i tried vista for a while, i didnt like it much. i want to run directx 10 for gaming i wish i could do it with xp, but i know i cannot. i found vista is a memmory hog, and my system ran slower with it installed. i have a athlon 64 X2 4200+ with 2 gig of memory, so its not a slow machine at all. for it to run slower with vista is a shame. i also had several games that did not run correctly. battlestations midway ran like snot. some of the other games i was running ran poor as well. i have a nvidia 7900 GS which is a good card for directx 9. Was it all issues with the video card drivers?
is vista a peice of ****
- Thread starter ad356
- Start date
None of the games currently out and some still to be released will see the full application of DX10. When you see cards that require the newer Direct X and not just DX10 compatible then they will fully utilize the newer version.
Vista's new Super Prefetch and Windows Experience Indexing features are what some are mistaking as memory hungry. The Super Prefetch places the most often used games or apps in a standby mode for faster loading times. The WEI scores the current hardwares on your system from as low as 1 to 4-6 for the high end.
The 7900 series card is primarily a DX9 card with both ATI and NVidia focused Vista support not XP to sell their newer models. Another thing that chews up resources in the new version of Windows is all the "eye cabdy" thrills namely the Aero styling, side bar, and other nonsense made to sell the OS. But there are also ways to improve performance in the new version as well. http://www.windowsvistamagazine.com/UK/4352741769746825868/50-ways-to-speed-up-your-pc-part-1.html
Vista's new Super Prefetch and Windows Experience Indexing features are what some are mistaking as memory hungry. The Super Prefetch places the most often used games or apps in a standby mode for faster loading times. The WEI scores the current hardwares on your system from as low as 1 to 4-6 for the high end.
The 7900 series card is primarily a DX9 card with both ATI and NVidia focused Vista support not XP to sell their newer models. Another thing that chews up resources in the new version of Windows is all the "eye cabdy" thrills namely the Aero styling, side bar, and other nonsense made to sell the OS. But there are also ways to improve performance in the new version as well. http://www.windowsvistamagazine.com/UK/4352741769746825868/50-ways-to-speed-up-your-pc-part-1.html
ThatGuy16
VIP Member
I have a junky X800XL at the moment and runs just as good if not better on Vista, are you sure your drivers were up to date? in my opinion vista is faster, it does use more memory but i also think it utilizes its resources better. The most common problem that make people "hate" vista is that they don't think they can turn off the UAC (user account crontrol, the annoying popup that asks you everytime you click something) that can be disabled under user accounts.
Edit: PC eye beat me to it
, he explains the memory thing.
Edit: PC eye beat me to it
, he explains the memory thing.I run both Vista and XP at this end giving me the chance to see what both versions do on the same hardwares. Being that Vista is new toy out from the MS crowd it still lacks the refined drivers that XP enjoys on the older models. Another thing to note is the older high end like 7900s and Radeon X1900s and X1950s not surprisingly perform better in XP then the new models out. Put them in Vista and the opposite is then seen.
There was another 10 ways to improve performance in Vista article found lately. But what that involved was disabling background services like printer spooling if you never use a printer as well as mentioning the Vista gadgets as being a waste there. With a new DX10 compatible video card here the first set of drivers was the problem for both Vista and XP. When ATI released the latest catalyst version Vista was all set.
Too bad that wasn't so for XP. The Start taskbar will turn black or white in portions until the mouse cursor is moved over those spots. The gaming problems stopped completely however despite the slight annoyance.
There was another 10 ways to improve performance in Vista article found lately. But what that involved was disabling background services like printer spooling if you never use a printer as well as mentioning the Vista gadgets as being a waste there. With a new DX10 compatible video card here the first set of drivers was the problem for both Vista and XP. When ATI released the latest catalyst version Vista was all set.
Too bad that wasn't so for XP. The Start taskbar will turn black or white in portions until the mouse cursor is moved over those spots. The gaming problems stopped completely however despite the slight annoyance.
X2BreakOfFate
New Member
Again.. Vista is not responcible for the drivers, the manufactuers are.
That was the main problem for the 64bit edition of XP Pro and Linux for the longest time. There was hardly anything for Pro and very rarely found much for Linux. Now if you take a good look at the support sites you see Linux and 64bit driver support becoming more widespread since Vista's release.
Even antivirus providers like Grisoft now see versions of AVG tools for Linux at this time. That was just added to their product line in March of this year. http://www.grisoft.com/doc/downloads/us/crp/0?prd=&typ=sup&lng=en
Even antivirus providers like Grisoft now see versions of AVG tools for Linux at this time. That was just added to their product line in March of this year. http://www.grisoft.com/doc/downloads/us/crp/0?prd=&typ=sup&lng=en
INTELCRAZY
banned
Got that right! As for drivers being hated on...
I love Vista, ppl just are too simple to try something new and actually get used to it or would rather hate than have.
AND!!!!!! if ppl wouldn't try to run it on the absolute crap that they have... And by the way guys, wipe your HDD clean before installing Vista, it makes for Vista to run faster... Who cares about memory? DDR2 is pretty cheap now anyway
On the new build here Vista does everything just as fast as XP. Once you understand how the new version works you won't find it quite the memory hog everyone makes it out to be. The main thing to anticipate however with any version when new is the seemingly "endless wait" for working drivers. I can imagine that "ME I" also heard many of those complaints!
That all depends on hwo you look at it. WIN3.1 had to be manually started up from a dos prompt while 95 was the first desktop version to autoload for a desktop OS besides Apple. NT was strictly for server type systems. Want to go back to dos prompts?
I didn't think so! Yet everyone hops for joy at Linux doing the same thing there. But I can still run a virtual dos environment to get some old 8bit dos game running and hear it in 5.1 surround sound instead of the speaker on a board.
http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dukereturns64bitaf3.jpg
I didn't think so! Yet everyone hops for joy at Linux doing the same thing there.
But I can still run a virtual dos environment to get some old 8bit dos game running and hear it in 5.1 surround sound instead of the speaker on a board. http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dukereturns64bitaf3.jpg
Le GoogelGuRu
New Member
Vista is much more stable (in my experiences) than XP was. Sure, it has it's minor flaws but it's definitely not a P.O.S.
The one thing that most don't realize is that with any new version of Windows it takes a certain amount of time before companies start coming out with drivers that work for various hardwares and devices. The crash control in Vista far surpassed what was seen in XP! by a long shot. I'm actually finding that some old games that crash every other minute in XP run better on the new Windows.