Vista SP1 Gaming Comparison

P

-=PESTILENCE=-

Gawd
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
931
ExtremeTech did a writeup about how SP1 of Vista compares to out-of-the-box Vista, and Vista with installed hotfixes. Looks promising.

Read Here

"With SP1 right around the corner, the Vista community is champing at the bit. Most of our gaming experience, and definitely our other tests, show that it's definitely worth the download and the slow, plodding installation. Gamers will almost certainly benefit from the myriad of fixes in the service pack.

We're troubled, however, by the Crysis tests. In fact, we're warming up a different test system as we type this conclusion to corroborate them. As startling as they are, however, they don't diminish the fact that all the other tests show that SP1 does indeed improve performance, especially in gaming and multimedia.

If you're a diehard Crysis player with an SLI rig, you might hold off until more SP1 tests are published; otherwise, SP1 is a boon to the troubled operating system and deserves serious consideration by anyone running Windows Vista on a gaming computer."
 
crysis is a big pile of shit and shouldnt even be a consideration under the topic of discussion
 
i agree completely, I was just quoting their summary page at the end for people who didn't want to read the whole thing.
 
Uhm, the World in Conflict results are a bit odd:

DX10 1024 High: 27 fps
DX10 1920 High: 31 fps
 
Rattle said:
crysis is a big pile of shit and shouldnt even be a consideration under the topic of discussion
Click to expand...

Amen brotha, I tried SP1 Beta couple of months back, was sort of thrown off by "Evaluation Copy" thing, I guess I shall wiat for final release, any dates?
 
I think the rumor is Mar 11th for the retail release.
 
Rattle said:
crysis is a big pile of shit and shouldnt even be a consideration under the topic of discussion
Click to expand...

Crysis is a great game. It looks awesome and has a pretty solid story. Just because your 8800GTS doesn't play it on max settings in DX10 without hitting single digit framerates doesn't make it a bad game.
 
I like Vista more than I do XP. Its just as stable and all my hardware has driver support using Vista x64. Something I can't say about the 64bit version of XP. I've also had no problem with games.
 
L33t Masta said:
Crysis is a great game. It looks awesome and has a pretty solid story. Just because your 8800GTS doesn't play it on max settings in DX10 without hitting single digit framerates doesn't make it a bad game.
Click to expand...

QFT. Maybe not great, but definately solid, for sure. I still get a good experience with the system in my sig under DX9 and high details at 1280x1024 (save physics, particles, and sound quality). At any rate, I actually have fun with Crysis, unlike the frustration-fest that was FarCry.
 
L33t Masta said:
Crysis is a great game. It looks awesome and has a pretty solid story. Just because your 8800GTS doesn't play it on max settings in DX10 without hitting single digit framerates doesn't make it a bad game.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go so far as to call it great, but it is decent. Certainly not worthy of being the end-all be-all people try to claim it is. Its engine doesn't scale well, especially in a multi-GPU configuration, so its usefulness as a technical benchmark is rather limited. The other problem is that the replayability is somewhat low and the multiplayer isn't that fun either, I got bored of it quite quickly. So, basing decisions off of a game that the average enthusiast will play through once or twice in the next year is probably a bad idea.
 
NKDietrich said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it great, but it is decent. Certainly not worthy of being the end-all be-all people try to claim it is. Its engine doesn't scale well, especially in a multi-GPU configuration, so its usefulness as a technical benchmark is rather limited. The other problem is that the replayability is somewhat low and the multiplayer isn't that fun either, I got bored of it quite quickly. So, basing decisions off of a game that the average enthusiast will play through once or twice in the next year is probably a bad idea.
Click to expand...

I've played through it a couple times already. Just the number of ways you can kill an enemy and how advanced their AI is is AMAZING! And the game just looks awesome.
 
NKDietrich said:
I wouldn't go so far as to call it great, but it is decent. Certainly not worthy of being the end-all be-all people try to claim it is. Its engine doesn't scale well, especially in a multi-GPU configuration, so its usefulness as a technical benchmark is rather limited. The other problem is that the replayability is somewhat low and the multiplayer isn't that fun either, I got bored of it quite quickly. So, basing decisions off of a game that the average enthusiast will play through once or twice in the next year is probably a bad idea.
Click to expand...

I played demo for some time - checked that it looks cool and never felt any need to play it again or spend cash on full version.
Hmm maybe when it goes to bargain bin at 10 euro I'll think about it :D
 
...returning to topic, I read this article yesterday ( I rarely read ET anymore, too much FUD spewing), and I must say, it was a well done article. Understanding it uses benchmarking, the results are largely impressive. SP1 looks to be a pretty decent deal. The install is a little daunting for some users, but being automated, it could be worse.

I think it's funny that ET calls 6fps a "significant" difference. However, though the individual differences are not ALL that big, there is definitely enough differences to indicate a trend.

Just an FYI, retail has been told it will be released in mid-march, and rumor has it pegged to the 11th. This may have already been stated, but I thought I'd add some support.
 
Any performance gain is a GOOD performance gain. You are basically getting those last few fps without really tweaking anything. What more could you ask for? I think people are expecting way too much from the first Service Pack. Besides, whats a couple FPS if your computer can already pump out 60+ in TF2 maxed out? Whooptie dooo 65FPS! Vista is great and I didn't think so at first but it has grown on me for the last few months that I've been using it.
 
LordVampyre said:
retail??? what theyre going to make us pay for a sp?? hope not.
Click to expand...

Seriously? No of course not.

What he meant was the slip-streamed copies of Vista with SP1 will begin showing up on retail shelves then, right around the release of SP1 on Windows Update and a few other channels.
 
LordVampyre said:
retail??? what theyre going to make us pay for a sp?? hope not.
Click to expand...

You're thinking about Apple. This is m$, they provide free sh1t to update your PC all the time. And I meant free shit in the literal form. But if the article rings true, good for Vista SP1.
 
tehblue said:
You're thinking about Apple. This is m$, they provide free sh1t to update your PC all the time. And I meant free shit in the literal form. But if the article rings true, good for Vista SP1.
Click to expand...

this isn't an apple versus microsoft thread. Last I checked both companies offer security updates and new features as the OS progresses. A whole new set of software 10.5 vs 10.4 is more akin to vista vs xp than it is vista vs vista sp1.

Ive been on vista sp1 for a while now and can attest to better performance across the board, especially file transfers over a network.
 
Will there be a way to download the SP1 without Windows Update? Or will I be able to request a hard copy?
 
Chombo said:
Will there be a way to download the SP1 without Windows Update? Or will I be able to request a hard copy?
Click to expand...

yeah, off technet or msdn as usual. I doubt you could get a hard copy though.
 
L33t Masta said:
Crysis is a great game. It looks awesome and has a pretty solid story. Just because your 8800GTS doesn't play it on max settings in DX10 without hitting single digit framerates doesn't make it a bad game.
Click to expand...


that has nothing to do with it, I played it on alot of different configs and it ran better than most games at the lower frames.

The game is a TURD because its LAME, far cry is more fun, the story is BORING and unoriginal and it wasnt that great and then there's the core level that did ti for me, complete rubbish. The multiplayer SUCKS on top of that.

Its basically EYE CANDY and a benchmark
 
I've been dual booting for about 8 months now. I used XP pretty regularly until last month when I decided to give vista more of a try. So far, I haven't had one hiccup to speak of. Stability is simply not an issue. The only thing I notice is initial bootup and shutdown times. I play COD4 on both OS's and don't notice a difference. I'm just waiting for my free Vista ultimate to come in (feedback program) then I will say goodbye to XP for good.
 
Rattle said:
that has nothing to do with it, I played it on alot of different configs and it ran better than most games at the lower frames.

The game is a TURD because its LAME, far cry is more fun, the story is BORING and unoriginal and it wasnt that great and then there's the core level that did ti for me, complete rubbish. The multiplayer SUCKS on top of that.

Its basically EYE CANDY and a benchmark
Click to expand...

Crysis was good. The suit alone makes the game interesting enough to finish.
 
Yeah they cracked it using a version that was given to OEM's because activating and authentication was deemed "too time consuming and frustrating for end users"
 
All you crysis haters need to stfu, upgrade your system, reinstall crysis, and take your head out of your ass; one of the best games to date.

:rolleyes:
 
Bigjohns97 said:
All you crysis haters need to stfu, upgrade your system, reinstall crysis, and take your head out of your ass; one of the best games to date.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Haven't been playing PC games long have you? Crysis isn't one of the games people will be talking about in 5-10 years. The second something with better graphics comes out, you will see talk about Crysis virtually disappear. We've seen it a million times.
 
NKDietrich said:
Haven't been playing PC games long have you? Crysis isn't one of the games people will be talking about in 5-10 years. The second something with better graphics comes out, you will see talk about Crysis virtually disappear. We've seen it a million times.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. Some people might remember it as great and revolutionary, certainly Far Cry was memorable for a number of reasons. Doom 3 was as well, but not as a good game, but rather for technical innovation at the time.
 
kllrnohj said:
Going from 18fps to 12fps is a significant difference ;) Something like 30%
Click to expand...

50% increase actually.

|(12-18)| / 12 = 0.50 :)

Rattle said:
crysis is a big pile of shit and shouldnt even be a consideration under the topic of discussion
Click to expand...

Funny.
I can run it at 1600x1200, 2x edge aa, 16x AF, on a custom VERY HIGH config at an average of 30 FPS.
Frames go as high as 60+, and as low as the low-mid 20s, but usually hover in the low-mid 30s.

The way it looks quite simply, shames every other game that has ever come out.
Nothing so much as even comes close to its graphics.
And the 30 FPS average with nominal dips is also nothing short of commendable with respect to the fidelity of its graphics and the settings that I run it at.
 
Hamidxa said:
50% increase actually.

|(12-18)| / 12 = 0.50 :)



Funny.
I can run it at 1600x1200, 2x edge aa, 16x AF, on a custom VERY HIGH config at an average of 30 FPS.
Frames go as high as 60+, and as low as the low-mid 20s, but usually hover in the low-mid 30s.

The way it looks quite simply, shames every other game that has ever come out.
Nothing so much as even comes close to its graphics.
And the 30 FPS average with nominal dips is also nothing short of commendable with respect to the fidelity of its graphics and the settings that I run it at.
Click to expand...

Actually in this context, its a 33% decrease.

Intresting settings and FPS youre getting, i run it at a lower resolution with the same GPU, with a custom medium-high config, and get the same fps as you, with no AA.
 
nissanztt90 said:
Actually in this context, its a 33% decrease.

Intresting settings and FPS youre getting, i run it at a lower resolution with the same GPU, with a custom medium-high config, and get the same fps as you, with no AA.
Click to expand...

Yeah, in that context then,
18-12 / 18 = 33% decrease

But in terms of my performance, ive made a thread about it.
Go here if you want to see how to make it look and run great simultaneously:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1265845
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top