PDA

View Full Version : Vista better than XP if game and video card support DX 10?


Viventis
12-22-07, 12:38 PM
My newest system has a Geforce 8800 GT, Core Duo 6750 and (currently) 2 mb ram. I am going to need a new Windows license and am debating between XP and Vista. With more and more games coming out DX 10, are they now running better than using DX 9c in XP or is XP still the gammer's choice?

$n][pErMan
12-22-07, 12:41 PM
The simple fact is, newer games will start supporting DX10 more and many of Vista's issues have been fixed. XP and Vista are about the same performance level now and some DX10 games even perform better on it. Going XP would be a downgrade at this point, you would only be stalling on what you will eventually have to do and of course you would have no DX10 for games.

dxx
12-22-07, 12:46 PM
I have a valid Windows license. I have it for WinVista x64.

I'm now in the position that I need to either not turn my PC off until SP1 comes out, or do a repair installation, or a complete reinstallation of the OS. Why? Because I had to reset my BIOS, which is enough to make Vista believe that I've 'significanty' changed my system hardware, so I need to re-authorise it with Microsoft if I am to use the system after my next reboot. I can't re-authorise it. Doing it online produces an error code and it refuses to authorise it, attempting to do it by phone, which should normally present nine groups of six digits, presents 9 boxes with a single digit of 1 to 9 in each. This, obviously, can't be authorised.

Microsoft's advice is to speak to tech support (for which there is no toll-free number), or buy a new copy. And it's for this reason that my advice to you use whatever copy of XP you've already got or get a pirate copy, and to hell with Microsoft and their PC-crippling blackmail bullsh*t.

Viventis
12-22-07, 12:54 PM
I have a valid Windows license. I have it for WinVista x64.

I'm now in the position that I need to either not turn my PC off until SP1 comes out, or do a repair installation, or a complete reinstallation of the OS. Why? Because I had to reset my BIOS, which is enough to make Vista believe that I've 'significanty' changed my system hardware, so I need to re-authorise it with Microsoft if I am to use the system after my next reboot.

Does this only apply to OEM Vista installs or is there a "one install only" rule in effect on Full Vista versions as well? Because I have kids (with all the garbage they let get onto the hard drive), I will generally have to reformat and clean install 2 to 3 times a year.

Sidric
12-22-07, 11:08 PM
afaik, oem copies are bound to just one machine and one machine alone. retail copies can be reactivated as many times as you want, just make sure you're only using it on one machine at a time.

Zapablast05
12-23-07, 12:07 AM
I have a valid Windows license. I have it for WinVista x64.

I'm now in the position that I need to either not turn my PC off until SP1 comes out, or do a repair installation, or a complete reinstallation of the OS. Why? Because I had to reset my BIOS, which is enough to make Vista believe that I've 'significanty' changed my system hardware, so I need to re-authorise it with Microsoft if I am to use the system after my next reboot. I can't re-authorise it. Doing it online produces an error code and it refuses to authorise it, attempting to do it by phone, which should normally present nine groups of six digits, presents 9 boxes with a single digit of 1 to 9 in each. This, obviously, can't be authorised.

Microsoft's advice is to speak to tech support (for which there is no toll-free number), or buy a new copy. And it's for this reason that my advice to you use whatever copy of XP you've already got or get a pirate copy, and to hell with Microsoft and their PC-crippling blackmail bullsh*t.

Vista x64 runs about what, $150 depending on which version? How much will the toll call be if you call to authorize it? Lets say that the call takes 6-10 minutes, that's about like what... $.35/minute US? Do the math, you'll save a **** load of money just making that call to reauthorize instead of buying a whole new OS.

TheBigOne
12-23-07, 12:12 AM
I have a valid Windows license. I have it for WinVista x64.

I'm now in the position that I need to either not turn my PC off until SP1 comes out, or do a repair installation, or a complete reinstallation of the OS. Why? Because I had to reset my BIOS, which is enough to make Vista believe that I've 'significanty' changed my system hardware, so I need to re-authorise it with Microsoft if I am to use the system after my next reboot. I can't re-authorise it. Doing it online produces an error code and it refuses to authorise it, attempting to do it by phone, which should normally present nine groups of six digits, presents 9 boxes with a single digit of 1 to 9 in each. This, obviously, can't be authorised.

Microsoft's advice is to speak to tech support (for which there is no toll-free number), or buy a new copy. And it's for this reason that my advice to you use whatever copy of XP you've already got or get a pirate copy, and to hell with Microsoft and their PC-crippling blackmail bullsh*t.I reactivated online with no problem if you are using the same system, you sure be able to reactivate without having to call it in? If you have to give them the number and till them what happen, it not a problem at all, it take maybe 10mins of your time.

Buio
12-23-07, 12:21 AM
Most games supporting DX10 has had bad performance, probably due to them adding too much effects making it go slow instead of using DX10 to optimize performance.

But in the long run I'd say Vista x64 is a good choice for future gaming.

Zapablast05
12-23-07, 12:37 AM
Most games supporting DX10 has had bad performance, probably due to them adding too much effects making it go slow instead of using DX10 to optimize performance.

But in the long run I'd say Vista x64 is a good choice for future gaming.


It's not because DX10 has all these bells and whistles. DX10 just hasn't matured. Look at CoD:4, it could pass off for a DX10 game, but it's not. It's DX9.0c. Extra graphics doesn't have anything to do with it. If it's because of extra graphics, then maybe it's time for you to upgrade your GPU. DX10 needs time to develop. It's balls haven't dropped.

ASUSEN7900GTX
12-23-07, 04:50 AM
wasnīt DX9 slow when it came and now it is (optimized)? and thus we need a revision B of DX10 to get it do what we all want thus iīm notr going Vista until SP1 is outnand what it does

i am not sure but i heard it woould havwe so many restritions in it so youre Comp ios almost as secure as fort knox.

meaning speciallly made drivers for asus GFX or VGA GFX if third part drivers used thing wouldnīt work and you couldnīt watch HD stuff if you didnīt have HDMI GFX and MOnitor and such.

Well i am not sure this will be the fact but if so then VIsta wonīt be waht it is today thus i havenīt been for Vista. But i guess it is so that i canīt avoid it forever but at least until SP1 is out

Viventis
12-23-07, 08:09 AM
Here is a link that compared visuals in DX10 vs DX9 in Flight Simulator X. The difference is stunning! Check out the sky and the water. Isn't this type of visual improvemnet the reason we buy high end equipment to begin with?

http://pc.ign.com/articles/767/767311p1.html

hirantha
12-23-07, 08:56 AM
Here is a link that compared visuals in DX10 vs DX9 in Flight Simulator X. The difference is stunning! Check out the sky and the water. Isn't this type of visual improvemnet the reason we buy high end equipment to begin with?

http://pc.ign.com/articles/767/767311p1.html

Hallelujah!!! you got that right!!

Gregor976
12-23-07, 10:19 AM
Here is a link that compared visuals in DX10 vs DX9 in Flight Simulator X. The difference is stunning! Check out the sky and the water. Isn't this type of visual improvemnet the reason we buy high end equipment to begin with?

http://pc.ign.com/articles/767/767311p1.html

Isn't that an extremely old CG dramatization of the difference between DX9 and DX10. I don't think it's actually being rendered by a DX10 system.

I could be wrong though.

Vasot02
12-23-07, 10:28 AM
. With more and more games coming out DX 10,

DX10 titles do not really exist yet...

Only hydrides (Dx9 games with some Dx10 support)

Dx10 mostly sucks in them because the difference is small and the performance is worse from DX9

Eliminator
12-23-07, 10:49 AM
Here is a link that compared visuals in DX10 vs DX9 in Flight Simulator X. The difference is stunning! Check out the sky and the water. Isn't this type of visual improvemnet the reason we buy high end equipment to begin with?

http://pc.ign.com/articles/767/767311p1.html
AHAHA that was actually a fake picture.. you should go take a look at how it REALLY looks in DX10

dxx
12-23-07, 05:07 PM
Does this only apply to OEM Vista installs or is there a "one install only" rule in effect on Full Vista versions as well? Because I have kids (with all the garbage they let get onto the hard drive), I will generally have to reformat and clean install 2 to 3 times a year.

I'd imagine so - my copy is an MSDN Subscriber copy, so it's effectively the retail version.

But, yeah. As an official conference-attending MS affiliate, I wholeheartedly recommend The Dark Side.

dxx
12-23-07, 05:14 PM
Most games supporting DX10 has had bad performance, probably due to them adding too much effects making it go slow instead of using DX10 to optimize performance.

But in the long run I'd say Vista x64 is a good choice for future gaming.

Future gaming, yeah. But, like, way-off future gaming. Reason being, the majority of games we're getting aren't developed as PC games, they're developed as Xbox360 games that get ported to the PC. Both Xbox360 and PS3 run Dx9-level video hardware, so Dx10 is really unnecessary. And to prove this fact, in 12 months of its public availability, it's yet to be used by even the most advanced of games.