Please advice-XP or Vista on new computer

C

chrisfreez

New Member
I am going to build or buy a new computer within a month. My present computer is an Intel P4 1.7Ghz - 512MB ram running the full version of XP with service pak 2. I built it when the P4 first came out. Replaced the PC board after 3 years. No other trouble and it is reasonably fast. No trouble with speed or operation. But the board is old and I cannot upgrade much on my Ram. So time for a new one.

I read many threads of people having trouble with Vista being really slow. But many of these people have lap tops. And I know that many lap tops do not have their own Video card unless you spend a small fortune. And most Lap tops do not have 6 or 8 GB's of ram either. My new desk top wll have its own video card (512MB) and 6 to 8 GB ram.

How is Vista with 6 to 8 GB of ram with an Intel Q6600 processor. I do a lot of photography using a Nikon D200-10 MP (buying a D700 too - 12MP FF). I know I will need a lot more speed when batch Post Proceessing 12MP files with a 35 mm sensor, so will the Vista or XP SP2 be better. With Vista do I get 64 bit processing with home addition.

I would rather go with Vista. It has been out for a year or more, and XP although great is reaching its end. I hate to build a new computer using a very old Operating system.
 
XP is just as much as Vista, and you'd think it'd be cheaper than Vista because it is now outdated. I'm sure with 6 - 8 GB of RAM, Vista would run great. And this is coming form someone who does not like Vista but instead Linux. I'd suggest going with Vista. Just amke sure you have the updates installed regularly and use only Vista-certified software to keep crashes to a minimum (because you use Windows, you'll always have crashes:)) -

What kind of processor (name the name like Pentium, Core 2...)??? Intel Q6600 processor isn't very specific.
 
I will be getting an Intel Q6600 core 2 quad (Socket 775) 1066 Mhz, 8MB cashe.

I have had no windows crashes after windows 95

I had a few with Windows 3.1 and Windows 95

Windows 98 I do not remember any crashes

And Windows XP Sp1 and 2 are dream Operating systems

I think Vista is getting a bad rap. I do not want to buy a build a new computer with a 5 year (or more) old OS.
 
Vista is good now SP1 is out, so go for it, when vista first came out it was crap, now it is good.
 
Personally, I prefer XP to Vista, but I guess it's because I know where everything is. Vista Ultimate runs fine on my laptop, but I just can't get Vista running "crash free" on my main rig... go figure. I have a few programs that are not compatible with Vista, but nothing major. Speed wise, XP, IMO, has a SLIGHT advantage. (Better 3DMarks, etc.)

Yeah, XP is a few years old, but just because Vista is newer doesn't mean it'll be around long term. Windows 7 will be out in another year or two, relegating Vista to "obsolete" status. I consider Vista to be what Windows ME was to Windows 98SE... an interim solution enroute to something better.
 
cohen said:
Vista is good now SP1 is out, so go for it, when vista first came out it was crap, now it is good.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm one of those laptop Vista users and I have no problem running Vista fast and smooth. I do have a dedicated graphics card, and 3gb of RAM so everything runs very well. I'd go with Vista as opposed to XP as well. However, if you would like, dual booting is an option as well. I haven't really looked into that as much as I should though.
 
Vista isn't bad, I have had it on my laptop for over a year no crashes, on my desktop for 6 months no crashes. It runs quick and smooth on my laptop with 2 Gb of ram and faster on my desktop with 3 Gb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top