PDA

View Full Version : Will Vista improve the performance of current games?


Pages : [1] 2 3

sillyeagle
05-25-06, 11:32 PM
From what I hear vista will eliminate much of the API stuff, and MS was claiming 30-40% performance gain. Will there be a gain for dx9 game?

SH64
05-25-06, 11:39 PM
For DX9.0 games , i dont think so.

a12ctic
05-25-06, 11:40 PM
i dont think therell be a big performance gain period.

btw, the release date got pushed back again LOL

supra
05-25-06, 11:54 PM
isnt dx9 games going to be run thru some emulator thing?

dont like the sound of that.

PeterJensen
05-25-06, 11:57 PM
i dont think therell be a big performance gain period.

btw, the release date got pushed back again LOL
Only a rumor.

nekrosoft13
05-26-06, 06:53 AM
isnt dx9 games going to be run thru some emulator thing?

dont like the sound of that.

dx9, dx8, dx7 etc.. and there was some talk that opengl too.

back to topic, when a fresh install OS uses close to 800-900mb of ram. i don't see how can performance improve.

jolle
05-26-06, 07:20 AM
The new drivermodel might reduce CPU overhead a bit on current games, but I doubt its going to make alot of difference, CPU is not often the bottleneck..
Tho Vista seems to bring alot of gamer stuff to the table, Live anywhere sounds a bit interesting.. unified patching ala Windows Update for games, some years ago there were rumours about a standard for PC handcontrollers, not heard much about that lately tho..
And MS initiative with "Games for Windows", the jibberjabber on their E3 conference sounds like they intend to get Xb360 games developed for Windows aswell, but you know how companies like to talk big about themselves..

Then you got D3D9L which prolly has some advantages over D3D9, and ofcource DX10, but both require the games renderers to be written for the APIs, so nothing for current games.

Becoming
05-26-06, 01:17 PM
dx9, dx8, dx7 etc.. and there was some talk that opengl too.

back to topic, when a fresh install OS uses close to 800-900mb of ram. i don't see how can performance improve.

Where exactly are you pulling that number from? I thought the minimum ram requirement for Vista was 512 so I don't see how this works? Unless you meant hard drive space in which case your numbers are even further out of whack.

jAkUp
05-26-06, 01:26 PM
You are basing those numbers on a beta. There is no way in hell the final product will use 1GB of ram.

a12ctic
05-26-06, 02:54 PM
You are basing those numbers on a beta. There is no way in hell the final product will use 1GB of ram.
i dont know about that, areo (sp?) is the most unefficient way of introducing transparancy ive ever seen, in linux you can get transparancy with 0 performance loss :D

Riptide
05-26-06, 02:59 PM
Yeah but Linux is for gay penguins.

Tygerwoody
05-26-06, 03:07 PM
Yeah but Linux is for gay penguins.
I second this

Knot3D
05-26-06, 03:07 PM
I can even imagine a scenario where, initially, alot of games' performance will suffer a bit from it.

nekrosoft13
05-26-06, 03:14 PM
Where exactly are you pulling that number from? I thought the minimum ram requirement for Vista was 512 so I don't see how this works? Unless you meant hard drive space in which case your numbers are even further out of whack.

if you google it you will find info about it

Riptide
05-26-06, 03:16 PM
It's true. I've seen some posts on ars from people that have loaded the second beta and it really is a bit of a pig. But rationally everyone should take that with a grain of salt. It is after all, a beta.

einstein_314
05-26-06, 03:20 PM
Yeah but Linux is for gay penguins.
I third that :D

It's a beta. You can't base anything on a beta. As it's been pointed out in other threads, betas have debugging code in them. This slows them way down and makes them bigger. I agree with jAkUp about it not using 1GB of ram for the final version. Especially because the minimum requirement is 512 MB...

Sazar
05-26-06, 03:20 PM
It's a beta 2. I can't imagine there is going to be a lot less overall overhead by going with the final ESPECIALLY when the final will have all out aero effects and all that jazz in the higher end version.

jAkUp
05-26-06, 03:39 PM
Betas typically have memory leaks, and large overheads. Its only at Beta 2. Who knows how many betas they will have until an RC. We still have almost 1 full year until Vista will be released.

Also, think about the drivers. Most of the drivers that we are using on Vista right now are not even Alphas!

Aero is not inefficient, it actually uses quite a lot of GPU memory for its effects, thats good since all that ram is usually just sitting idle when your not gaming.

Riptide
05-26-06, 03:42 PM
I'd like to point out that all we are doing here is speculating. None of us is on the design team. None of us has any idea what is or isn't in there beyond any doubt. Nor do any of us know what will happen with the final builds.

Sazar
05-26-06, 03:45 PM
I have faith in m$.

They usually double the memory requirements (minimum) to run their completely new operating systems :)

512 for XP for smooth sailing, I expect 1 gig for Vista for smooth usage.

I am thinking 2 gb should hold fine for now.

Son Goku
05-26-06, 03:50 PM
Well, being feature incomplete does tend to play in the other direction, and until they announce the feature set has been locked (which they tend to do before it leaves beta) that can go up.

However, that debug code (I think I'm the one who mentioned it) can take quite a bit away from the system's performance. One should also not underestimate the improvements that a mature driver set can provide over a first gen... Just look at some of the gfx drivers from a new board, vs. a board that's been out for a couple years. This was especially seen back in the 3dfx days where there were no integrated driver sets.

However in this case, much like then, one does have to start from scratch somewhat with Vista drivers...

Acid Rain
05-26-06, 04:13 PM
i dont think therell be a big performance gain period.

btw, the release date got pushed back again LOLSweeny mentions the current inefficiency of Direct3D, citing as much as a 50% loss of potential output capacity due to this inefficiency. Remove that bottleneck and, wahlah, significantly higher performance on capable hardware. In games coded for the new driver model, that is. Whether or not Microsoft will eliminate this bottleneck is unsure, but I have faith.

As far as "They pushed Vista back LOLzz!!!", who here really cares? Rushed to market and buggy, or pushed back but solidly released? Your choice. I'll take the latter.

nekrosoft13
05-26-06, 05:15 PM
It's true. I've seen some posts on ars from people that have loaded the second beta and it really is a bit of a pig. But rationally everyone should take that with a grain of salt. It is after all, a beta.

i know its a beta, but i don't think MS will lower it to XP levels, with some luck they will decrease it from 800-900mb to maybe 500-700mb levels

and thats just for fresh vista installs, not counting any programs, firewalls, AV etc..

Fuku2
05-27-06, 01:56 PM
There will be a gain in performance for DX10 titles. Unfortunatly these games will tax your system far more than ever making the gain invisible.

a12ctic
05-27-06, 02:04 PM
personaly i think they should just wait another 5 years and release something completly *different*, use their billions of dollars to make something revolutionary, get some inovated programmers, make something as cool as XGL, and an operating system thats efficient and fresh, thats when I'll buy a MS product.