View Full Version : Gaming: Vista or XP
Bosniaguy
02-23-2007, 13:03
Probably the most crucial question being asked nowadays... well, some people have done it and the results are here: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2096940,00.asp
Nice find .. thanks.
A few friends I had spoken to said Vista was running fine (even appeared better?) for gaming than in XP.
I guess not.
:sad:
Well, one more solved at least... but the same I guess the compatiblity issues with the "older" games or simulations may be considered as well.
I mean, with this, that to get them running properly on Vista we should get the chance to install a special patch or something, and this would be near impossible with the elder sims...
I hope sincerely I won't think right this time.
Jackal out.
BHawthorne
03-02-2007, 14:15
Nice find .. thanks.
A few friends I had spoken to said Vista was running fine (even appeared better?) for gaming than in XP.
I guess not.
:sad:
Vista is a train wreck atm. I'd wait 6 months on it.
all-fired-up
03-02-2007, 14:47
I'm waiting a year or two on this one. I new Vista would be buggy, and I don't need another migrain. :nono: I have my gaming sytem with WinXP where I want it.
Hey guys :) I am new and so when crossing this topic it went right in line with a post I was going to do! Here is my question regarding this...
Most newer games can run with XP either alone or with the compatibility program. I am reading the link about the difference with xp and vista but, with older games say janes USAF, would it be better to just run them maby in a dual boot with their environment being Win98se or 2000?? If your running an older game too, which would be better, 98, ME, or 2000? I am hoping to do this dual boot for my older sims using two HD's but don't know which OS would be best for the older sims? If you could shed some light on this it would be great. Thanks!
If Vista won't run my older stuff I don't need it. I will NOT leave Unreal behind!
I'm starting to see why Microsoft is having trouble giving Vista away now.
BTW..
I'm sitting here looking at a NEW copy of Windows Vista Home Premium upgrade I purchased thats only been opened to try and install over XP, which I found it wouldn't install over XP Pro without re-formatting the hard disk AND a NEW UN-OPENED Copy of Halo 2 that won't run on anything other than Vista. I've been wanting to hold these in hopes of going to Vista but I'm just not sure if I'm willing to make the sacrafices Vista and Microsoft seem to be demanding.
WHAT A MESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hey there,
I have been running vista ultimate 64bit with minimal issues for some time now, i have not tested alot of the older games but i play FSX, lockon, BF2, bf2142, and Ghost recon 1 and 2....Only problem i have found so far is that creative audio cards and drivers seem to conflict on certain system setups. Here are my specs for my rig im not a regular pc builder but i built this one and my last one and really havent had any real issues that i couldnt quickly figure out with updating a driver or something along those lines.... I would load it up and run it if i were you, and they are fixing to come out with SP1 for vista...
AMD 5200+
4GB of OCZ ram
Nvidia 8800GTS 640mb
gigabyte ga-m59-sli motherboard
Antec 750 watt power supply
150gb raptor hard drive
creative X-fi xtreme gamer sound card
antec 900 case
swasta
_Big_Mac_
09-30-2007, 21:07
That computer looks like it eats small babies
VERY NICE machine,
I have an upgrade copy of Vista I have been sitting on for over six months.
I'd like to install in but from what I see Microsoft is wanting to try and play the monopoly card again. They must miss spending time in Federal court.
I just don't want to loose my older stuff.
One being Falcon.
I've posted to Lead Pursuit on this issue with no response.
Whats up with them? Is AF foundering? and if not. Does it work under Vista?!!
ruggbutt
10-01-2007, 03:57
That's a nice case, Antec 900. Just built an e6750 machine in one of those. As for Vista, one of our guys has experimented with his games on both. He's getting as much as a 20% drop in frames w/Vista. At this point XP is in really good shape and unless you absolutely have to use DX10, then it's the way to go.
One thing about the Vista upgrade disc. You lose your XP license forever if you use that upgrade. Read the EULA.
I built this machine for some of the newer dx10 titles coming out and to make use of the 64 bit architecture and the ability to use more ram.... and yes the case is probably the best case ive ever used, everything stays nice and cool in there....as for framerates i get a pretty good framerate with everything maxed on all the games i play including FSX......I figured i would take a very minor framerate drop for the newer operating system, and to add the new SP1 for vista which will release soon is supposed to make it game better than XP so that will be interesting to see.....
How is the dust build up in these cases?
ruggbutt
10-02-2007, 14:53
It's too early to tell (for me anyways) but I've read on some of the forums that it's not too bad. I'll spend a few bucks on canned air for the cooling that I'm getting w/this case. I'm at 31/33C at idle with this case and an e6750. My 8800GTS runs 2 degrees cooler in this case than it did my old Coolermaster, and that was w/the side panel off. Ambient temps in my office run around 80F +/-5.
Vista was designed to run on the newest hardware, therefore you really shouldn't upgrade unless you're buying a brand new machine. I know a friend who has been running Vista perfectly fine on a new gaming machine without any hiccups at all, in fact, it runs faster than some other comparable machines with XP.
And @ XRay: There are ways of playing your Halo 2 on XP, but I won't be posting any info here.
BHawthorne
10-22-2007, 03:49
IMHO, it's not really about having the latest hardware to run Vista, it's the disparity that comes when you compare DX9 vs. DX10 performance strictly by the numbers. The only thing really appealing about DX10 are eye-candy tech demos and the currently very rare DX10 title that actually harnesses that eye-candy in a blatently cool looking way. Until I see something to sway me, DX9 is rock solid and tested and simply faster if comparing even on DX10 hardware. I'm simply no fan to the fact that even if I spend a mint on the latest CPU, mobo and video card combinations that I'd still get that 20% or more performance hit. In an ideal world DX10.1 would address performance issues, but for all I know DX10.1 is gonna add even more bloat and bog it down further.
Playloud
10-22-2007, 05:00
Yeah, I was shocked when I read about the actual performance of DX10. Microsoft was advertising a 2x-8x performance increase. To see that performance has actually decreased really sucks.
Bagonous
10-22-2007, 05:37
On my development system I have Windows XP 32 bit and Vista 64 bit installed. Vista 64 bit is much more responsive than the 32 bit XP on the same machine. Both OSs are fully patched and up to date. However frame rates for DirectX apps does drop a bit on Vista 64 bit.
The point is that a fully patched Vista isn't the same as the out of the box version performance wise. The compatibility of a patched Vista 64 bit with devices is much better too.
Finally, Vista loves RAM. A good 4GB is perfect for Vista 64 bit. Remember that Vista 32 bit and XP 32 bit cannot use more that 3GB of RAM.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.