Originally Posted by ahheadlock
I installed vista 64 to run retail version on, since i heard it would perform better. Plus i bought more ram to make use of it.
Retail under x64 w. 4gb ram is running slower than the demo did on x32 with 2gb. The load times are better and so is the IQ. I put that down to the driver. The cruddy texture / water reflection bugs running in 32bit with 169.04 didn't occur in 64bit, which probably account for a lot of the performance drop. Since installing 169.09 the performance has gotten closer, although i noticed 32bit was still a slightly faster in the time demo, but not as much as it was before.
In game it doesn't seem to matter if i run under 32 or 64 bit (or even dx9 or dx10). With detail set to high the performance is pretty much uniformly bad.
Did you totally ignore all of the online reviews and tests and users here saying that DX10 performance was substantially worse? Along with other countless threads here with simple config file tweaks that offer up all of the fancy DX10 effects using a safe, stable, smoothly operating XP operating system??
To this day, the only game that has offered a shred of evidence to go from XP to vista is lost planet and possiby call of juarez but I wouldn't consider either of those games monumental or worthy of an entire OS upgrade.
That money you spent on vista could have been put towards probably a pair of 8800GT's or an ultra.