| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 88819 | 2008-04-10 05:16:00 | XP or Vista for Gaming | GeneralKanos (13592) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 657670 | 2008-04-11 01:38:00 | Few Articles on this issue Vista SP1 (no real gaming improvements overall) www.bit-tech.net Windows SP3 (Actually may increases its performance lead, slightly older article) exo-blog.blogspot.com Few days old DX10 vs DX9 in VISTA (not a XP vs Vista comparison, XP is faster again) enthusiast.hardocp.com Prior to Visa SP1 (about the same as SP1 as first article) enthusiast.hardocp.com 7/10 Games faster in XP SP2 vs Vista SP1 (used a Phenom processor and only a 3850 shame, gaps would have been bigger on a better rig) www.neowin.net I spend a lot of time in the gaming forums. I don't need to read these articles to know XP is "currently" a faster gaming OS and have Vista SP1, all I do is test myself, unlike those defending Vista who clearly do not dual boot lol. Hope this clears up all the confusion for the Vista Posters :) |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 657671 | 2008-04-11 01:49:00 | Just thought I'd ask... but does faster mean prettier too? | Thebananamonkey (7741) | ||
| 657672 | 2008-04-11 01:49:00 | I suggest getting XP now, and possibly moving to Vista if necessary in the future. Going by the stats on the website that I administer, there are 7x as many XP users as there are Vista users, so developers aren't going to abandon the most popular platform any time soon. I'm not a hardcore gamer (just WoW and PS2 :)) but from what I've heard, most of them are sticking with XP for now. |
Nermal (7077) | ||
| 657673 | 2008-04-11 01:51:00 | Just thought I'd ask... but does faster mean prettier too? Faster means, more frames per second (smoother) for Identical or similar IQ, but that is a general statement, there are exceptions. Overall XP is the better gaming OS no question, generally accepted across the industry accept by a few Vista forum nutters (no offense Vista forum nutters are people to) :) When we see native DX10 games in a few years, Vista will have a definite advantage, until then.... |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 657674 | 2008-04-11 01:53:00 | The last link captured my attention 7/10 faster with XP but the differences were quite small. 3 fps ... and that newer OS at any given time will just mature and newer updates like DX will be released to them ... Is DX10 going to be released to XP .. and from that difference I'm not a gamer maybe those stats are significant ... | Nomad (952) | ||
| 657675 | 2008-04-11 02:02:00 | The last link captured my attention 7/10 faster with XP but the differences were quite small. 3 fps ... and that newer OS at any given time will just mature and newer updates like DX will be released to them ... Is DX10 going to be released to XP .. and from that difference I'm not a gamer maybe those stats are significant ... lol yea but look at the test rig, did you read the other articles. If i was to put a "blanket" overall XP advantage I would say 10% faster than Vista, thats from my own experiences and articles. 10% can make a large difference if you are playing at higher resolutions and cutting it close to a smooth frame rate, so thats why most hard core gamers are sticking with XP at least for now. To add no DX10 will never be integrated into XP for two reasons, the way the DX10 subsystem accesses system resources is hugely different than and other DX in XP. Secondly its a marketing issue to boost Vista. |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 657676 | 2008-04-11 03:28:00 | Bear in mind that most of those 7/10 games reviewed did *not* use DX10 which would also affect the speeds... | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 657677 | 2008-04-11 07:00:00 | Here's an idea, we should see if we can get PCWorld to do some benchmarking all around, Id read that article :) Especially if they threw in a review of a Linux distro for the one or two games that *do* work :p I can see it now! WinXP SP3 vs Vista SP1 vs Ubuntu 8.04 gaming benchmarks! Wonder if we could even throw in a Mac for a laugh :D Jan? :D MacPro with 8GB of RAM and Bootcamp - thus running Windows would be ok although not great in the video card department compared to a PC gaming rig. www.mactech.com I think OS X is going to see some improvements filtering through relating to gaming with all the game developers jumping on board the iPhone platform. |
vitalstatistix (9182) | ||
| 657678 | 2008-04-11 09:20:00 | As for Windows 7... you really want to wait until 2011 to upgrade your OS? If so... why? Aint it coming out next year?? :wub cant wait to see if its like vista was =) |
password (5384) | ||
| 657679 | 2008-04-11 10:00:00 | haha, now this makes me EVEN MORE suspicious. Any mods wanna check out the ip's or registration emails or something and put our curiosity at ease? :banana Really does look like this guy has created a new account just to back up his arguments, not saying that argument isn't feasible, just the way he is doing it. Ok I call for a mod, any mods here? PS get back on subject, the point is that future hardware will make the tiny performance drop in vista negelible. Like less than 1% (like on my system). DX 10 is brilliant, and since you'll have to get vista anway, get it now, so you don't need to reinstall EVERYTHING when you finally get it. Oh and by the way read this benchmark blogs.zdnet.com as you can see, Oblivion gains 23.2% in fps in oblivion, which sucked running on Vista when it first came out, but the game makers released a patch which made it run FASTER on Vista. This shows that Vista is actually the better OS for gaming, but most games are designed for XP, since around 85% of people use it. So therefore, as XP dies out, games will be made for Vista and all gamers will rejoice, as games take advantage of Vista. |
SPARTAN 860 (2618) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | |||||