Windows XP SP3 now available via Windows Update

Windows XP SP3 is finally here for those that use Windows Update, and here is a direct link to the stand-alone version of SP3 for x86 XP systems (32 bit). Thanks Bink! Neowin reader WindowsNT says: "There won't be a 64bit version until Windows Server 2003 hits SP3 since they share the same code base."

Here is an interesting article regarding SP3 performance, ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3 users will enjoy a performance boost over SP2. When will people learn that Vista ain't all bad!

Windows® XP Service Pack 3 (SP3) includes all previously released updates for the operating system. This update also includes a small number of new functionalities, which do not significantly change customers' experience with the operating system. This white paper summarizes what is new in Windows XP SP3.

Download: Stand-alone installer for Windows XP SP3 English, 32 Bit (316 MB)
Link: Service Pack 3 for Windows XP via Windows Update (Size varies)

Read more for additional languages..

Additional languages:


Thanks to our readers for submitting the different language stand-alone installers!

Known issues:
On some hardware configurations, you may encounter the Windows XP SP3 BSoD Endless Reboot Loop with Stop c0000139 on GDI32.dll Error, follow this guide to repair your XP installation. Thanks daPhoenix for the tip!

Link: Explanation on MSDN TechNet forums

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

i'm Initiative donates $1.3M in its first year.

Next Story

Experts: Don't blame Microsoft for mass site defacements

138 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3 users will enjoy a performance boost over SP2. When will people learn that Vista ain't all bad!

My Systems:-
Windows XP SP2 Pentium 4 2.8Ghz AGP 128 Meg ATI Sapphire.
Windows Vista Home Premium 64 Core 2 Duo 2.3Ghz x 2 PCI-E ATI x1550 256Meg.

Which "performs" best? Put it this way... when I make a typo on the XP machine, I don't have to wait 3 seconds for the machine to fill in what I have already typed before I know how far to delete back to as I just did here.

Vista has some neat tricks, and vastly improved security. XP outperforms it by miles. Of course 2K still outperforms XP, if you can put up with the shabby anti-aliasing and goofy dinky 256 colour Icons. Just replace explorer, and get Window Blinds going, should be fine.

Performance is all about optimising for the things people usually do. Vista optimises for all the things I almost never do, and uses all the resources I desperately need to achieve those optimisations. The x64 versions of Vista are much better than the XP x64 versions, if it weren't for that, I would stick with XP/2K, and if I didn't need a 64-bit Windows development platform, I'd use Linux or OS X on my Core 2 Duo.

XP SP3 is a god sent simply as a roll-up of all the security releases since SP2. Hoorey!

installed SP3, now Word & powerpoint 2000 do not function, however excel does work. I'm going to have to reinstall it this weekend :(

Anybody else having compatibility problems?

ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3 users will enjoy a performance boost over SP2. When will people learn that Vista ain't all bad!

We have forums for personal point of views. The topic said "Windows XP SP3 now available via Windows Update", not "SP3 Released, people still think XP better - I don't know why" No offense, but stick to the topic.

(oqwarrior said @ #64.2)
There is most definitely no "SP3" on the bootscreens of the 5 computers that I have installed this service pack on.

Have it on 3 that I installed on

I have a corporate XP Pro SP2 CD from my work and noticed that when slipstreaming the Service pack that it will not recognize my CD Key....Is MS issuing new keys to legitimate corporate users? Or will MS issue a separate SP3 file for corporate users?

Update: Guys, I don't know what air you breathe because I just went ahead and used my free student copy of XP pro and it activated and worked great. And no, I didn't use "nlite", I used the correct switches. And Yes I'm using Vista to do the slipstream. So if I were any of you guys, I would do my homework and I would also stop jumping to conclusions before responding to this type of post.

So I'm guessing that MS will issue a new set of keys to corporate customers :-)

Update: It finally worked....Thanks guys....it seems that Corporate versions need to be slipstreemed on a XP system....Though my student version worked fine when slipstreaming it on Vista...Anyway, thanks again guys:-)

(jesseinsf said @ #63)
I have a corporate XP Pro SP2 CD from my work and noticed that when slipstreaming the Service pack that it will not recognize my CD Key....Is MS issuing new keys to legitimate corporate users? Or will MS issue a separate SP3 file for corporate users?

Well if you were a true IT person & obtain this so-called legit corporate disk, you should know the answer to your own question then. Nice try though..... Most work places just don't go jumping into a newly released service pack, & the question you ask sounds a little fishy. No offense.....

my guess is that you are trying to slipstream with nlite + vista? slipstreaming with nlite only works with xp

and lol yeah sure like even half of the people on this site own legit copies of xp or vista... anyone who is a 'true it person' possesses the knowledge enabling them to steal everything.

I personally own a legit copy of XP pro... only because it came with my laptop.

I found a Technet forum talking about this issue. It is, and was, well known during the betas. Actually, it was known back when SP2 was coming out.

The issue with the CD keys not working deals with how the slipstream integration occured. If you performed the integration process on a Vista PC, ANY AND ALL CD Keys will fail. This is due to the integration process pulling some DLL file from the host PC and using it. Thus, the user needs to perform the integration on an XP system. Most Vista users have just installed VMWare or Virtual PC and installed XP SP2 as a virtual machine. Then performed the integration on the virtual machine. Next they moved the integrated folder to the Vista machine through the network link. Then things will work well.

I will try to locate the same forum link again and post it here so people do not thing I am just making this up. (I found the link, read page 4)

http://forums.microsoft.com/technet/showpo...1&tf=0&pageid=3

The above technet forum shows plenty of proof that using Vista to integrate SP3 to XP will fail. However, I am unsure which version it will break. As I only have a corporate VL version. As most of the forum posters. So if you use Retail/OEM it may work on Vista. All I can say is I tried it three times in vista before going to the technet forums. Now I have done the integration a fourth time through Virtual PC and it is now working. So the only factor I changes was I used XP as the host system to do the integration.

Illegal Download Reposted In The Microsoft MSDN And Microsoft Tech Net Forums 4 MSDN And Microsoft Tech Net Subscriber's, It Won't Be Long Now Until Microsoft Kills Your Illegal Service Pack 3 Download, Just FYI.

Except.. they wont kill it. Probably because its been out on at least a dozen other websites for a week now and they don't give a s@#$ about it.

(kevpan815 said @ #59)
Illegal Download Reposted In The Microsoft MSDN And Microsoft Tech Net Forums 4 MSDN And Microsoft Tech Net Subscriber's, It Won't Be Long Now Until Microsoft Kills Your Illegal Service Pack 3 Download, Just FYI.

Hail the internet police!

(kevpan815 said @ #58)
Complaint Against Illegal Download Sent 2 piracy@microsoft.com, Just FYI.


Well you had better inform the Microsoft Moderator that posted in this thread with said "illegal" links without his glasses.

kevpan815 (catchy name there), why have you written the start of each word with a capital letter?

EDIT: Oh you sad little man for posting this. Note the capital letter problem again.

tsupersonic:

why post HUGE letter ?? are u retard or WHAT ?? #@$#@%%#@


BTW

Any chance to post Brazilian portuguese download link ?

I installed it got the "Access Denied" error, ran the reset.cmd on the registry then it installed fine. The system went to reboot and will not reboot AT ALL. Not in safe mode, not in safe mode command prompt not at all. Hmmmmm

......."
Here is an interesting article regarding SP3 performance, ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3 users will enjoy a performance boost over SP2. When will people learn that Vista ain't all bad!"........................

and.... when will YOU learn that when you're on the phone dealing in tech support, that the general public doesn't benchmark their systems, they don't care, they don't use it for those reasons.. and when the Vista updates wipe the OS and you have to completely recover the system, it's really hard to convince Joe Public that it's "not so bad".

cyberfox, final build number is: 5.1.2600.5512

go to c:\windows\system32 and choose properties on any file in there e.g xpsp3res.dll, then click version and it will tell you your build number, if you are using SP3 final it will say: 5.1.2600.5512

(torrentthief said @ #48)
cyberfox, final build number is: 5.1.2600.5512

go to c:\windows\system32 and choose properties on any file in there e.g xpsp3res.dll, then click version and it will tell you your build number, if you are using SP3 final it will say: 5.1.2600.5512


Thank you very much buddy.

(jayr0 said @ #47)
only way im switching back to xp is if they allow you more than 3gb of ram on 32bit

What is it that you run that uses more than 3gb? I cant think of any software or game that uses more than 3gb, you wont notice any difference. I do alot of xvid encoding and 4gb made no difference to me compared to 2gb.

4gb is for the future, its not needed at the moment, 3gb is more than enough.

(jayr0 said @ #46)
only way im switching back to xp is if they allow you more than 3gb of ram on 32bit

It is a hardware limitation, nothing can be done for 32bit OS's really.

Vista 32bit will give you the same result. Only difference is Vista will fool you into saying it see's all 4 gig but won't use it all.

(leo_the_lion said @ #41)
Not available on Microsoft Update yet :(

not until late afternoon or night time of April 29. check back later in the day.

been running this since Thursday :D

no issues, just some incompatibilities with shell patchers/uxtheme and such

can we use the SP2 way to slip it?

Ie:
Extracting the files
C:\XP-SP3\windowsxp-kb936929-sp3-x86-enu_c81472f7eeea2eca421e116cd4c03e2300ebfde4.exe -x

Then

Intergrating the files
C:\XP-SP3\i386\Update\Update.exe -S:C:\XP

from what i understand the looping BSOD problem should disappear w/ the SP3 RTM, right?

I got the BSOD when i installed one of the RC2's a few weeks ago. v5508 and higher contains the newest version of gdi32.dll which should not conflict w/ the older 5.1.xxx version.

can anyone confirm this for me before i install the final build?

Well, I have given in to all the hype. I reinstalled XP and updated to SP3. XP performs the same as I remember, but the novelty of a new service pack makes it seem like the best decision was making the switch. I'll stick with it for a while and hide "behind enemy lines" with the rest of the XP userbase (until MS finally pulls the plug). ;-)

Oh, and no problems so far.

SP3 didn't show up via Windows Update, so I downloaded the 316mb standalone installer and it installed fine.

No problems so far.

(dl0711 said @ #30)
well u would think that they would have added it since IE7 is an update from IE6..

not so, dl0711. The full standalone XP SP3 download package does NOT include IE7 nor its updates. I just don't like XP SP3 to automatically install IE7 on top of IE6. period! IE7 still wrecks some older programs that some people use and that's why they stick with IE6. enough said.

also, WinXP SP3 contains WMP9 build 4053, not WMP10 nor WMP11.

the Portugese language edition of XP SP3 is not available until sometime in May. see this Tech ARP article:
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=534

as for availability of XP SP3 express installer from Windows Update, wait until late afternoon or evening of April 29. for those living in far away time zones wait until April 30 and XP SP3 will show up on WU.

(dl0711 said @ #29)
why in hell did they not inc IE7 in the SP????

Its the OS service pack, IE7 is an optional download and some companies still use IE6.

It does include IE6 SP3, since IE6 shipped with XP.

The final SP3 installed perfectly here, even overtop the RC2 release of SP3 (I didn't have to uninstalled the RC2 release before installing the final). It runs very smoothly, no issues. I've slipstreamed it onto my install CD (which had SP2) so when I do a complete reinstall next month (after 3 years, it needs a reinstall just to clean things up a bit) I won't have to spend ages downloading updates.

I tried Vista on my old computer and while it runs, even Aero works, it is soooooo slooooooow. On this hardware, XP is light years faster.

I gotten an BSOD before it can even load the windows xp boot and it doesent give me a chance to see what the error is. I have tried the GDI32.dll thing still it does the same thing anybody know how I can fix?

anybody can confirm which version of the gdi32.dll will cause the reboot loop?
on my xp sp2 its dated 2/20/08, 276KB

"ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3"

Yeah, right!!

Wouldn't mind having this but I'm not accepting having IE7 rammed down my throat! Stupid thing can't even remember user names at sites, such as here, from one reboot to the next!

Does this thing force WMP11, or whatever version it's up to, down your throat also?

Guess I'll grab it just to suck up some bandwidth though!

As far as I have read and been told, IE7 is not part of XP SP3. You will still have to install IE7 after a clean install of SP3.

(cork1958 said @ #23)
Wouldn't mind having this but I'm not accepting having IE7 rammed down my throat! Stupid thing can't even remember user names at sites, such as here, from one reboot to the next!
Guess I'll grab it just to suck up some bandwidth though!

Web Developers and Mozilla lovers UNITE!!
Get him!

(jstillion said @ #23.2)
Confirmed with clean install of Windows XPand SP3, IE is still at version 6.

wow M$ just can't seem to get their act together at all.

I love it - Windows people fighting amongst themselves.

I bet the Apple and Linux fanboys are laughing it up as we speak

No. We wouldn't do that....

Besides, a healthy portion of us use Bootcamp, and are fighting our way in to get copies ourselves.

(traviso said @ #22.2)
No, the Apple fanboys are too busy applying their weekly Quicktime update to fix 30 something exploits.

(traviso said @ #22.2)
No, the Apple fanboys are too busy applying their weekly Quicktime update to fix 30 something exploits.

No to mention they are probably at work at a second job they had to take to help pay for the grossly overpriced and inferior performing mac they bought.

The servers are getting hammered, the link is down at the moment. I'll probably download it in a few days, I already downloaded it a little while ago but apparent it wasn't really RTM so gotta download it again...that will teach me for been impatient :P

(necrosis said @ #21.1)
Getting hammered? I guess getting 4MB/sec is hammered by todays standards. :cheeky:
I don't get anything, the connection just times out.

The update isn't availabe through automatic updates yet it is just on the MS servers

I downloaded and installed SP3 from the link in the post

I will say that it is a bit of a visualy ugly update. Nothing as nice as say the IE6>IE7 update

Once the SP is installed it (using the typical hotfix GUI from windows 2000) needs to restart.
This then goes into a welcome screen style UI (like scandisk)
then a bootscreen style UI saying "please wait"
and then after you log in you get the horrible "Personalized Settings" for Microsoft Outlook 6 (haven't they finshed supporting that now?)
and then you get your desktop followed by a couple of non-descriptive command prompts.
Finally my beta version of Live Messenger 9 asked for the installation source

Everything seems to have gone smoothly. Visually everything looks the same, time will tell (I've got my fingers crossed).

ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3

That has to be the biggest load of FUD i've ever heard. It is not faster. Show me consistent benchmarks of SP1 wins, and then we'll talk.

Note that some machines I've had here at the office have run into the infamous GDI32.DLL BSOD at startup issue.

The "easy way" to temporarily fix the issue and allow your installation to boot is to insert your XP cd, boot it up and enter Repair mode by pressing R at the first dialog after which you need to login to your XP installation by providing the administrator password.

cd to \windows\system32 and ren gdi32.dll to gdi32.old
copy c:\windows\servicepackfiles\i386\gdi32.dll to c:\windows\system32 and exit to reboot the computer.

Make sure everything, including display drivers, are up to date and try reinstalling the service pack.

The servicepack file path might be off, took it from memory

(daPhoenix said @ #14)
Note that some machines I've had here at the office have run into the infamous GDI32.DLL BSOD at startup issue.

The "easy way" to temporarily fix the issue and allow your installation to boot is to insert your XP cd, boot it up and enter Repair mode by pressing R at the first dialog after which you need to login to your XP installation by providing the administrator password.

cd to \windows\system32 and ren gdi32.dll to gdi32.old
copy c:\windows\servicepackfiles\i386\gdi32.dll to c:\windows\system32 and exit to reboot the computer.

Make sure everything, including display drivers, are up to date and try reinstalling the service pack.

The servicepack file path might be off, took it from memory :p

does this still happen with the final release?

ignoring the fact that Vista SP1 is still faster than XP SP2/SP3

I'm still trying to find a source for this statement. Can I get some help?

(Neobond said @ #9.1)
Well, the first part of that sentence links here: http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1772 which shows a benchmark to defend my statement.

Thanks, I missed the "longer is better" part. I think it is important to note another quote from the article "However, benchmarks scores such as Passmark don’t translate well into real world performance indicators."

Yeah I don't see how one tiny article about one benchmarking program (that personally I haven't seen used before) with one graph and one system is enough proof. I think we should wait for some articles that have a little more effort put into them before we jump to any conclusions.

(elvenseven said @ #9.5)
"Passmark don’t translate well into real world performance"


But passmark is all that is needed to fuel the lies of the vi$ta fanboys.

(madkingsoup said @ #4)
"When will people learn that Vista ain't all bad!"
When it works without me having to buy a new machine. :-)

It works for me without buying a new machine. More than 3 years.

No. By my logic, I'm happily using XP on my machine which was built (by me) for XP and for which the Vista upgrade examiner/suggestor thingy says would just about run Home Basic. But then, I know what I'm talking about since it's my computer. ;-)

(madkingsoup said @ #4.3)
No. By my logic, I'm happily using XP on my machine which was built (by me) for XP and for which the Vista upgrade examiner/suggestor thingy says would just about run Home Basic. But then, I know what I'm talking about since it's my computer. ;-)

Pretty sure his point was that you're blaming the operating system for your ****ty computer. Sorry you didn't catch that.

(Eis said @ #4.4)
Pretty sure his point was that you're blaming the operating system for your ****ty computer. Sorry you didn't catch that.
That's OK - I forgive you.

(madkingsoup said @ #4.5)
That's OK - I forgive you.

The rate at which you chew up information and spit it out without absorbing any is astounding.