OS for gaming.

M

mis3

Gawd
Joined
Jul 4, 2000
Messages
827
Don't know where I should start this thread.

My friend is getting a new PC for gaming and he has to choose between OS (XP or Vista). Are most games available in Vista?
 
at this point vista and xp are basically the same in performance (with the nod going to xp), but dx 10 is maturing and more powerful cards are coming out in late 2008 or early 2009 that will truely show off dx 10.... i say go vista, im using vista ultimate 64-bit, and its fine, but xp pro 64-bit or 32-bit would be better.... but for future proofing go with vista, unless he's rich and get both and duel boot...
 
Anyone ever try WinFLP for gaming? It's a stripped down version of XP
 
skadebo said:
Anyone ever try WinFLP for gaming? It's a stripped down version of XP
Click to expand...

On a decently spec'ed gaming system, WinFLP isn't going to make any appreciable difference. That OS is meant for much older hardware as a way to get XP on the box at all. As to the original question, XP or Vista64 are really your only choice, with a slight speed advantage to XP, but not really enough to make it worth not upgrading to Vista.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
vista X64 home premium, ultimate is a waste.
Click to expand...

Unless you also want the Media Center additions.

Personally, I'm staying with XP Pro for a while, I've even got one of the Freebie Vista Business versions from the PowerTogether Promo. Eventually, I'll end up using it and doing the $139.00 Upgrade to Ultimate so I can move to 64bit.

But XP is going to be around for a while and there is a project, called ALKY, to get DX10 ported over to XP. It seems that the hardware limitation that prevented DX10 from running on XP has been deemed optional by Microsoft because only a few of the major graphics chip vendors could implement it at all. So, that means that it will run on XP too.

**edit**
Seems that I spoke a little too soon about the ALKY Project.
http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/
Seems that it shut down on Jan. 06, 2008
 
MrWizard6600 said:
vista X64 home premium, ultimate is a waste.
Click to expand...

++ I love vistas being stable. I enjoy playing a game and not getting kicked out cause XP has some random issue. Ultimate is fine for increasing your e-penis but really wont do anything for you. Spent the extra money it would have cost you on better hardware
 
Running Vista 64bit Ultimate and gaming is super smooth. I could not say that about Windows XP. The frame rates may have been higher but overall smoothness was inconsistent. This is regardless of whether I'm running overclocked or not.
 
pfunkman said:
What media center additions does ultimate have that home premium dont?
Click to expand...
He probably doesn't know that Home Premium comes with VMC. The only thing I can think of that Ultimate has that HP doesn't is remote desktop which is easy to fix by simply firing up VNC.
 
If you're building a new system, I'd say go Vista x64 and choose hardware for it. Performance in Vista is only going to get better and there are already benefits. As others have said, smoothness (from better memory management?) and stability (for example, Vista will recover from a driver crash where XP needed to be rebooted) are great.
 
xp sp3 is just around the corner. i wonder if we'll see any improvement in gaming performance?
 
CrimandEvil said:
He probably doesn't know that Home Premium comes with VMC. The only thing I can think of that Ultimate has that HP doesn't is remote desktop which is easy to fix by simply firing up VNC.
Click to expand...

Right about that...
I thought the difference was the MCE, But I guess I was wrong.
That just makes it a little cheaper when I decide to Switch. ;)

And from the reports of the Beta testers XP SP3 gives about a 10% boost in performance over SP2. So that's another reason to stay with it until I have to switch. I'll wait until I build a new 'puter and that looks to be a ways off.
 
rodsfree said:
Right about that...
I thought the difference was the MCE, But I guess I was wrong.
That just makes it a little cheaper when I decide to Switch. ;)

And from the reports of the Beta testers XP SP3 gives about a 10% boost in performance over SP2. So that's another reason to stay with it until I have to switch. I'll wait until I build a new 'puter and that looks to be a ways off.
Click to expand...

Im willing to bet that when Vista SP1 is released it will net vista the same performance improvements that XP will recieve from SP3.
 
CrimandEvil said:
And not to mention that all reports is that the Vista SP1 has little to no performance increases.
Click to expand...
Well, I'd imagine most of the performance increasing updates that it has enthusiasts already nabbed when they came out :D.
 
Windows XP Pro SP3 32 bit

Vista is a waste of time and money. Hardly anything supports DX10 and even then it runs nearly all applications much slower than XP. Quite a botched OS. Microsoft should be ashamed. Hopefully Windows 7 makes up for it.
 
Mr. K6 said:
Well, I'd imagine most of the performance increasing updates that it has enthusiasts already nabbed when they came out :D.
Click to expand...
You mean all zero of them? "Performance increasing updates" are not the same as bug fixes and other patch fixes which is pretty all Vista has had so far.
 
As a Person that dual boots XP and Vista, i can honestly say XP wins out for gaming, the performance in XP is usually slightly better. .

Its a tough one, anyone that claims Vista is equal is dreaming, however I would probably grab Vista for future proofing, it has got to stop sucking some time lol.
 
Battleneter2 said:
Its a tough one, anyone that claims Vista is equal is dreaming, however I would probably grab Vista for future proofing, it has got to stop sucking some time lol.
Click to expand...
Thats pretty much how I see; I would love to stick with XP but looking ahead for the year or two I know I'll have to get Vista at some point and I'd rather not pay MS twice for the privilege
to use their OS.

Then again I've been thinking of just ditching PC gaming as it seems to be looking more and more like a dinosaur lumbering around in favor of just getting a PS3 or possibly a 360.
 
CrimandEvil said:
You mean all zero of them? "Performance increasing updates" are not the same as bug fixes and other patch fixes which is pretty all Vista has had so far.
Click to expand...
Well considering they "increase performance" over an unpatched version, they can rightfully be called "performance increasing updates." English not your first language? :confused:

Anyway, if your motto is "FPS is life," then yes, XP is probably the way to go. Vista for me has been just as good of an operating system, although it lacks raw performance its smoothness and stability are more convenient. I just love how everyone jumps on the "Vista sux" bandwagon, its like year 2000 all over again :rolleyes:.
 
Mr. K6 said:
Well considering they "increase performance" over an unpatched version, they can rightfully be called "performance increasing updates." English not your first language? :confused:

Anyway, if your motto is "FPS is life," then yes, XP is probably the way to go. Vista for me has been just as good of an operating system, although it lacks raw performance its smoothness and stability are more convenient. I just love how everyone jumps on the "Vista sux" bandwagon, its like year 2000 all over again :rolleyes:.
Click to expand...
It's every Windows release. It's pretty much pointless to even get into discussions about it, but I'm with ya on the Vista is smoother and more stable point. Unless you are running garbage hardware, the 5-10 fps you MIGHT lose playing your favorite FPS in Vista is not going to be noticable. I've played all the recent games in both OSs, there is no appreciable difference between the two.
 
IMO my games in vista feels more smoother then they did in XP. Thats why I cant stand my XP boot. I mostly go there for F2p mmos that uses gameguard, or ones that dont work in vista.

So I rarely use my XP boot any more.so in my view I see vista as the os for gaming. XP still great too. But I just cant stand it any more. Plus I perfer the audio stack in vista over the one in XP.
 
I prefer XP but if you want DX10 go Vista x64. For some reason I've had more success with x64 than the 32 bit version.
 
Battleneter2 said:
As a Person that dual boots XP and Vista, i can honestly say XP wins out for gaming, the performance in XP is usually slightly better. .

Its a tough one, anyone that claims Vista is equal is dreaming, however I would probably grab Vista for future proofing, it has got to stop sucking some time lol.
Click to expand...

Vista is most likely to be replaced by the next gen within the next two years, and XP is receiving a SP3 soon, so I don't think future proofing is a good reason to go with Vista.

Vista is going to be replaced sooner rather than later because sales have been dismal, much less than expected. Google "vista sales disappointment" and you will see several articles on this, reporting less than 5% market share as of June. Here's an example:
http://www.bitsofnews.com/content/view/5890/

Doesn't help that PC World rated Vista the #1 tech disappointment of 2007:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140583-page,5-c,techindustrytrends/article.html

And the Microsoft Windows development group has been reorged. Count on Vista being replaced sooner than later.

I switched back to XP after running Vista for about 3 months. I just didn't like the heaver "nanny state" feel of it always trying to protect me from myself. It constantly is running stuff in the background. Tests show it a bit slower in games, but I don't think that is all that noticeable.

I think it comes down to if you are of the "less is more" camp, go with XP until the next gen arrives. It this is not important and you want the latest thing, go with Vista. Game experience will be nearly enough the same not to matter much, especially the newer Vista aware games.

Oh, yes. Vista looks cooler, no doubt about that.
 
Another vote for Vista 64. When your in the OS doing stuff, Vista is smoother, faster and more stable with a couple of nagging exceptions that should be fixed with SP1. I've got 2 similar machines side by side one with XP and one with Vista both with the same games installed and there is no "noticeable" difference playing the game. If you were to benchmark however, XP would show higher fps but not high enough in my experience to allow a higher playable resolution for example. Crysis plays with exactly the same settings using DX9 mode in Vista that it does on the XP machine. UT3 plays the same. ETQW plays the same. Bioshock plays the same except I have the option of playing it DX10 mode and it plays very well and looks fantastic. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. played great. I could go on but I haven't had any trouble playing any game I've wanted to play on Vista.

It is the future. Don't pay twice.
 
Volucris said:
Windows XP Pro SP3 32 bit

Vista is a waste of time and money. Hardly anything supports DX10 and even then it runs nearly all applications much slower than XP. Quite a botched OS. Microsoft should be ashamed. Hopefully Windows 7 makes up for it.
Click to expand...

I have NO issues with Vista, have fun being left behind. :p
 
Vista here too. No problems from my side (x64 and 32)
 
I think everyone misses the point that vista has superfetch and that it manages memory better. For gaming as it mentioned time and time again that XP is slightly better but not noticeable.

Future proofing is understanding that all new games to be released will be developed using DX10 and that DX10 much like DX9 will have updates making it faster and allowing for better graphic engines, shader models, etc....

MS is done with DX9.

Personally, there is no point in upgrading something that is not broken. XP works great so why fix it? Wait till you are forced to upgrade to a new OS...aka new computer or want to experiment with other OS on a new HD.

My new computer parts should be arriving over the next couple of days and I will be installing vista on the new comp.
 
CrimandEvil said:
He probably doesn't know that Home Premium comes with VMC. The only thing I can think of that Ultimate has that HP doesn't is remote desktop which is easy to fix by simply firing up VNC.
Click to expand...

Ultimate also has "ultimate-only extras" (crappy things like DreamScene (using a movie for your desktop background) and Texas Hold 'em Poker), along with BitLocker (and all the other features that Business has that Home doesn't, such as backup software and Fax & Scan).

MS has a nice table here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/choose.mspx

Oh, and here is another vote for Vista 64-bit.
 
Vista for me, It has been 2x more stable than any XP install I have ever done. Vista performance in games is a tad bit less but like everyone else says its barely noticeable. Think of vista as a investment that will eventually pay off when bugs get fixed here and there.
 
I'm happy with Vista x64 also.

I got Ultimate OEM, since I want to be able to access everything (no locking me out of Group Policy or advanced security settings), and I also use the Encrypting File System occasionally (Previous Versions might be useful, too), but don't want to lose the consumer-orientated features.
 
What's with all the 'more stable than XP' comments? I run 32 and 64 bit versions of XP and have zero problems. In fact, I have had no problems for a long, long time.

How can it be more stable than that? Just curious to know what 'more stable than XP' means....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top