| Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
 Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 17:23 Post subject: Vista or Xp - Which is better choice for my new rig? |
|
 |
Will be putting together parts below. Now, Should I install Vista 64 Ultimate or just stick with XP Pro? After reading, it seems Vista is better choice for new rigs. Let me know. and I dont want to dual boot.
Video - EVGA 512-P2-N757-TR GF8600GT 512MB PCI-E
CPU - INTEL CORE 2 DUO E6550 2.33 GHZ
Mobo - ABIT IP35-E
HD - WD 500GB Serial 3.0 WD5000AAKS
Monitor - V7 22 WIDE LCD MONITOR
Memory - CRUCIAL 2GB DDR2 5330
PS - Ultra V Series 500 W
Case - Ultra Wizard Black Mid Tower Case ULT31580
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 17:44 Post subject: |
|
|
dual boot and enjoy both.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 17:54 Post subject: |
|
|
I'd go with XP, DirectX 10 is the only upside with VISTA, and not many games demand DX10 these days. Until that day, stick with XP, it uses up less resources per default which gives you more power for those games and applications that you run on it. Why unnecessarily waste memory and cpu on something that's supposed to be transitory (eg. lead to an experience you want)?
I also think fisk should be unbanned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Invasor
Moderator
Posts: 7638
Location: On the road
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 17:56 Post subject: Re: Vista or Xp - Which is better choice for my new rig? |
|
|
| todd72173 wrote: | | and I dont want to dual boot. |
| SpykeZ wrote: | | dual boot and enjoy both. |
lol
Well consider that you'll have to install Vista one day, so you might as well do it now. It's not too bad (actually, it has many nice things, but I'm back to XP for now since I had some random freezes). So I would say go ahead and install Vista, if you have any problems go back to XP.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 18:02 Post subject: |
|
|
oh man...i guess i can install xp for now. I end up formatting every 4-6 months anyway. Maybe by then, vista will be ok to use. Just a shame to buy DX10 stuff and not be able to use it.
RYZEN 5 2600|RADEON 570| |ASRock X370 Killer|DDR4@2800Mhz||Corsair SPEC-05 Case|AOC G2590FX 24.5''144hz 1ms|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 20:01 Post subject: |
|
|
C2D+2GB+8600GT = Great performance in Vista with the same framerate in games.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 20:27 Post subject: |
|
|
minus the random crashing in games, liek bio. whenever i used the ice plasmid it crashed. played the whole game basically nonstop in xp and not one crash.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 20:28 Post subject: |
|
|
No crashing here. Update your drivers.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 20:34 Post subject: |
|
|
nothing wrong with my drivers, used the smae ones everyone else is. vista is just shit for games atm. game ran great but crashed to hell. live on xp
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 20:37 Post subject: |
|
|
Dual boot like SpykeZ said. I have them both, XP for games and Vista for... well, anything else... Probably until SP for Vista shows up
"Quantum mechanics is actually, contrary to it's reputation, unbeliveably simple, once you take the physics out."
Scott Aaronson | chiv wrote: | | thats true you know. newton didnt discover gravity. the apple told him about it, and then he killed it. the core was never found. |
๏ปฟ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 21:09 Post subject: |
|
|
Even if I install all the latest updates through september for Vista? Still garbage? I only want vista for DX10 - so if it sucks for gaming, I wont bother with vista. Ill just stick with XP..
RYZEN 5 2600|RADEON 570| |ASRock X370 Killer|DDR4@2800Mhz||Corsair SPEC-05 Case|AOC G2590FX 24.5''144hz 1ms|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 21:25 Post subject: |
|
|
It's the same for gaming as XP. With that rig, that is. Don't listen to those that have P4 with GFFX 5200 and ZOMG Vista doesn't run well (omg omg).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 21:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Ok thanks. Well, Ill go with Vista to start...Will install Bioshock and see how it goes with DX10..I wont install my other apps. If its bad, Ill reformat it with xp...T
RYZEN 5 2600|RADEON 570| |ASRock X370 Killer|DDR4@2800Mhz||Corsair SPEC-05 Case|AOC G2590FX 24.5''144hz 1ms|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 21:53 Post subject: |
|
|
| todd72173 wrote: | | Even if I install all the latest updates through september for Vista? Still garbage? I only want vista for DX10 - so if it sucks for gaming, I wont bother with vista. Ill just stick with XP.. |
This is your best option. Currently only the very few DX10-games that exist are worth it. Every other game runs better on XP, no matter if you have new hardware or old.
Other problems is application support, you have some applications you really like using - chances are they don't work on VISTA, or their UI get crapped up. The Adobe CS3-pack has problems for instance (though Adobe claims they're working on an update).
Also, the UAC is a PITA, why that shit is turned on by default is something you'll wonder. How do you like getting asked questions when you do shit? If real life was VISTA, you'd get pop-ups when you go to the bathroom: "Do you really need to go?" "Do you really need to open that door?" "Do you really need to flush?" "Unrecogniced process, do you really want to do it?"
I suggest you look at the below list:
http://blogs.technet.com/MarkRussinovich/
Dual install it to begin with, evaluate it yourself. Some people clearly don't care about optimizing their rigs, and have their hardware being used for unnecessary fluff that could increase performance in a game or similar, if you like having to pay extra to use your modern sound card properly (Alchemy) then it's for you, if you like to run into problems every now and again with driver/application support... then VISTA is for you, XP has better driver support than VISTA, hands down... but some people don't care/are satisfied with the fact that THEIR hardware is supported (and want to try to gospel that because it runs on their rigs, it must be the same for every other hw/sw combination) - if you're one of those people, then VISTA clearly is for you.
But if you recognice the pattern from the old days (of Windows Me) in VISTA, then you'll wait until it either matures, or the next windows version arrives. And enjoy a more stable, faster XP.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 22:00 Post subject: |
|
|
It's turned on because some idiots click "Download Now" and run stupid viruses and trojans that spy on their PCs, so MS goes to the lowest common denominator.  This is the dumbest feature in Vista. Other than that, nothing else really. Vista is a superset of XP in every way possible, and it's really hard to go back to XP when you get used to Vista.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 20th Sep 2007 22:10 Post subject: |
|
|
anyway... It's up to you to decide. You won't make mistake installing either of those OS, go google the differences, pros and cons and install what you think will be best for you. If you try to find out here it will result in posts shown just up in this thread 
"Quantum mechanics is actually, contrary to it's reputation, unbeliveably simple, once you take the physics out."
Scott Aaronson | chiv wrote: | | thats true you know. newton didnt discover gravity. the apple told him about it, and then he killed it. the core was never found. |
๏ปฟ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Teramos
Posts: 336
Location: Outer Limits
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 02:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| Areius wrote: | | LeoNatan wrote: | | It's turned on because some idiots click "Download Now" and run stupid viruses and trojans that spy on their PCs, so MS goes to the lowest common denominator. This is the dumbest feature in Vista. Other than that, nothing else really. Vista is a superset of XP in every way possible, and it's really hard to go back to XP when you get used to Vista. |
I agree, once you get used to Vista, you dont want to get back. |
bullshit. ive gone back multiple times, because vista just finds ways to suck. IE crashing for no reason in bioshock. whereas in XP i had not ONE crash. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 03:18 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 04:08 Post subject: |
|
|
drivers my ass. i used the same shit everyone else used. and welcome to crash city. oh and plus no EAX support for my audigy. but blame creative for that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 04:32 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 04:37 Post subject: |
|
|
it doesnt support anything under audigy 2. blame creative. PLUS you gotta pay for the non x-fi version. yes there is a hacked version out there but once again, doesnt work with the SE cards. i have no use for vista. its just a bunch of eye candy. XP is perfect
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 04:47 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 09:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | 98 was perfect as well. |
Here's something that you fail to grasp:
Why people upgraded to XP from Windows 98 and 2000 was because games perform BETTER on this platform. A lot of games didn't run on 98 that ran on XP. And the hardware manufacturers prioritized development of software for XP. Plus, Windows XP was based on the NT-kernel but still played multimedia as good as 98/2000 but better.
VISTA has less performance because it's a resource hog, it has problems running even modern games and applications. The only thing it got going for it is more nice features and presentation. But for the extra hardware requirements (say 15% more than XP), why get a platform that has more issues?
I do not doubt that this will improve over time. But right now VISTA is an operating system that light users that like the flare of shiny menu:s and the idea of "having the latest" appreciate. Sure, that's most of the computer consumer market - but in spite of this, more people use XP because there's no clear advantage to upgrade to VISTA.
A friend of mine recently purchased a computer with VISTA and changed OS to XP, why? 'It's like an integrated WindowBlinds... and I hate that app. Plus XP ran Bioshock faster'.
The fact that you don't understand these reasons has an almost comical quality to it. I appreciate the fact that you like VISTA. But there's a certain blindness to the fact that you can't understand that some users just prefer another OS.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel ๐ฎ๐ฑ
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 09:34 Post subject: |
|
|
| dominae wrote: | | Why people upgraded to XP from Windows 98 and 2000 was because games perform BETTER on this platform. |
Certainly not when I first upgraded to Windows 2000 (and later to XP, they had the same performance in games). It got better when good drivers got out and developers moved on to use the good features of that particular OS. But performance was certainly not on par with 98 at first.
You talk about higher footprint (bloat) in Vista. I ran W98 on 16MB machine and it ran great. XP struggled with 64MB machines. Oh right, but times moved on, and 64MB was nothing when XP became popular (mid 2002). Now Vista is struggling with 512MB machines. Guess what, 512MB ain't that much either at this day and age, and 1GB is pretty obsolete as well if you want to do more than surf the net and watch 640x232 dvdrips.
The fact that you don't understand this has an almost comical quality to it. I appreciate the fact that you like XP. But there's a certain blindness to the fact that you can't understand that some users just prefer another OS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nakitu
Posts: 1144
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 10:03 Post subject: |
|
|
You are still fighting about vista? Both Vista and Xp are good. It depends what you do with youre OS. If you like to play older games dont use vista. If you produce music you cant use Vista. For other things Vista is same as Xp. These are the facts.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 10:14 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: | | dominae wrote: | | Why people upgraded to XP from Windows 98 and 2000 was because games perform BETTER on this platform. |
Certainly not when I first upgraded to Windows 2000 (and later to XP, they had the same performance in games). It got better when good drivers got out and developers moved on to use the good features of that particular OS. But performance was certainly not on par with 98 at first.
|
Nice equivocation there Sir. I'm talking about Windows XP. When it came it was clearly better than both 98 and 2000 as it combined the best of the two in one OS.
| Quote: |
You talk about higher footprint (bloat) in Vista. I ran W98 on 16MB machine and it ran great. XP struggled with 64MB machines. Oh right, but times moved on, and 64MB was nothing when XP became popular (mid 2002). Now Vista is struggling with 512MB machines. Guess what, 512MB ain't that much either at this day and age, and 1GB is pretty obsolete as well if you want to do more than surf the net and watch 640x232 dvdrips. |
Exactly why XP was such a huge success. It was clearly the better alternative at the time. And to many still is.
| Quote: |
The fact that you don't understand this has an almost comical quality to it. I appreciate the fact that you like XP. But there's a certain blindness to the fact that you can't understand that some users just prefer another OS. |
Yes. I agree, it's funny that I want the RAM and the CPU used for the applications I run and not the OS.
And Nakitu ofc. is right - XP runs both older games, and newer too. And no performance improvements in VISTA over XP is yet to be found. And VISTA is less backward-compatible.
The music production too is true. But I think I already covered that in better app-support (though I s'pose it's mostly driver-related).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nakitu
Posts: 1144
Location: Croatia
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 10:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Nope its not driver problem its OS problem. It handles VST-i and sound protocol diffrent so all plugins and appz for music production dont work and will never work on Vista (i use all those appz). No studio will change xp to vista because of that. That was dumb move from Micro. loosing all audio studios in the world because of 1 stupid move. Only older games dont work on Vista,new ones work.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 23rd Sep 2007 11:14 Post subject: |
|
|
| LeoNatan wrote: |
I appreciate the fact that you like XP. But there's a certain blindness to the fact that you can't understand that some users just prefer another OS. |
I'm sure lots of folks prefer to use Vista, however they are never given the choice. It comes packaged with new computers even when it can barely run it.
I dual boot with Vista. It's kind of funny, XP just refuses to fill up the 2gb RAM I have (don't game) but vista uses it well. Still, I prefer to have the RAM being used for apps than for the OS. Especially since firefox with all the addons I have takes up a ton of RAM.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
