Vista being heavier to run, does it affect game performance ?

Yes it affects game performance.For example,if the OS uses 256mb of memory and you have 512mb installed there won't be enough memory for some games.
 
At present there is no actual way to determine gaming performance in Vista since the final version is still waiting. The beta versions are simply trying out for evalaution and suggestions on improvements. Running a game will depend on what OS the game is supported by. Yet 8bit games and apps can be run on an XP system on a virtual dos drive.
 
meanman said:
im sticking with xp for as long as i can vista will be a pain for a long time
Click to expand...


Same.... they try to make it look clean and nice, they put few usefull options.... and for what???:confused: to slow ur pc down and then you have to spend $$$$ to upgrade just to have vista.... When XP is just as good....
IMO even better....
 
Vista does use more system memory, but it has many new features which promise to increase game performance. We will have to wait until it's released to know for sure though.
 
yeahh, im staying with XP 4 a whileee, i see no reason just 2 upgrade 2 Vista just because it's new..
 
[-0MEGA-];484159 said:
Vista does use more system memory, but it has many new features which promise to increase game performance. We will have to wait until it's released to know for sure though.
Click to expand...

Besides seeing Vista out there will also have to be games that perform well on Vista before any real performance is ever realized. Plus there are a few others things to note especially for those who play online. http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1990662,00.asp what's this?! :confused: security loop holes not found in XP! :eek: I'm not rushing into Vista anytime soon.
 
Im also staying with Xp,

Im not intrested in all that eye candy stuff....Its performance i want.

Even when i have a new computer built i will still probably get Xp and even better it will be cheaper.:)
 
I had that desktop explorer bar on the RC1 run shortly and just wanted it out of the way. It prevents access and placement of desktop icons on that side of the screen. I said "no way! Mr. BG". At least XP gives you that option to set the display settings for either appearance or performance. We'll have to wait to see if that is included in Vista or just the "eye ticklers"?! :(
 
Im going to stick with XP, look how long it has taken to get xp running stable, and with SP3 in the pipeline, i rekon xp will be better than vista. Its just that vista is better looking.
 
The newer one "always" looks better at first :D until you get into it. Then you say "ut ohhhh.... :eek: I made a big one!". Don't worry about XP for a few years. Only SP1 was dropped by MS recently while they delayed SP3 until 2008? They learned from ME fast when people still ran 98 long after XP came out. You know that the Vista SP1 will have to have some big fixes in it.
 
Tomshardware.com (I believe) did a report comparing gaming on XP to gaming on Vista RC1, and they found a ~25% decrease in FPS going to Vista (not actual release, of course)
 
Motoxrdude said:
Man, I am sticking with linux :)
Click to expand...

Some lately have been favoring Mac's OS X. Originally Apple based that on a cross between Windows and Linux somewhat with the Unix core while being able to run MS apps. But Linux is ... what? FREE! :D

Jet said:
Tomshardware.com (I believe) did a report comparing gaming on XP to gaming on Vista RC1, and they found a ~25% decrease in FPS going to Vista (not actual release, of course)
Click to expand...

RC1 barely has beta drvers available when it came out. The complaint I was hearing from some was that they couldn't get games to run on it? Or they simply just didn't know how to work around the beta. On the higher versions like Ultimate the system requirements list 1gb minimum. So you know that the finished versions will have a good number of things loading and chewing ram.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top