
> 
> 
> Our installer uses InnoSetup. At some point they updated their Visual Studio compiler, which results in EXE files that don't run on Windows XP anymore. For GPU-Z it's getting increasingly difficult to continue supporting Windows XP, but it's an important capability for me, so I go the extra mile to make this work


I just want to know if the version before 2.40 can be installed on Windows XP normally


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 27, 2021)

Naki said:


> SSD for both?


While XP does not support the TRIM function needed for SSD's, most SSD controllers natively manage their own drive TRIM functions. As such, modern SSDs can be used safely on XP or even Win2k & 9X.



regorwin56 said:


> I just want to know if the version before 2.40 can be installed on Windows XP normally


Try it. It'll run in portable mode if it won't install.


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> While XP does not support the TRIM function needed for SSD's, most SSD controllers natively manage their own drive TRIM functions. As such, modern SSDs can be used safely on XP or even Win2k & 9X.
> 
> 
> Try it. It'll run in portable mode if it won't install.


I need to wait until the weekend to test my Windows XP
I just want to know the answer so that when someone asks me this question, I can answer him
There are quite a few people around me who can use old graphics cards on XP
And now GPUZ is still adding support for some old cards


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 27, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm curious, with XP now completely out of support, hardware wise, and most software having moved along as well, why the effort to support it? Feature set updates that you want to ensure are backported? Or is it a bit of a nostalgia thing maybe?


People still want to know about their graphics hardware?



regorwin56 said:


> I need to wait until the weekend to test my Windows XP
> I just want to know the answer so that when someone asks me this question, I can answer him
> There are quite a few people around me who can use old graphics cards on XP


Please test it and report back to us


----------



## ThrashZone (Sep 27, 2021)

Hi,
I use the ROG version think it has both install or portable options can't remember I don't see the popup message anymore to install so maybe it had a box to check to not ask again ?
Like the dark mode


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> People still want to know about their graphics hardware?
> 
> 
> Please test it and report back to us


Hmm... You may need to ask the person who posted this post for help. I also watched him initiate a discussion and noticed this.



Dave-H said:


> Hi, GPU-Z 2.41 won't run on Windows XP.
> When I run it, nothing happens.
> 2.40 seems to be fine.
> Has XP support been dropped, I can't see anything in the changelog for 2.41 to that effect?
> Thanks, Dave.


In GPU Z 2.40 version, are all installation methods still executable on Windows XP?


----------



## pavle (Sep 27, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Filesystem writes are cached and combined into one larger write when going to disk, this won't have a significant impact on anything. Do you have any data to support this change?


Here's data to back it up: M$ alone turns Last_access_update OFF on all NT6.x windoze - that is 6.0 (Vista) 6.1 (7) 6.2 (8) 6.3 (8.1) and of course least but not last 6.4 (10).  
All this does it prevents useless disk accesses for nothing (confirmed by my tests), but the choice is up to the user, of course.


----------



## RJARRRPCGP (Sep 27, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Grrrr .. all I did was update my Visual Studio 2019 version to the latest, without touching the compiler (still using v141_xp). But apparently they made some change that uses this API call, which isn't available on Windows XP. Will search for a solution


This is why there's a project for extending XP functions, to work around the artificial limitations.


----------



## Splinterdog (Sep 27, 2021)

2.4 works fine with my XP set up, except it crashes when using the built in screenshot option. No worries because prn screen/paint does the job.


----------



## Dave-H (Sep 27, 2021)

regorwin56 said:


> In GPU Z 2.40 version, are all installation methods still executable on Windows XP?


As far as I remember, no.
You'll need an earlier version if you want to do a full install on XP, but I can't tell you which one is the last that works I'm afraid.


----------



## Naki (Sep 27, 2021)

This has not been working for a while now. 
So, yes, latest version with installer working is not 2.40 or 2.39 -- it is more versions back. 
Exact version it is, maybe W1zzard knows best.


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> As far as I remember, no.
> You'll need an earlier version if you want to do a full install on XP, but I can't tell you which one is the last that works I'm afraid.


Understand So is the GPUZ installer actually unavailable in version 2.40?  It's not that it became unavailable after 2.42 was repaired


----------



## Dave-H (Sep 27, 2021)

Actually I've just checked the original report about this on MSFN, and 2.41 was the first version reported as not installing on XP, so it may well be that 2.40 is actually OK.
The problem occurred when @W1zzard changed the authoring software version.


----------



## pavle (Sep 27, 2021)

Splinterdog said:


> 2.4 works fine with my XP set up, except it crashes when using the built in screenshot option. No worries because prn screen/paint does the job.
> 
> View attachment 218417


Some errors in that GPU-Z for GeForce3: A) it's got 8 TMU's and B) bandwidth is 2x the reported ~7.4GB/s C) Texture fillrate is 1.6GTexels.


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 27, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> Actually I've just checked the original report about this on MSFN, and 2.41 was the first version reported as not installing on XP, so it may well be that 2.40 is actually OK.
> The problem occurred when @W1zzard changed the authoring software version.


This is the reason why I confirmed with version 2.40. I want to know if GPUZ version 2.40 can be installed normally on Windows XP.


----------



## Dave-H (Sep 27, 2021)

Having now reviewed the history, the answer to that is yes.


----------



## Splinterdog (Sep 27, 2021)

pavle said:


> Some errors in that GPU-Z for GeForce3: A) it's got 8 TMU's and B) bandwidth is 2x the reported ~7.4GB/s C) Texture fillrate is 1.6GTexels.


Thanks for the observation, but I really don't mind as it plays NOLF perfectly well


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 28, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> Actually I've just checked the original report about this on MSFN, and 2.41 was the first version reported as not installing on XP, so it may well be that 2.40 is actually OK.
> The problem occurred when @W1zzard changed the authoring software version.


The running status of different versions of GPU Z installer on Windows XP
Version 2.30 is installed normally in Windows XP
2.31-2.35 version crashes cannot be installed
After 2.36, a notification that requires Windows Vista will pop up


----------



## pavle (Sep 28, 2021)

I always use the zipped version and the latest, 2.42, works on XP, the screenshot feature does not - "couldn't quantize bitmap".


----------



## Naki (Sep 28, 2021)

Try the new 2.43 version!  








						TechPowerUp GPU-Z (v2.52.0) Download
					

GPU-Z is a lightweight utility designed to give you all information about your video card and GPU.




					www.techpowerup.com
				




Please tell us how it goes.


----------



## regorwin56 (Sep 28, 2021)

pavle said:


> I always use the zipped version and the latest, 2.42, works on XP, the screenshot feature does not - "couldn't quantize bitmap".


Version 2.43 is released today, there is a fix for Windows XP screenshots


----------



## Dave-H (Sep 28, 2021)

2.43 is working fine thanks!


----------



## Naki (Sep 28, 2021)

Dave-H said:


> 2.43 is working fine thanks!


Great! Thanks for letting us know. 
You are welcome.


----------



## pavle (Sep 28, 2021)

Mighty fine mighty fine! Thank you.


----------

