XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Found the below tests. Seems like its now safe to run Vista.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2 ... 830,00.asp
Your comments .
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2 ... 830,00.asp
Your comments .
Asus Rampage Formula : E8400@4000 : 4GB Mushkin Frostbite @1066/5.5.5.15/TRD6
Sapphire 4870 Toxic 1GB: Coolermaster HAF : BlackIce360 Rad : Apogee GT : DTek-Customs Rez.
Sapphire 4870 Toxic 1GB: Coolermaster HAF : BlackIce360 Rad : Apogee GT : DTek-Customs Rez.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 20576
- Joined: 19 Sep 2003, 02:00
- Location: Bloodbank
Vista was bound to eventually close the gap in gaming performance against it's older sibling. No doubt over the next few months it will improve even more as gfx, sound etc. drivers get even more Vista friendly.
Home users can mostly use Vista with a smile now, although for business, the jury is definitely still out.
Home users can mostly use Vista with a smile now, although for business, the jury is definitely still out.
There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those who understand binary and those who do not.
Those who understand binary and those who do not.
Screeper wrote:Vista was bound to eventually close the gap in gaming performance against it's older sibling. No doubt over the next few months it will improve even more as gfx, sound etc. drivers get even more Vista friendly.
Home users can mostly use Vista with a smile now, although for business, the jury is definitely still out.
Well thats if developers start using dx10 correctly. Coding for better performance , not pretty gfx.
Asus Rampage Formula : E8400@4000 : 4GB Mushkin Frostbite @1066/5.5.5.15/TRD6
Sapphire 4870 Toxic 1GB: Coolermaster HAF : BlackIce360 Rad : Apogee GT : DTek-Customs Rez.
Sapphire 4870 Toxic 1GB: Coolermaster HAF : BlackIce360 Rad : Apogee GT : DTek-Customs Rez.
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Crysis high detail and low detail shows the same numbers accross the board. I didnt read it was with DX10 features enabled so all it says now is "If you want to run the next generation system like the old generation it is finally on par/better. But dont try the new features your looking for..." Sadly that doesnt work for me.
I want to see both DX9 and DX10 statistics when you compare the 2. I know you cant compare apples with oranges but if you change then atleast show what your getting yourself into.
I want to see both DX9 and DX10 statistics when you compare the 2. I know you cant compare apples with oranges but if you change then atleast show what your getting yourself into.
- Firestrm_ZA
- Deliciously Moist Cake
- Posts: 16644
- Joined: 13 Mar 2008, 02:00
- Processor: AMD Ryzen 7 5950X
- Motherboard: ROG Strix B550-F Gaming
- Graphics card: EVGA 3080Ti XC3 Ultra
- Memory: 32GB 3600 G-Skill Trident Z RGB
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 20576
- Joined: 19 Sep 2003, 02:00
- Location: Bloodbank
That's totallt right. Vista is atill on its infancy and will mature sooner than one year, i think.Screeper wrote:Vista was bound to eventually close the gap in gaming performance against it's older sibling. No doubt over the next few months it will improve even more as gfx, sound etc. drivers get even more Vista friendly.
Home users can mostly use Vista with a smile now, although for business,
the jury is definitely still out.
Graphic Cards Reviews
http://www.mygpu.info/
http://www.mygpu.info/
Ever since I started using Vista I loved it!
It had some super annoying bugs at first...but they were fixed through windows updates
Iv always rolled my eyes at people who said XP was still better than Vista and it will always be.etc .etc .etc bla bla bla.
Now when people tell me Vista is **** I just ignore them/agree with them...
They are the ones suffering in the end...not me!
It had some super annoying bugs at first...but they were fixed through windows updates
Iv always rolled my eyes at people who said XP was still better than Vista and it will always be.etc .etc .etc bla bla bla.
Now when people tell me Vista is **** I just ignore them/agree with them...
They are the ones suffering in the end...not me!
“The true bare of any man is his willingness to accept the consequences of his actions.” - iser0073
- Spoiler (show)
- Prime
- Registered User
- Posts: 27729
- Joined: 01 Mar 2004, 02:00
- Location: Getting into trouble
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Um, XP will no longer be for sale from suppliers as of Jan 2009. I have been informed of this while pricing a new PC. So yes, we'll all be forced to move to it. I'm reserving judgement until i get my copy of ultimate 64
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
I was on Vista SP1 about 2 weeks ago.
I had to format after I accidentally messed something up badly (my fault, not Vista's).
I went back to XP, because despite not having DX10:
Crysis on Vista DX9 vs XP DX9 there was about a 10 FPS improvement in XP.
Assassin's Creed in Vista DX9 and XP DX9 was also faster by about 10 FPS.
I'm not saying that it'll be the same for everyone's PC, but XP's game performance is still better at the moment... until DX10 starts getting used properly.
My rig:
8800GTS 640MB
E6600
2GB DDR2 RAM
the rest doesn't really matter all too much.
I had to format after I accidentally messed something up badly (my fault, not Vista's).
I went back to XP, because despite not having DX10:
Crysis on Vista DX9 vs XP DX9 there was about a 10 FPS improvement in XP.
Assassin's Creed in Vista DX9 and XP DX9 was also faster by about 10 FPS.
I'm not saying that it'll be the same for everyone's PC, but XP's game performance is still better at the moment... until DX10 starts getting used properly.
My rig:
8800GTS 640MB
E6600
2GB DDR2 RAM
the rest doesn't really matter all too much.
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: 10 May 2006, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5-3750
- Motherboard: Gigabyte
- Graphics card: nVidia GTX 550Ti
- Memory: 8GB Jetram
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Crysis on 64bit vista is definetly faster than Crysis on XP.
We have just about the same rig M1ke (replace the GTS with a GTX and then it's the same) and I tested Crysis on a Fresh vista 64 install, then restarted and dual booted into my fresh XP install. Vista was a bit (like 5FPS) better. Vista DX10, XP 'DX10' hack.
We have just about the same rig M1ke (replace the GTS with a GTX and then it's the same) and I tested Crysis on a Fresh vista 64 install, then restarted and dual booted into my fresh XP install. Vista was a bit (like 5FPS) better. Vista DX10, XP 'DX10' hack.
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Yeah, apparently Vista 64-bit or even Windows XP 64-bit are about 10-15% faster minimum for Crysis.DarkRanger wrote:Crysis on 64bit vista is definetly faster than Crysis on XP.
We have just about the same rig M1ke (replace the GTS with a GTX and then it's the same) and I tested Crysis on a Fresh vista 64 install, then restarted and dual booted into my fresh XP install. Vista was a bit (like 5FPS) better. Vista DX10, XP 'DX10' hack.
I was comparing 32-bit, but you're right when you step into the 64-bit zone... Vista will blow 32-bit XP away!
It's just a bummer that you need to have Ultimate to get 64-bit
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: 10 May 2006, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5-3750
- Motherboard: Gigabyte
- Graphics card: nVidia GTX 550Ti
- Memory: 8GB Jetram
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
oh, i didn't know that. BTW: The XP was 32bit... Because XP 64bit sux
- rustypup
- Registered User
- Posts: 8872
- Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
- Location: nullus pixius demonica
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
:sigh: again???...DarkRanger wrote:Vista DX10, XP 'DX10' hack.
how many times does it need to be clarified... there is no such thing as DX10 for XP... at all. there will never be an XP version because it's HAL interface is completely foreign to the XP kernel.
repeat after me: i will stop believing in faeries, honest lawyers and DX10 on XP machines...
vista still sux. it will be at least 2 SPs in before it becomes moderately usable for anything other than gaming... at which point the next botched version of windows will be in circulation with its own little cabal of zombies hugging themselves at night for being such good brand-victims...
"Windows 7: Because we can't believe you suckers fell for the same thing seven times in a row... "
- Spoiler (show)
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: 10 May 2006, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5-3750
- Motherboard: Gigabyte
- Graphics card: nVidia GTX 550Ti
- Memory: 8GB Jetram
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
OMFW rusty. I said 'DX10' in inverted commas. It's that bloody thing that a lot of people claim makes Crysis LOOK like the DX10 version. I KNOW DX10 wil never be for XP. I downloaded that pack that claimed to make DX10 work on XP, but all it did was screw up my XP install.
If you read my posts, you will see that somewhere I also told someone that DX10 will never happen in XP.
Comeon man.
If you read my posts, you will see that somewhere I also told someone that DX10 will never happen in XP.
Comeon man.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 28520
- Joined: 06 Oct 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5 650
- Motherboard: Asus P7H55-M LX
- Graphics card: Gigabyte 7850 2GB OC
- Memory: 8GB Kingston DDR3
- Location: In my skin
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Rusty, I believe DarkRanger was referring to the modification of Crysis' cvar files to enable some of Crysis' "DX10 only" effects. God Rays etc. that still run on DX9 shaders, but that are not available in DX9 mode.
"Every thinking man is a drinking man."
Member of the Barberton Tigers
Member of the Barberton Tigers
- rustypup
- Registered User
- Posts: 8872
- Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
- Location: nullus pixius demonica
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
yesssss... and then you drew an immediate performance comparison between the 2 systems - a comparison predicated on the 2 systems enjoying equal benefit from an equatable HAL interface and rendering system... which is clearly pants....DarkRanger wrote:I said 'DX10' in inverted commas.
so, while you pay lip-service to the fact that DX10 on XP is a myth, you're still playing at being a victim of the myth
or did i completely miss the point?
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: 10 May 2006, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5-3750
- Motherboard: Gigabyte
- Graphics card: nVidia GTX 550Ti
- Memory: 8GB Jetram
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
Yes. You are missing the point.
What I was trying to say that if I were to compare the two OS's, 64bit Vista with DX10 and 32bit XP with the cvar hack that makes it look like DX10 Crysis (maybe my wording was just wrong) then I get better performance in Vista, even though I'm running DX9 in XP.
And no, I haven't fallen victim of the DX10 on XP myth. Because since the start of DX10, I knew that it won't be possible for XP to run DX10.
So maybe my post text just wasn't structured properly, or you didn't understand what I was trying to say.
What I was trying to say that if I were to compare the two OS's, 64bit Vista with DX10 and 32bit XP with the cvar hack that makes it look like DX10 Crysis (maybe my wording was just wrong) then I get better performance in Vista, even though I'm running DX9 in XP.
And no, I haven't fallen victim of the DX10 on XP myth. Because since the start of DX10, I knew that it won't be possible for XP to run DX10.
So maybe my post text just wasn't structured properly, or you didn't understand what I was trying to say.
- rustypup
- Registered User
- Posts: 8872
- Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
- Location: nullus pixius demonica
- Contact:
Re: XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 Gaming
aah... gotcha apple-o-gees for the misunderstanding...
still not the best comparison to make; given that the 'hack' degrades performance and a 64bit OS+app enjoys massive advantage over a 32bit install...
still not the best comparison to make; given that the 'hack' degrades performance and a 64bit OS+app enjoys massive advantage over a 32bit install...
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 8346
- Joined: 10 May 2006, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i5-3750
- Motherboard: Gigabyte
- Graphics card: nVidia GTX 550Ti
- Memory: 8GB Jetram
- Contact: