So Vista caught up with XP... or is it?

[t3hl33td4rg0n]

My Vista x64 disc has been collecting dust for quite some time now since when I first tried it when I got it, it wasn't exactly a pleasent experience. I've been hearing recently that all the updates to date have really improved things in terms of performance and stability. So I made a small 20GB partition to find out for myself.

Everything installed without issue which was nice, I installed drivers and a few apps. Everything went smoothly. Did a few tweaks here and there and everything seems to be running quite good, and I am suprised and pleased to say that as well.

... Then I installed 3dMark 05 to see how it would score. To my suprise my score nearly shot up 900 points from the same install on my XP partition (from ~8500 to ~9400). Now of course, there are some things to take into consideration like I have a lot of 3rd party apps running on my XP install (steam, trillian v4, FRAPS, JoyToKey, DAEMON, DynDns, XFire to name a few, as well as several 3rd party installed services).

So my question I ask you vista users, am I right to assume that if I were to make Vista my primary OS, install all my apps and such, I wont see any significant gaming performance decrease.

Another concern would be my 1.5GB RAM. Some of the more memory hungry games I have do perform quite well when I increase texture settings to maximum. I'll use Dark Messiah as an example. Setting texture resolution to very high requires just about all of my 512MB texture memory and did not do well when I just had 1GB RAM installed on XP, having 1.5GB RAM reduced hitching to a minimum, only stuttering on the biggest maps. Basically, will I still be able to push it just the same or will I have to take things down a notch because of Vistas extra RAM usage? Is this assumption even a concern?

I should also note that I allocated an extra 1.5GB with ReadyBoost on a flash drive as well.

[conroejoe]

Not really, start from here http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1523445&postcount=122 and work your way down. Still problems.

My buddy is using a 8800GTS 320 and he was using Vista x64 and just went back to XP x64 last weekend. He mentioned being able to jump the graphic settings up in XP more than in Vista and maintain smoother performance. I still think you'll find XP to be better for gaming.

[Digital_Trans]

Hell, no Vista has such a long ways to go. I'ts a shot OS with nice skins and broken directx 10 wow! Have fun not my OS anymore. I'll stick it out with XP it's simple and faster and I love it!!! It does everything Vista couldn't.
url: http://blip.tv/file/340692

[AthlonXP1800]

Yes Vista has finally caught up with XP with Vista SP1, better wait until Vista SP1 gone gold.

One guy called Mikael from Futuremark forum benchmarked apps and games to compared the performance of Vista SP1 64bit vs XP SP2 32bit here (http://futuremark.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=72298), some faster and on par with XP SP2.

Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.2GHz (8*400)
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3
8GB DDR2-800 4-5-4-15
GeForce 8800GT 512MB (stock)
Western Digital Caviar SE16 250GB <--- Vista Home Premium SP1 RC 64-bit
Samsung SpinPoint T166 320GB <--- Windows XP Professional SP2

[See the end for some comments on the results.]

The tests:

File copy (6.3GB ISO from Samsung drive to WD drive):

Vista: 2min 48sec

XP: 3min 07sec


File extraction (extracting the Crysis patch zip file with WinRAR):

Vista: 14s

XP: 13s


File extraction (extracting 3.9GB RAR archive file using WinRAR):

Vista: 2min 16sec

XP: 2min 22sec


File extraction (extracting 1.7GB ISO file using 7zip):

Vista: 2min 05sec (64-bit version of 7zip)

XP: 2min 18sec (32-bit version of 7zip)


Program load times:

Vista:
Photoshop CS3: 2 secs
OpenOffice: 1.5 secs
Crysis: 26 secs

XP:
Photoshop CS3: 8.5 secs
OpenOffice: 6.5 secs
Crysis: 33 secs


Photoshop CS3 "Retouch artist's benchmark":

Vista: 30s

XP: 29s


3DMark06

Vista:
3DMarks: 11297
SM2.0: 5227
SM3.0: 4942
CPU: 2772

XP:
3DMarks: 11706
SM2.0: 5391
SM3.0: 5150
CPU: 2869


Call of Duty 4 (1280x1024, MAX settings, except no AA and AF slider at ~half):

Vista: 104fps (avg), 54fps (min), 255fps (max)

XP: 102fps (avg), 56fps (min), 274fps (max)

Since CoD4 contains no built-in benchmark, I had to measure with FRAPS and play the same sequence a few times to get somewhat reliable results. I played from the beginning of the level "The Bog" and until you pick up the Javelin, approximately 3 minutes of gameplay. The results were very consistent, so they're probably pretty accurate despite the inaccurate metodology.


F.E.A.R. (1280x1024, MAX settings, 4xAA, 16xAF):

Vista: 97fps (avg), 48fps (min), 242fps (max)

XP: 95fps (avg), 45fps (min), 242fps (max)


Crysis GPU-test (1280x1024):

Vista (”High”, DX10, 64-bit): 35fps (avg)

Vista (”High”, DX9, 64-bit): 37fps (avg)

Vista (”High”, DX10, 32-bit): 35fps (avg)

Vista (”High”, DX9, 32-bit): 36fps (avg)

Vista (”Very High”, DX10, 64-bit): 20fps (avg)

XP (”High”): 39fps (avg)


Crysis CPU-test 2 (800x600):

Vista (”Low”, except ”Physics” on high, DX9, 32-bit): 60fps (avg)

Vista (”Low”, except ”Physics” on high, DX9, 64-bit): 54fps (avg)

XP (”Low”, except ”Physics” on high): 69fps (avg)

[t3hl33td4rg0n]

Graphics: From those framerates it looks about the same, perhaps a slight lower in some areas (high geometry?).

Application Performance: Seems like thats improved quite a bit.

[nekrosoft13]

Graphics: From those framerates it looks about the same, perhaps a slight lower in some areas (high geometry?).

Application Performance: Seems like thats improved quite a bit.

don't worry about conroejoe and trans.

joe been against vista since day one, just look at his previous post. it like his full time job.

trans switches OS faster then some people switch underwear

[Digital_Trans]

don't worry about conroejoe and trans.

joe been against vista since day one, just look at his previous post. it like his full time job.

trans switches OS faster then some people switch underwear


Muuuhahahahaha............. Vista SP1 might cure my unhappyness!
I'll wait until it's gone gold and see the feedback results before hand.
Wait till we get our hanes on you! :D

[$n][pErMan]

Vista 64-bit runs fine for me and my games run smooth... have been on Vista sense March and no issues I could not fix in a few minutes of looking here :) I would not recommend anything less than 2GB of ram.

[Q]

Vista still has a lot of issues, even with SP1 (definitely a step in the right direction, though). The real answer to "XP or Vista" is to try out Vista for yourself. Vista does have its advantages and it does some things very well. However, there are some bugs and unwanted "features" that make it unbearable for some users. If these bugs don't affect your particular software and hardware configuration (or if you can just overlook them), then Vista can be a fantastic OS. You really have to make the call though, and its going to take time and effort on your part to test Vista out.

My machines run XP with the exception of my HTPC which runs Vista.

[Dragunov]

No real problems at all, using Home Premium on the laptop of my parents and Ultimate on my own

Sometimes IE stopped responding error, but no real problems

[conroejoe]

Sometimes IE stopped responding error, but no real problems


That would be a real problem. Let's see I'm placing an order online for a customer I have 20 items in my cart at lets say newegg. Browser crashes and I lose the cart. Happiness and love for Vista wouldn't be the first thing on my mind. That would be a problem.

I know some of you guys defend Vista cause you paid alot for it. But c'mon man call a spade a spade. IE crashing is a real problem.

[conroejoe]

[pErMan']Vista 64-bit runs fine for me and my games run smooth... have been on Vista sense March and no issues I could not fix in a few minutes of looking here :) I would not recommend anything less than 2GB of ram.


I think 4GB is about where you wanna start with Vista. 8GB is looking tempting right now. And I do find x64 (XP or Vista) to be smoother when gaming too.

[lognoronon]

I don't use IE just Firefox and thus far no issues with that but I think IE sucks anyway.

[LycosV]

I think the only really problem you could run into is your 1.5GB of RAM. With Vista and it's pre caching ability, more RAM is better.

Dragunov: I had problems with IE crashing in the 32bit version but now that I'm in 64bit I haven't had a crash yet.

[$n][pErMan]

I think 4GB is about where you wanna start with Vista. 8GB is looking tempting right now. And I do find x64 (XP or Vista) to be smoother when gaming too.
True.... it will run fine on 2GB, but I did notice it became smooth as butter once I went to 4GB awhile back (even back on my old 32-bit Vista).

[Q]

That would be a real problem. Let's see I'm placing an order online for a customer I have 20 items in my cart at lets say newegg. Browser crashes and I lose the cart. Happiness and love for Vista wouldn't be the first thing on my mind. That would be a problem.

I know some of you guys defend Vista cause you paid alot for it. But c'mon man call a spade a spade. IE crashing is a real problem.

I don't know if its the result of a WU or what, but I've had both IE 6 and 7 crashing on numerous systems in the last few weeks. And this has been on XP systems.

[Redeemed]

I've seldom experienced any crashes in IE. But I always hear people complaining about it. Anymore I just consider my self to be one lucky individual- no problems with IE, none with Vista, and non with Crysis. :cool:

[Gorion]

I don't know if its the result of a WU or what, but I've had both IE 6 and 7 crashing on numerous systems in the last few weeks. And this has been on XP systems.

No way IE only crashes on the Vista. Don't spread fud! Nothing ever crashes on XP it's Vista that is the suxor.

:captnkill:

[john19055]

It took me a long time to install Vista ultimate 32bit ,I have used it for over three months now ,but I still don't like it ,sure it looks fancy ,but I just have better luck with Windows XP,It not that games don't play ,nearly ever game I play on Vista I have very little problems,but there are some older games that does cause me problems ,but with XP I rarely have a problem with any of my games .I have more lockups with Vista ,I guess I am just so used to XP and if I do have a problem ,XP to me is just easier to fix.I know there are plenty of people that love Vista ,But I just have not found the love yet .I will be going back to my Windows XP pro and stay with it until I have to change.I just have two many third party program that just work better with XP ,Nero is one ,I just like nero 6 Ultra edition a lot better then nero 7,I hate the scout that I cannot get rid of and I am not paying the $70 or more for nero 8 even if it is better then nero 7 ,when nero 6 does everthing I need it to do.If you want a fancy and 3-D interface then Vista is nice ,but other then that I cannot tell vista is worth it ,yes it has DX10 but IMO it does not look that much better ,with a few tweaks you can get XP to look almost just as good as Vista with less performance hit in cysis ,and for as sercurity I have a good anti-virus and fire wall detection and I have'nt had a virus with XP in years,so the extra security in vista is meaningless to me ,plus I not ask are your sure or what ever it said ,since I cut that off day one.I just think windows Vista is a flop,but this is my opinion ,because there are plenty of people that think it is great.

[newfiejudd]

It took me a long time to install Vista ultimate 32bit ,I have used it for over three months now ,but I still don't like it ,sure it looks fancy ,but I just have better luck with Windows XP,It not that games don't play ,nearly ever game I play on Vista I have very little problems,but there are some older games that does cause me problems ,but with XP I rarely have a problem with any of my games .I have more lockups with Vista ,I guess I am just so used to XP and if I do have a problem ,XP to me is just easier to fix.I know there are plenty of people that love Vista ,But I just have not found the love yet .I will be going back to my Windows XP pro and stay with it until I have to change.I just have two many third party program that just work better with XP ,Nero is one ,I just like nero 6 Ultra edition a lot better then nero 7,I hate the scout that I cannot get rid of and I am not paying the $70 or more for nero 8 even if it is better then nero 7 ,when nero 6 does everthing I need it to do.If you want a fancy and 3-D interface then Vista is nice ,but other then that I cannot tell vista is worth it ,yes it has DX10 but IMO it does not look that much better ,with a few tweaks you can get XP to look almost just as good as Vista with less performance hit in cysis ,and for as sercurity I have a good anti-virus and fire wall detection and I have'nt had a virus with XP in years,so the extra security in vista is meaningless to me ,plus I not ask are your sure or what ever it said ,since I cut that off day one.I just think windows Vista is a flop,but this is my opinion ,because there are plenty of people that think it is great.

Simple right click the app, RUN AS Admi. Or run in Compatibility mode.

Also have you disabled Windows Search and the UAC?

Those have been two major annoyances with vista for me.
Compatibility mode has solved alot of problems for me.

[Wolfhound]

It took me a long time to install Vista ultimate 32bit ,I have used it for over three months now ,but I still don't like it ,sure it looks fancy ,but I just have better luck with Windows XP,It not that games don't play ,nearly ever game I play on Vista I have very little problems,but there are some older games that does cause me problems ,but with XP I rarely have a problem with any of my games .I have more lockups with Vista ,I guess I am just so used to XP and if I do have a problem ,XP to me is just easier to fix.I know there are plenty of people that love Vista ,But I just have not found the love yet .I will be going back to my Windows XP pro and stay with it until I have to change.I just have two many third party program that just work better with XP ,Nero is one ,I just like nero 6 Ultra edition a lot better then nero 7,I hate the scout that I cannot get rid of and I am not paying the $70 or more for nero 8 even if it is better then nero 7 ,when nero 6 does everthing I need it to do.If you want a fancy and 3-D interface then Vista is nice ,but other then that I cannot tell vista is worth it ,yes it has DX10 but IMO it does not look that much better ,with a few tweaks you can get XP to look almost just as good as Vista with less performance hit in cysis ,and for as sercurity I have a good anti-virus and fire wall detection and I have'nt had a virus with XP in years,so the extra security in vista is meaningless to me ,plus I not ask are your sure or what ever it said ,since I cut that off day one.I just think windows Vista is a flop,but this is my opinion ,because there are plenty of people that think it is great.

Looks like your keyboard doesn´t have enter key... anyway, the only problem I had with Vista x64 was that the installation hangs in "completing installation" stage and needed a hard reset. Without finishing properly the installation.

This problem cannot be recreated on Windows XP SP2 install and XP x64 install, both installed without problems.

After googling a lot I discover how to solve this problem, I had to disable EIST and all the thermal functions for my quad core to install Windows Vista properly. In terms of performance I´m very happy, the only letdown is transfer times between HHDs when copying a lot of files and performance in some games, but I run all my games in DX9 only Bioshock run on DX10.

[RockSolid]

"Newfiejudd" I not understand one thing WHY! we have to run any game in "Compatibility mode"? XP don't so why Vista?

I have to agree with you "john19055"

For me Vista is all new OS with a fancy 3-D interface very nice, but not for me I didn't buy it for all the fancy bits I got it for my New Computer & games but find out the hard way. Vista has more bugs than a dog got fleas, without SP1 and SP2 my Vista will stay in the cover until Microsoft release them in the near future maybe!, for me I have gone back to windows XP Pro 32bit no problem on all my games.

Its just my opinion....

[newfiejudd]

"Newfiejudd" I not understand one thing WHY! we have to run any game in "Compatibility mode"? XP don't so why Vista?

I have to agree with you "john19055"

For me Vista is all new OS with a fancy 3-D interface very nice, but not for me I didn't buy it for all the fancy bits I got it for my New Computer & games but find out the hard way. Vista has more bugs than a dog got fleas, without SP1 and SP2 my Vista will stay in the cover until Microsoft release them in the near future maybe!, for me I have gone back to windows XP Pro 32bit no problem on all my games.

Its just my opinion....

You run the compatibility mode if the game/app doesn't run under Vista. The most recent problem I had was with Tiger woods 08. I wouldn't install. Ran the setup in compatibility mode, and it installed and runs perfectly on my vista machine.

[nekrosoft13]

You run the compatibility mode if the game/app doesn't run under Vista. The most recent problem I had was with Tiger woods 08. I wouldn't install. Ran the setup in compatibility mode, and it installed and runs perfectly on my vista machine.

thats not a problem with vista, you can get the same problem with XP, its the faulty EA installer.

[Bearclaw]

thats not a problem with vista, you can get the same problem with XP, its the faulty EA installer.
EA Sucks.