Windows XP Patch Q811493 Frame Hit ??

[Guest Stanner1953]

I understand that MS had admitted that their Patch Q811493 for Win XPresulted in a significant reduction in the Frame Per Second (fps) in the FS 2002 and FS9.MS is now saying that the patch has been updated so it no longer causes significant reductions in FPS.Has anyone experience with the updated patch Q811493, and is the MSclaim correct, that there is no adverse impact to the FPS?Thank you.Stanner

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

Stanner,I posted a warning last Sunday on these pages with this warning. After contacting MS Technical help I was pointed to an updated file to download and installing this has resolved the problem.Here's the link. You'll need to copy and paste it for it to work.http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=enThe download link is on the right.Cheers,

[Guest N247BK]

Ray, I followed this link and installed the newer version (thanks loads for this "heads-up").There is no release date shown in "Control Panel", but the version number is: 20021212.173024.It seems this number came up before my "change".Can you confirm the newer version via this number?Thanks again!

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

Bob,I'm not sure where you got that number from, I can't find an equivalent anywhere. However, if you've downloaded the file the version number of the exe is 5.3.0016.5. If yours is the same then you have the same update as me.Cheers,

[W2DR 1,860]

Bob and Ray (makes a good radio show name :-) ) - Maybe this will help clear up the dates for this patch. The version number for the May 28th release should show as 20030424.101451 . The easiest way to verify what's on the system at present is to check the date of ntoskrnl.exe (WindowsSystem32ntoskrnl.exe). The date will show as 04-24-2003 if it's the latest version provided by the latest patch. If the date of this file shows as 12-12-2002 then the "problem" update is still there. But, not everyone who has applied this patch has experienced the framerate issue. So, if it ain't broke.....DougPS: One way to get the version number is Control PanelAdd Remove Programs, highlight the update and then click on the support information link. Others?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

Hi Doug,Thanks for the clarification. The date of my EXE is 24 April 2003, 08:57:50. The Version of Windows XP Hotfix (SP2) Q811493 is 20030424.101451. Looks like I'm okay.I must insist on Ray and Bob. Not that I'm pretentious of course :-lol Cheers,

[W2DR 1,860]

Too late Ray. Bob already got top billing. See http://www.radiohof.org/comedy/bobray.html :-) .Doug

[Guest kilo_sierra17]

Ok, I have tried to follow what you guys said, I downloaded the update from that link and I checked the file and I am no 100% sure if is the right one so here's a couple picutres if you guys could tell me please.http://members.shaw.ca/kstangrecki/help1.jpghttp://members.shaw.ca/kstangrecki/help2.jpg

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

Kurt,Looks good to me.Cheers,

[Guest Max Cowgill]

I d/l'd & installed this update twice now (both times uninstalling the previous patch beforehand, and rebooting afterward) and both times when I checked the version of ntoskrnl it listed the 12/12 file version. What's up with that?-Max Cowgill

[Guest kilo_sierra17]

Thanks Ray, so far so good, no slow down at all.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,947]

Max,It could be using the one held in your cache instead. That's what Microsoft said to me. Check for a folder called WUTEMP and see what's in it. You can safely delete everything including the folder itself. It might be on a drive other than your C. Mine is on my D.Once the cache is clear run the EXE again and you should be okay.Cheers,

[Guest Max Cowgill]

Thanks Ray,still no go however. I deleted the WUTemp folder (even though there was nothing in it) and re-installed the patch yet the ntoskrnl remains the same. Is having XP SP1 installed a prerequisite for this update? If that's the case, I can understand why it won't install since I don't have SP1 installed.-Max Cowgill

[Guest kilo_sierra17]

You do need to have SP1 installed for this to work.

[Guest Max Cowgill]

That would explain it. No SP1 for me.-Max Cowgill