PDA

View Full Version : WindowXP or VISTA for Gaming machine


Pages : [1] 2

BladeRnR
07-20-07, 07:28 AM
It's been 3 years since my last PC upgrade and the Tax Cheque is coming in. With the X38 Chipset around the corner and 1333Mhz INtel CPU's just out I thought now is as good a time as any to upgrade (i.e Build a new system).

Now I am running VISTA on my 'old' gaming rig with no games installed as the old 6800GT has been relegated to 'Web Page renderer' and a PS3 is feeding my gaming urges. I know this is a very basic question but what OS to use for a pure gaming rig?

I have about 180 PC Games of which I'd probably install 50 games ranging from System Shock 2 right through to FEAR, PREY, C&C3 & Stalker. I have followed the Driver threads and it seems VISTA still suffers performance problems (But is improving). I have still yet to play PREY, FEAR or OBLIVION (I know but my poor system would never do them justice).

What say you fellow gamers - WindowsXP or VISTA for gaming? System will have a 3.0Ghz Core Duo 2 CPU (6850), 8800GTX (Non-SLi for now) and about 4 Gig Memory.

Thanks for your time.

spaceigg
07-20-07, 08:22 AM
XP

Revs
07-20-07, 08:36 AM
Dual boot's the only way IMO. XP for DX9, Vista for DX10. At least until nVidia get the Vista drivers sorted!

BTW: More than 3Gb RAM is pointless with a 32bit OS.

Oh, I would have a good read up on these 1333 CPU's. Had a quick browes last night and it seems these CPU's have little or no advantage at all. In fact they don't look to OC as well either! But they are cheaper I suppose.

Tr1cK
07-20-07, 08:40 AM
Go for Vista. Might as well take the plunge some time.

Besides, 4gb isn't fully utilized on 32bit Windows as Revs said.

nekrosoft13
07-20-07, 08:53 AM
go with vista, no point in waisting time with dual booting.

Nvidia drivers are very good now, not so good times have passed.

DRen72
07-20-07, 08:54 AM
If its one or the other, then Vista, mainly because it will mature more with time and is ready for DX10 games now. For the record, I still dual boot, but I rarely go into XP anymore. All games seem to run fine in Vista.

Revs
07-20-07, 08:57 AM
If its one or the other, then Vista, mainly because it will mature more with time and is ready for DX10 games now.

If ya don't want dual boot then yes, Vista is the way to go IMO

Though the SLI drivers arn't right yet, but as u said, your not going SLI yet anyhow.

BladeRnR
07-20-07, 09:32 AM
I should have added the caveat that I would only install 4 Gig Memory if VISTA was chosen (Ultimately). With RAM relatively cheap I couldn't see any reason not to to go twice what my current rig has.

Dual-Booting may be the way to go considering it's easy enough to test each game under each OS.

Many thanks for the replies :)

Revs
07-20-07, 10:22 AM
I think we're very close to a WHQL SLI DX10 Vista driver anyhow. I reacon in the next month or so all being well. I hope so anyhow, ready for Bioshock ;)

Monolyth
07-20-07, 10:38 AM
4GB's of RAM will not be fully utilized on Vista 32-bit versions (2GB's is the sweet spot). Looking forward "Games for Windows" requires that all branded games work on 64-bit as well so that will definitely help to feed the 64-bit eventual changeover.

I say dual-boot. For spending an extra 1-2hours of work installing/updating XP first on one partition and then Vista on another you could potentially save many hours "trying" to troubleshoot a problem in either O/S. And with many game settings now using files instead of the registry to store settings/profiles it's fairly easy to just install on one O/S and then copy your profile and it "just runs" on the other. I've yet to install a game on XP, but I have it there just in case I need it, better safe then sorry.

3-4 more months from now I will probably be saying just install Vista, things are really starting to stabilize now and drivers are maturing, early adopters always feel the growing pains first. ;)

JasonPC
07-20-07, 12:34 PM
I think you are going to be bound to find a program or device that doesn't work in Vista. Certainly if you are interested in any older games/software, dual booting with XP is a wise idea. However, if you are certain all your devices work with Vista and you are only looking to install newer software, Vista all the way.

stncttr908
07-20-07, 03:21 PM
It looks like Vista is having some trouble with memory addressing.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3044

I'm on XP until DX10 is worth it, and even then I'll still probably use XP for my day to day tasks and web design.

$n][pErMan
07-21-07, 12:47 PM
Vista for sure. I have not even booted into XP for months now. The Drivers are pretty good if you are on a single 8800 and you can get the hacked X-Fi software online easy :) Also, go with 4GB. Some people here will claim its being wasted.. .blah blah blah. But I tell you what, my Vista seems to run flawlessly and so much smoother on 4gigs. Games load and close faster and if a game does happen to crash you can Alt-Ctrl-Del that thing without ever making windows sweat. Also worth noting is I am using the 32-bit version of Vista and I still noticed a difference. Take the plung into Vista... if you remember... XP had the same issues when it came out as Vista has now... give it time and VIsta will be a great OS IMO.

JasonPC
07-21-07, 01:27 PM
With 4 GB of RAM you do have more RAM to be cached, so it definitely may be much faster. With Superfetch, literally all of your RAM is being used as much as possible at all times. When you exit a program, superfetch immediately tries to fill up all ram with files that you often use. This doesn't negatively affect performance though because if you load a program that needs the ram, some of the cached files can instantly be cleared. Although a high performance USB drive can be used as a cache location, it's nowhere near as fast as RAM.

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/3756/superfetchem3.png

You'll notice that I have 1189 MB cached and really 0 MB free. Windows reports that 979 MB is being used, but what it means is that 979 MB is being used by programs running.

grey_1
07-21-07, 08:07 PM
I've been on Vista 64bit for months now, and gaming is fine. Not fully up to XP speed on all the games I own yet, but close enough to not notice.

Even got Dark Messiah to finally run, but I had to install steam to do it. :thumbdwn:

Redeemed
07-21-07, 08:45 PM
I've been on Vista 64bit for months now, and gaming is fine. Not fully up to XP speed on all the games I own yet, but close enough to not notice.

Even got Dark Messiah to finally run, but I had to install steam to do it. :thumbdwn:

Everybody seems to complain about STEAM- yet I've not had a single problem with it myself. I guess I should just consider myself lucky. :p

grey_1
07-21-07, 10:17 PM
Everybody seems to complain about STEAM- yet I've not had a single problem with it myself. I guess I should just consider myself lucky. :p
I really didn't mean it as a slam. I was just irritated that I had to install another app to make the game work. The regular installer doesn't put steam on your hdd, but it's there on the disc, so I had to dl the game to get it to play...still stutters like an over dosed caffeine freak..but that's the engine, not steam.

six_storm
07-21-07, 10:22 PM
Unless you have some major horsepower, I wouldn't even consider Vista for gaming.

Redeemed
07-22-07, 12:28 AM
I really didn't mean it as a slam. I was just irritated that I had to install another app to make the game work. The regular installer doesn't put steam on your hdd, but it's there on the disc, so I had to dl the game to get it to play...still stutters like an over dosed caffeine freak..but that's the engine, not steam.

I've never had stuttering issues with HL2. I do have issues with the fog still... but meh. I'm not so picky that I cannot live with it.

Unless you have some major horsepower, I wouldn't even consider Vista for gaming.

Would you say my rig has major horsepower? Just curious.

Sazar
07-22-07, 12:29 AM
I've never had stuttering issues with HL2. I do have issues with the fog still... but meh. I'm not so picky that I cannot live with it.

Would you say my rig has major horsepower? Just curious.

My folding rig is less powerful than yours and I have no complaints about gaming on it.

JasonPC
07-22-07, 01:14 AM
Dark Messiah loves to stutter. I think it's that way because it pushes the engine to its limits. I've tested that one Stonehelm level on multiple computers where the Cyclops crashes through the gate and it stutters at the exact same place on all the computers no matter what the graphic setting is.

Anyway, I would think anyone building a gaming computer now a day would be using components that would work well on Vista! I mean major horsepower? If you have the horsepower to run new releases these days, you have the horsepower to run Vista.

Redeemed
07-22-07, 01:37 AM
My folding rig is less powerful than yours and I have no complaints about gaming on it.

The reason I asked him that is because this rig can game on Vista just fine. Performance is barely less than what I get in XP. They're almost identical, except for the areas where Vista pwns XP- which is almost in every area... but still. :p

I was curious as to his response and his response alone. Mostly cause he said you need a power house to run Vista and game... well I know my rig is better than what most Joe's are running but it is far from a power house. Atleast IMO.

SwedX
07-22-07, 07:33 AM
Vista all the way, its the only OS on my gaming comp and it runs totaly perfectly..just love it :D

The drivers is so good now that you never have to think about XP for gaming annymore and DX10 starts to dropping in so I say fuc. XP Vista is the future and its works as I said perfect now.

six_storm
07-22-07, 09:36 AM
Would you say my rig has major horsepower? Just curious.

Yeah I guess. I'd say to get a decent gaming experience out of Vista, you at least need 2GB, a daul-core CPU and a 8800GTS 320MB and up. My PC couldn't cut it gaming in Vista right now. The last time I had games running on my Vista install, I got 20 less FPS than my XP install. I'll switch over to Vista once SP1 officially comes out and I have the system specs mentioned above.

grey_1
07-22-07, 10:03 AM
Yeah I guess. I'd say to get a decent gaming experience out of Vista, you at least need 2GB, a daul-core CPU and a 8800GTS 320MB and up. My PC couldn't cut it gaming in Vista right now. The last time I had games running on my Vista install, I got 20 less FPS than my XP install. I'll switch over to Vista once SP1 officially comes out and I have the system specs mentioned above.
I'd say that's about right, mho anyway. Weren't you running a 6xxx gfx card before six_storm?