Window Vista vs Window XP

Actually I have no idea which one is better based on some points:

- Gaming
- 3D
- Graphic
- Speed
- Stability
- Security

Some people say Vista is crap.

Ashikaa said:

Actually I have no idea which one is better based on some points:

- Gaming
- 3D
- Graphic
- Speed
- Stability
- Security

Some people say Vista is crap.

Click to expand...

Comparing a fresh fully patched untweaked install of either:

Gaming: Vista is ~10-15% slower than XP, but Vista supports Direct X 10 which won't be released for XP, so in 12 -18 months or so some games are likely to require Vista.

3D: I can't confirm this, but I would imagine that the situation would be similar to games. Though in this case presumably XP is the winner because most pro 3D apps are Open GL, and so th DX 10 thing isn't an issue.

Graphic: I don't know what you mean, Vista is all round slower at everything than XP, so if you are talking about apps like Photoshop then they will run better on XP, if you mean the look of the OS Vista has a prettier GUI though it eats system resources.

Stability: I have never really had any problems with XP, and I haven't used Vista enough to say, but but early adopters of XP had problems and the same probably goes for Vista.

Security: They are both big, bloated and insecure. M$ claim that Vista is less so, though anylists have been saying that because of the complexity of Vista exploits are likely to become more rather than less common. If you have a reasonably secure home network and security software running it shouldn't be that much of an issue.

Overall, vista is far slower and more bloated than XP, but it has features that XP lacks, like DX 10 support and erm... maybe something else? However, a heavily tweaked cut down vista with all of the junk features removed would probably only be a little slower than XP. I say wait a while and then when you do get it, rip it apart with vlite.

Today XP Is better, next year Vista will probably be due to the whole.. supporting new stuff thing.

On your system, unless you measure FPS in gams, you will proably not notice a diffrence. All the games I play work great on Vista, but I dont count FPS in shooters.

I am getting pumped about Vista Ultimate extras, I just read that Objectdock is creating a version of Windowblinds and a boot screen manager for M$ to be released exclusivly through the ultimate extras.

Your system is quite powerful though, some people will take a serious performance hit.

I run Vista quite well. It only slows down a bit due to my 1GB of RAM, but I should be getting another gig soon. The only problem with Vista right now is that ATi doesn't have a driver that support the non-beta version of Vista.

From what I have read and been told about Vista, it's rather going to be a big pain until they release the first Service pack. What was told to me was that Vista is a complete fresh slate and that it's apparent in the fact that exploits for windows that were fix in Windows 95 and 98 are now broken again. All because someone overlooked them. This was also said about the beta version, the RC's this may have been fixed.

The first Service pack is what kills me. M$ already knows that the first SP will be a full out Kernel replacement to the Longhorn Server Kernel. I dunno about anyone else, but a windows Kernel replacement doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I know it can and has been done in Linux, but windows?

I dunno, we'll all see. I kinda want to get a copy of vista just to watch M$ break it with SP1.

I've read that is it some what slower up until about a week or so ago & then I"VE read from some pc magazines that it is the same or somewhat faster in some instances...as far as working in windows, Word, Excell, browsing the net other apps within windows....nothing much else was mentioned...

a general consensous though is that the pop ups you get from installing stuff or making changes or whatever is just a total PITA but most make due as it is supposidly protecting you.

but yeah I'm going to wait to atually upgrade...I"ll be getting a new full copy of XP with a free vista coupon so depending on what the cost in that is b/c I'm sure MS's idea of free is not really free...lol But I'll just shelve it until all the hardcore people get it & it blows up their systems & all that jazz & wait till the first SP comes out to fix everything...unless by some miricle of the computer gods retail is in excellent & not so buggy condition.

csaremnant said:

The first Service pack is what kills me. M$ already knows that the first SP will be a full out Kernel replacement to the Longhorn Server Kernel. I dunno about anyone else, but a windows Kernel replacement doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I know it can and has been done in Linux, but windows?

Click to expand...

IIRC XP sp2 involved a kernel replacement and it worked great for me when I applied sp2 to my running sp1 system.

Take it for what it's worth, but my 2 cent opinion is that you shouldn't upgrade until you find yourself in a situation where what you've got isn't working and what you'll get is supposed to work. What you get may not work, but if you're already in a hole looking for a ladder makes sense Stick with XP until you have a real reason to "upgrade".

I've been running Vista Betas on 3 different machines since March. The first releases were slow, clunky and massive memory hogs. RC2, however, is a totally different game. Memory usage is way down (just a bit more than XP; 350mb+/- with all the bells and whistles) and everything runs much smoother.

Currently, I'm running Vista RC2 on my HTPC. This machine is a stock A64 3000+ with 1GB of RAM and GeForce 6100 integrated video; hardly a powerhouse, by any definition. This machine is used for DVDs, Internet, Google Earth, Office 2007 Beta and MS Flight Simulator 2004. I'm running the full Aero eye candy and have done nothing to optimize the OS. Everything runs very smoothly and I've experienced no errors over the course of the 3 or so months this machine has been running . Video playback quality seems better than on the previous XP install for some reason; perhaps optimized drivers...

If you are considering a new machine sometime after the end of January, I'd say go ahead and get Vista. It's certainly just as good as XP and if you're investing in a new OS, you'll have a longer service life.

If you are considering upgrading, (what MVC said) you might as well wait until there's an overriding reason to do so, such as DX10, driver support, etc... As of this time, Vista has no other significant advantages over XP.

Actually right now I am running Window Vista 64bit RMT 6000 aka Final Version. It runs smoothly with my system, fast anyway. However, most drivers and softwares are not compatible and I am getting annoyed.

YES. VISTA is slower than XP.
YES. VISTA Gaming is 10-15% slower than XP.

I am going to install XP back and wait.

i found that vista used 512mb of my physical memory, where as xp would use 128mb. i do notice that vista is a bit slower than xp in general. looks better though i must say.

From my experience Vista is hardly any poorer in performance over XP. Your system will get a gazillion frames per second in any game, and vista will only knock a few off that at worst. Stability is something completely different in Vista, many times I have seen the graphics card drivers die, and Vista just says they failed, and continues like nothing happened.

Your system can take the full benefits and eye candy of Vista without a single problem. And Vista is the most worthwhile MS operating system I have seen. MS took the right step in making it look good and work well then sort out the bugs, in my opinion. It has worked, and it will pay off. Vista can only get better, as it has done since the start of development, and any bad noises about it are merely echoes from a couple of years ago. Signing up to beta test it is one of the best things I have ever done, and I don't actually use XP any more, to the point of doing away with XP.

well I was running 64 bit Vista now trying the 32 bit version (oh, Crap) and I gotta say that Vista is built well and is very easy to navigate and looks great. I will also add the 64 bit version was an absolute world of dif. for me. After using 64 bit Vista and going to 32 bit I truly want to shoot myself in the face whenever using it. It is soooooooooooooooo so so slow compared to the 64 bit version and uses 650 mb of mem. Compare that to 412 mb of mem in 64 version and no wait time on shutdown or startup... I mean none. I wait about 2.25 min. for Vista 32 bit to shut down. With that said I will give a few of my thoughts on Vista as a whole I have some isues with video drivers also, only when returning from standby. My fps in games is in the 20's when I get 65 in xp but as soon as there is SLI saport for Vista than that will not be a concern for me. Vist is though, one of the most functional OS I have ever used......

Windows 2003 is the best

ToiletDuck said:

Windows 2003 is the best

Click to expand...

S2k3 is considerably more expensive than even Vista Ultimate Retail @ $400.

lol i use Win 2000 Prof.. cant beat it for stability (well u can with linux but i cant dev in the .net framework then)

ToiletDuck said:

Windows 2003 is the best

Click to expand...

Isnt 2003 just a stripped down XP, with some more server stuff, and locked down?

Oroka Sempai said:

Isnt 2003 just a stripped down XP, with some more server stuff, and locked down?

Click to expand...

Nope different Kernal altogether. depending on version there are massive differences in everything from network permissions (via active directory) to web services (web edition).

If I had the 64-bit version, I'd run it...alas...