PDA

View Full Version : advise: new build XP-SP3 or Vista-32/64


wolfgar
04-18-08, 02:43 PM
I am preparing my regular 2-year major MB+CPU upgrade/rebuild of my gaming rig, but don't know enough about Vista hands-on to make a final decision of the OS to use.

I am primarily a gamer of FPS and tactical's on my 8800GTX with 24' LCD, plus the usual hi-end web surfer, general MS-office 2003 stuff ...

now the time has come to replace the MB/CPU. ( Athlon 4200+ 2gig to Q9450 + 4gig). This will be a full new system build, taking only the 8800GTX, and DVD-R from the current rig and will KVM the monitor/keyboard/mouse, between old and new.

I do some software development work/training here as well, but I run that inside task specific VMWare images to separate out the specific environmental aspects. ( JAVA, IIS, DBs', .NET)
MS Office, and other.)

My problem, other pieces of my home network, printers, scanners, Wife on 3yr-old Dell (was top of the line then, and still damn good), both our work laptops using XPSP2 over wireless G, ...

My primary printer is an older ActionLaser 1600, which will "never be supported" by the OEM for Vista. I really don't want (or need) to replace this still-good printer.


Question:

Should I stick with XP-SP3 for 1-2 more years, or take the plunge in Vista 32 or 64? Knowing that Ill need to spend $500 or more to replace orphaned hardware and software?

For my uses, would I really get anything out of Vista yet? (doesn't seem like it. Dx10 is going nowhere? Sound problems, DRM bullsh*t)

Most of the to-be recycled hardware is vista supported.

Money is a big factor here.
I have a tight expense budget, where i have to save the $$ in advance for I want to spend, and then its 'no questions asked' from the wife. ( Laugh if you want.. My toys, her shoes/purses.. it works for us.. no money fights). The toys budget, includes the desired HDTV upgrade, so spending too much in one area steals from another.

Is Vista particularly 64-bit, worth while? (i know about the 32 bit virtualization) and most of my peripherals are vista supported. Its replacing the printers/scanners, and all that win-XP based software worth it?

Yaboze
04-18-08, 02:48 PM
I took the plunge and went with Vista Ultimate x64 for my system, P35/E6850, only a dual core. I have a retail copy of Vista, I figure I can go Quad later.

Anyway, x64 has been great so far, no issues. Just make sure you get 4GB of ram or more.

ATOJAR
04-18-08, 02:55 PM
Yip, deffiently go with vista x64 with 4GB of memory, i went from xp pro x32 (sp2) to vista x64 and also got a extra 2GB of memory, with sp1 vista runs justas snappy as xp! ... looks great too. :)

No issues here.

K007
04-18-08, 07:57 PM
I think for your printer to work, you will have to try and force some other close/model versions to get to work in Vista.

I think what you need to do is make a list of what you plan to use the OS for. Then decide...does Vista have issues with each of these issues.. or does Vista does something better than XP.

einstein_314
04-18-08, 08:08 PM
I would definitely go with Vista x64. There shouldn't even be a Vista 32bit. Such a waste on MS's part. Anyways, yes, go with Vista x64. I've had no problems with it.

Here's a quick note. I built this current rig last May (so 11 months ago about) and installed Vista x64 on it. I didn't have to format a single time since then. I just did 2 days ago because I felt it was time and I just had too many programs and stuff installed...it was getting slow.

Back when I ran XP, I usually had to format every 3-4 months, not because it was feeling slow, but because it screwed up and something crashed. Maybe it was something I was doing wrong....don't know. But I went a whole year on Vista x64 without formatting. I find that impressive.

Regarding the printer drivers. I think you may be able to get it to work. My parents have a HP Photosmart 1215 printer that has the same problem. HP says there never will be vista support for it. But it works flawlessly using a different series driver. Just search the internets, I'm sure somebody has the same problem and solved it.

nekrosoft13
04-18-08, 08:32 PM
i would also go with vista, there is a chance your printer might not work, but that is the cost of progress

grey_1
04-18-08, 09:04 PM
Another vote for Vista 64. I ran it on 2 Gb ram and was quite happy, though I'll be doing 4 this next go around.

shilk
04-19-08, 02:11 PM
I was also thinking about upgrading to Vista 64. Only problem is that I'm quite concerned about the amount of memory I have (2GB DDR2 800). Can it be run comfortably with 2 Gigs? Will I see an impact in games and such?

ATOJAR
04-19-08, 02:28 PM
I was running vista x64 on 2GB of memory for a short while, it ran ok i suppose BUT as soon as i wacked the other 2GB in i noticed a big difference, as people always say vista x64's memory sweet spot is 4GB just like xp x32's sweet spot is 2GB.

So basically yeah vista will run OK ... but that about it just OK! .... 4GB's & watch it fly!

bacon12
04-19-08, 03:36 PM
I am happy with Vista 64 a well. Once you find your apps you will be ok, and the drivers have matured nicely.

S.SubZero
04-19-08, 03:43 PM
Use what you want. If you know what is and is not supported by your hardware, and it's your money deciding what does and what does not get replaced, use what YOU think fits your needs.

shilk
04-19-08, 10:00 PM
I don't mean to thread crap, but I had one more question. :D

If I installed Vista32, will 2GB be more comfortable than if I was running the 64bit edition?

So we all know that Vista64 is great with 4GB of ram. What about Vista32? Will it run "better" than Vista64 with 2 gigs? I'd hate to reformat XP and install Vista 64 only to find out it chugs more than Vista 32 because of my ram limitation.

The thing I see is how everyone recommends installing Vista64 with 4GB of ram, but I don't see people recommending Vista 32 if you only have 2 GB. Is there a difference at all?

DRen72
04-20-08, 10:55 AM
I don't mean to thread crap, but I had one more question. :D

If I installed Vista32, will 2GB be more comfortable than if I was running the 64bit edition?

So we all know that Vista64 is great with 4GB of ram. What about Vista32? Will it run "better" than Vista64 with 2 gigs? I'd hate to reformat XP and install Vista 64 only to find out it chugs more than Vista 32 because of my ram limitation.

The thing I see is how everyone recommends installing Vista64 with 4GB of ram, but I don't see people recommending Vista 32 if you only have 2 GB. Is there a difference at all?Vista 32 with 2GB will run better than Vista 64 with only 2 GB. Vista 64 has more overhead and needs the extra RAM.

S.SubZero
04-20-08, 11:42 AM
The 'overhead' in Vista 64 is trivial. It doesn't require 2GB of extra RAM to compensate. I have run Vista 64 in 2GB of RAM and it wasn't gasping for RAM or something like that. Some people seem to think that since 64 is double of 32, that it requires double the resources. This is not the case.

shilk
04-21-08, 02:06 AM
You're right S.SubZero. :)

I went out on a limb and installed Vista 64 SP1 on my shiny new 500GB SATAII hard drive. Everything is sooo freakin fast! :D I also installed Fernando1's nForce driver package, and it's very stable.

I was reading something over at Tom's Hardware or something (forgot where), and it said that Vista (32 or 64) scales the ram according to how much you have. For instance, one guy installed 8GB, and it was caching nearly 4GB. Another installed 2GB, and it was caching around 600~800MB. Mine's idling around 818MB right now. So it's not all that bad since Vista scales the ram usuage depending on what it needs. I'm sure disabling a lot of the bloat and tweaking the OS can get it down much further as well. I'm not ready to destroy my fresh install just yet though.

I haven't noticed any slowdown what so ever, and everything is running very smooth for me. :) Pretty bitchin OS I must say. Now I'm off to install some games. :D

CaptNKILL
04-21-08, 02:17 AM
I wouldn't bother messing with startup processes to conserve memory. As far as I know Vista unloads memory cached for system processes when other programs need more memory, so you'll most likely have quite a bit more than 1.2gigs available to your games, even if your free memory doesn't reflect that.

Still, 4gb is recommended.