Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vista vs XP performance comparison.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by oldkawman1 View Post
    The problem with 98se and all before was the ram limitation. You had to have <512MB in order to boot. That was just how it was written. Back then, 125MB or 256MB was real pricey. 64Mb was pretty much typical usage for pc100 or pc133 ram, so why spend time with the extra code for that. Typical BS corporate decision for short term results and long term failure. Why do something today when you can delay it until cost skyrockets and time is critical? For the BONUS of course! How about that?
    WRONG!

    Win98/WinME are able to go up to 1024Mby/ 2048Mbyte. (Or even more, but not tested)

    The problem was the Vcache. With more than 512Mbyte the Vcache will corrupt your data. But you can set the Vcache to a maximum of 512Mbyte. So no problem anymore. And Win9x with more than 512Mbyte RAM will become blazing fast. The next good point on such configuration: the Vcache can only grow up to 512Mbyte, but you have got more RAm free. Win9x wasnt able to clear the cache efficently, wich reduced performance, because RAm was full. I had a 2Gig ME machine running for1 year. And a buddy from mine has got winme for years as second os today with 1,5Gig RAm works great and much faster than XP.

    Comment


      Originally posted by SpitFire View Post
      funny how microslop products get more hardware intensive yet the latest incarnation of gentoo with full blown GNOME desktop uses a mere 127Mb with 0 swap , great if you're dual booting with vista on a 4gb box , one uses 1gig at idle and the other uses 127mb at idle yet the 127mb looks so much better and outperforms the 1gb os in ever way..... progress for ya eh
      And what can Gentoo do?
      I love people who don't actually use the OS but ramble on it. A superior kernel yeah, that you have to compile video drivers that are new EVERYTIME to get them working. Ahh, how intuitive. I'd rather use more RAM please than figuring how to get GRUB working again after it kills my existing dual-boot.


      1GB of DDR2 RAM is cheaper than an 1hr ******* too. Seriously.

      Comment


        There was never any fix or patch from microsoft!

        Originally posted by [FfFC]_-(MAD)-_ View Post
        WRONG!

        Win98/WinME are able to go up to 1024Mby/ 2048Mbyte. (Or even more, but not tested)

        The problem was the Vcache. With more than 512Mbyte the Vcache will corrupt your data. But you can set the Vcache to a maximum of 512Mbyte. So no problem anymore. And Win9x with more than 512Mbyte RAM will become blazing fast. The next good point on such configuration: the Vcache can only grow up to 512Mbyte, but you have got more RAm free. Win9x wasnt able to clear the cache efficently, wich reduced performance, because RAm was full. I had a 2Gig ME machine running for1 year. And a buddy from mine has got winme for years as second os today with 1,5Gig RAm works great and much faster than XP.
        There was a "community" produced service pack. But, microsoft never addressed the issue and never fixed it. They were to busy selling WinME and Win2000 and Win2000PRO and office 98 and office 2000, etc. to the masses as "upgrades" who eagerly responded by throwing money.

        Comment


          If anyone tried SP1 for vista, is there any performance vise difference in UT3?

          Comment


            Originally posted by SpitFire View Post
            i've no doubt someone will attempt to put me right on this but show me a windows box that has an uptime in years
            My 98SE PC was stable for a good 8 years (though I went through three cases, 4 HDDs, 3 processors, 5 graphics cards, 3 motherboards, and 4 CD-ROM/DVD-ROM drivers due to upgrading it frequently, but I merely transferred the previous HDD to the new system and/or copied the old HDD onto the new HDD). That computer had an 8GB HDD when I bought it. Its current incarnation, with the same original install of Win98SE is now on a 160GB HDD. The only time I had any instability was when I messed up the installation of a CPU, and that had nothing to do with Windows.

            The only reason I don't use it right now is I burned out the graphics card I had in it and don't have the money to replace it right now.

            I've had to do a fresh install of WinXP three times on my XP computer, though, due to instability.

            For reference, I have 3 computers right now: one running Win98SE, one running WinXP, and one running Vista. My Vista laptop is the most powerful at the moment (though I'm going to look at how I can improve my XP PC since I can plug it directly into my 19" HDTV), so it's what I use primarily for gaming.

            At 1440x900 with max settings (with a possibly underclocked GeForce 8600M GS), I get around 19-25 fps, which is plenty for me because my eyes can't really tell much difference at all between 20 and 30 fps, much less higher.


            The problem with 98se and all before was the ram limitation. You had to have <512MB in order to boot.
            Eh? I've only got 512MB of RAM in my 98SE computer because its current form (caused by my screwing up a processor and not having money for new parts) is a 'canabalized' Gateway computer from 2000 that uses Rambus RAM, which is (or was) absurdly expensive. Can't say I ever had a chance to try more than 512MB of RAM in it.

            Comment


              Originally posted by PhenomFX View Post
              If anyone tried SP1 for vista, is there any performance vise difference in UT3?
              It's hard to say, but I didn't benchmark with SP1 installed versus when it wasn't installed. I installed SP1 for other reasons. So far UT3 runs great on my system - knock on wood

              Comment


                Originally posted by Elohim View Post
                I highly doubt you'll see Windows 7 in 2009 The last I read, it's tentative release date is 2009-2011, so that probably means 2012
                LOL

                I have no doubt. I would never hold my breath for any Windows OS to be released anywhere near projections.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Hickeroar View Post
                  LOL my poor system? I've got one of the highest end motherboards you can buy, one of the highest end video cards you can buy...and you're saying I have a poor system?

                  If I buy an MSI motherboard and run the same clock speeds with the same video card, my performance under vista isn't going to be magically drastically different on that setup. I know this, because I used to have the same system...with a different motherboard. My vista performance on that sucked as well. UT3 has shown by far the biggest drop in framerate going from Vista to XP. Usually it's a 5-10% drop, not a 50% drop.

                  And don't talk computer hardware at me. I've probably built more computers and used more varying system setups than you can count.
                  You're wasting your time. Someone who defends Vista like this guy is obviously delusional. He'd probably admit to being Elvis too...

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Princess Katrina View Post
                    My 98SE PC was stable for a good 8 years (though I went through three cases...
                    This might seem strange to a non unix guy, but uptime means you actually don't power off the system.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by AlienMind View Post
                      This might seem strange to a non unix guy, but uptime means you actually don't power off the system.
                      Yes, I know, and that's part of my point. I highly doubt any of you go more than 2-3 years without upgrading some part of your computer, which requires powering down your system. I doubt any of you ever went without updating/installing something that required rebooting, either; and that also requires powering down your system, if only for a moment. I'm sure everyone here has also experienced at least one black out in the past year or two, which will power down your system unless you've got a backup power generator connected to your PC.

                      If you do go 3+ years without ever powering down your system, it won't matter if you have instability because your system is going to be too out of date to matter. Especially if you go 8+ years.


                      The main point, though, is that I've got an 8 year old 98SE (actually, it's almost 10 now) computer whose only bout with instability was because of a faulty processor installation and not because of the OS. In fact, I think it's the only one of my computers that I've never had a Blue Screen of Death on (even managed to get one on my Vista laptop). It is, by far, my favorite OS. I wish they'd stuck with it and just upgraded it to work with the improving hardware.


                      Personally, I hate XP, but for reasons that have nothing to do with gaming, and I love Vista, also for reasons that have nothing to do with gaming. XP is ugly. Vista is pretty. That's all that really matters, right?


                      Edit: Oh, and I assume you said "guy" as a generic, automatic term; but maybe you should, oh, I don't know, look at the username of the person you're replying to before deciding on gender-specific terms?

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Princess Katrina View Post
                        Yes, I know, and that's part of my point. I highly doubt any of you go more than 2-3 years without upgrading some part of your computer, which requires powering down your system. I doubt any of you ever went without updating/installing something that required rebooting, either; and that also requires powering down your system, if only for a moment. I'm sure everyone here has also experienced at least one black out in the past year or two, which will power down your system unless you've got a backup power generator connected to your PC.

                        If you do go 3+ years without ever powering down your system, it won't matter if you have instability because your system is going to be too out of date to matter. Especially if you go 8+ years.


                        The main point, though, is that I've got an 8 year old 98SE (actually, it's almost 10 now) computer whose only bout with instability was because of a faulty processor installation and not because of the OS. In fact, I think it's the only one of my computers that I've never had a Blue Screen of Death on (even managed to get one on my Vista laptop). It is, by far, my favorite OS. I wish they'd stuck with it and just upgraded it to work with the improving hardware.


                        Personally, I hate XP, but for reasons that have nothing to do with gaming, and I love Vista, also for reasons that have nothing to do with gaming. XP is ugly. Vista is pretty. That's all that really matters, right?


                        Edit: Oh, and I assume you said "guy" as a generic, automatic term; but maybe you should, oh, I don't know, look at the username of the person you're replying to before deciding on gender-specific terms?
                        seriously , i have machines that work for a living that havnt been so much as rebooted for nigh on 3 years , and as for looking good :-

                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ImW0-MgR8I

                        ......LMAO @ vista ....wtf is vista....hahahaa

                        btw you wanna go out for a drink sometime seeing as you're a non-guy ... sorry cant help myself being a red-blooded hetro

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by SpitFire View Post
                          seriously , i have machines that work for a living that havnt been so much as rebooted for nigh on 3 years , and as for looking good :-

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ImW0-MgR8I

                          ......LMAO @ vista ....wtf is vista....hahahaa
                          Most of those features were painful on the eyes or so totally pointless as to be retarded (firepaint?). >.>

                          It's also irrelevant as to whether or not other operating systems besides Vista have some of the features Vista has. It doesn't make Vista any less pretty or XP any less ugly.

                          btw you wanna go out for a drink sometime seeing as you're a non-guy ... sorry cant help myself being a red-blooded hetro
                          I've already got a boyfriend.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Princess Katrina View Post
                            Most of those features were painful on the eyes or so totally pointless as to be retarded (firepaint?). >.>

                            It's also irrelevant as to whether or not other operating systems besides Vista have some of the features Vista has. It doesn't make Vista any less pretty or XP any less ugly.
                            The internals of vista make it ugly not the ui and the purpose of "windows flip" is? to look cool? , you may think that firepaint is retarded but a clever guy coded it , maybe he did it because it was easy..? i dunno. You dont have to have firepaint at all , infact you dont have to have a 3d window manager at all , for sure your games will run better without such a thing right ? also there is a list of compiz-plugins that is as long as your arm, firepaint is just one of them , the thing is choice *nod* , I know how bad XP is but that video is a GNU/Linux distribution nothing to do with microsoft what so ever

                            Originally posted by Princess Katrina View Post
                            I've already got a boyfriend.
                            good for you

                            Comment


                              IMO If you already have or don't mind having a dual-boot setup , I guess also having Ubuntu would be cool, if you are a PC enthusiast. Otherwise most people should stick to Windows (i.e. keep what you have) even if it has lower quality than Linux, etc...

                              Comment


                                Just a funny little link I'd like to throw in

                                He did take somewhat ancient games, most of them I haven't heard of in the first place, but it's funny nevertheless

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X