Vista or XP? Im looking at building a new pc and was wondering should i get Vista home basic, Vista Home premium, or XP. And if you you say Vista, should i get 32bit or 64bit. The processor is a Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
if you go vista get more ram than you think you would. it takes about 1 gig just to keep vista running
so would 2 gig be good enough
2 gigs should be good. Talk to Taxman about Vista, he has been running it awhile and likes it alot. I have it on my wifes computer and it is ok... nothing to jump up and down over however... no killer app for it yet. They do have SP1 coming out for Vista so if you go that way you may want to wait for that to hit the streets...
you need 4 gigs. 1 to Handle Vista, 1 to handle the other 64 bit programs you can now use with Vista, and 2 for gaming. That's how my friend Dave does it, and he's been building computers for over 10 years.
It's always seemed to me that you shouldn't run Vista unless you HAVE to run it... be it, either programs that require it, or that your system came with it, so that's what you own (like my little brother's new laptop).
I'm not going to Vista until I have to.
The newer games that only look half-ass good unless you have Vista with DX10(Age of Conan for instance) pretty much make people want to get Vista. Now I don't care *that much* about graphics, but when you say "have to get it" I take it you mean that the games you want to play are ONLY available to those with Windows Vista, correct?
Yes Crim, although right now, that only means games like Halo 3 (for which, there's cracks to allow them to play on XP).
I simply believe we're not at the point yet where Vista is necessary. You mention DX10. For one, games that get a DX10 boost (like Crysis) don't really need it. I bought myself a 8800GT OC, and while all the Very High settings are locked and require DX10, the High settings make the game frigging beautiful enough. And besides that, what it takes to run the game at Very High settings would be insane.
And secondly, I've read that just using DX10 causes a frame rate drop.
See, one reason why I'm quick to warn against Vista is because I work at a CAD/CAM software company. Our software runs on Vista, but we gotta jump through a lot of rings to get it to do so, and even still, we don't suggest it.
ya vista to make alot of programs work u have to do alot of gay register editing kinda of dumb if u ask me. I would stick to xp considering dx9c new patch is basically dx10 for xp.
Thanks for all of your resoning. I going to stay with XP. Doing so means that I will have more money for ram and processor. The PC that i bought will now have a Athlon 64 X2 5000+, 2 Gigs of DDR2/800, 250 Gig HDD, and a GeForce 8400GS 512mb video card. I know its not a hardcore gaming rig but for under 700$ I think its a good deal.
Ken, do you have a quick link to that new DX9c patch?
That's a pretty damn solid machine, Ehonda. I'll point out to you, though, that I bought my 8800GT OC from Best Buy for $230. Pretty swanky deal, especially after I used $55 dollars in gift cards I had.
XP 64 pro.
Vista is bullshit.
DX10 is ass.
If you HAVE to get Vista, get Ultimate or the top tier business version, otherwise MS will be telling you what you can and cannot run on your machine when their media buddies dislike something.
I'm going to have to disagree. I like and prefer Vista. Dealing with updates and drivers is MUCH easier. (I've been using Vista Business 32bit version.) I've play LOTR, CoH/CoV and Guild Wars all with no problems.
The only reason I'd use XP is in a business setting or other situation where you you have legacy application that you just must run.
I have vista it was a free upgrade to my computer, i never installed it. i still use xp and don't plan to upgrade unless I have to at some point but i do have it jic i ever get a wild hair. I heard that Vista will only recognize your system having 3 gigs of ram but it was just what Jet was telling me about.
Well... managing updates and drivers isnt at all difficult on XP, so I wouldnt call it much of an advantage.
In any case, XP doesnt perform that well in the virst place, and you can expect signifigantly less performance in terms of FPS on Vista.
Thats an insanely good reason for anyone not to switch over. You are literally paying MS a heap of cash, to kill the performance of your machine. Its insanity. Thats aside all the other issues.
And yes you will miss those frames, not off the top end, but off the bottom. 35 ave FPS as opposed to 45 means average- your going to bottom out around 10 as opposed to 20
during lagfest.
Vista has about the same type of appeal as an I-mac. It looks "stylish" and such, some people like the look and "feel" , but either way your saddling yourself with a pile of shit.
Yes yes, DX10... blah blah. As Tomshardware proved with, I think it was Crysis? By hacking it up a little, the DX9 look was identical to the DX10... if DX10 is better, nothing is showing it yet. Nicer look for some games coincides with new generation of GFX hardware, not DX10- devs just made the switch around the same time for various reasons.
If you're getting a new machine, the cost of Vista shouldn't be a factor since you're getting a new OS anyway.
As for the look and feel, there is something to be said about that. Personally, I like the UI of Vista better than XP.
I like the integration of the windows desktop search tool (which you can use with XP as well--it's just better integrated with Vista). There small improvements with security, hardware management and networking that I like from the user interface perspective.
Bottom line for me, is that I've been using Vista at home for school and gaming since May and I like it. I installed it an old machine and increased the ram from 1GB to 2GB. I've had hardly any crashes or anything (iTunes--that RAM hungry piece of shit, doesn't play well all the time).
It's by no means revolutionary or guaranteed to solve all problems, but as an OS I think it's a good improvement. I can't speak to a pure FPS comparison with XP and I'm not running DX10, but I definitely like it better than XP.
Hey if a couple UI tweaks make it more comfortable for you and worth it, great. Its your cash.
Getting a barebones no-OS new machine IS cheaper though, use that money for XP if the OEM of your choice isnt offering it. SATA drivers are included in install on XP64
so all you basically have to do is pop in the CD, and then hit the websites of your hardware providers to get new drivers- which you should be doing with any new machine anyhow regardless of OS.
To me the UI look/feel is nothing important. Linux UI/Desktop and management is actualy far above and beyond any MS OS these days. But, Linux wont run AoC/Steam/Ect easily or well, so I dont use it as primary OS.
Quote:
To me the UI look/feel is nothing important. Linux UI/Desktop and management is actualy far above and beyond any MS OS these days. But, Linux wont run AoC/Steam/Ect easily or well, so I dont use it as primary OS.
QFT!
Quote:
XP 64 pro.
Vista is bullshit.
DX10 is ass.
If you HAVE to get Vista, get Ultimate or the top tier business version, otherwise MS will be telling you what you can and cannot run on your machine when their media buddies dislike something.
Agreed. Each of the following I maintain on a 24/7 basis. ~'XPx64Pro' 'windows 2003 x64 enterprise' 'FreeBSD' 'PFsense'(atm) and 'ubuntu7.1'~. Also I would like to mention my appreciation for VMware as I test "bandwagon OS's" when possible.
Quote:
Hey if a couple UI tweaks make it more comfortable for you and worth it, great. Its your cash.
Getting a barebones no-OS new machine IS cheaper though, use that money for XP if the OEM of your choice isnt offering it. SATA drivers are included in install on XP64
so all you basically have to do is pop in the CD, and then hit the websites of your hardware providers to get new drivers- which you should be doing with any new machine anyhow regardless of OS.
To me the UI look/feel is nothing important. Linux UI/Desktop and management is actualy far above and beyond any MS OS these days. But, Linux wont run AoC/Steam/Ect easily or well, so I don't use it as primary OS.
Again I agree. I have found Ubuntu w/Beryl the 3d desktop to be the ultimate management platform years to maybe a decade ahead of Microsoft's retarded children.
I thought a link would be amusing..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVD7pj8iaR4&feature=related
another?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_cFq2EZTwA&feature=related
I'd add that if you buy a out-of-the-box system and sticking with OEM parts, Vista isn't too bad. Aesthetically it does look nice, it will run just fine, plus you're guaranteed .
If I were building my own rig (which I'll be doing soon) I'd personally go with XP64 just to keep the number of headaches down.
That said it's all personal preference and everyone has their anecdotal evidence to support their choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTpEoZYFLkw&feature=relatedI don't like macs but I thought the vista pokes are starting to get funny.
The one vista commercial just had retards saying wow for like 2 minutes long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL3rfuKwMDIThe next Vista commercial should just go "WOW! WOW! wow?! WOW! TRASHCAN!" <display> Microsoft Logo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4&feature=related...I think you should see this...but its just a link...
I like that Linux vid. I use Ubuntu on my laptop. It's nice simple and free.
" I heard that Vista will only recognize your system having 3 gigs of ram but it was just what Jet was telling me about. "
This is a limitation of a 32-bit operating system Elph
It's not solely limited to Vista, but rather to all 32 bit
systems. Once you cross over into the 64-bit your system
can see MUCH more than 3GB of Ram.
Personally, I will stay with XP for as long as it suits
me to do so. I'm not about to go out and purchase another
Microsoft operating system just so I can game on it. Not
a chance.
If / when XP dies, I will become a Linux kinda guy
Since
I'm very, very familiar with both Sun and HP's flavors of
Unix ( work ) Linux will not be all that strange to me. I'm
just too damn lazy to build another system at the moment.
Maybe at some point VM-ware (not the company specifically) will get so good that you'll actually be able to run the OS of your choice and run windows based games on top.
Well I am staying with XP. I have the cd and key and will be installing it on my new system when it comes in. So I did not have to buy an OS, which allowed me to get the 64 X2 5000+ processor. Like I had said, I was building this on a budget not to exceed 700$ and I build this one at 650$
You're going to need more than 2gig of Ram to run AOC effectively and smoothly without the game looking like Pacman. 3gig isn't always easy to pull off, given the amount of slots it would take and odd numbers don't really work too well either when placing RAM.
I'm not advocating Vista, I still use XP. Just stating the truth about AOC's demand on a system.
More than 2gig RAM? You sure? 2gig is a lot for just RAM, and
RAM usually doesnt have a ton of effect on visuals.
I think CPU/GFX card will be greater factors past 2gig, unless you know something I dont thats AoC specific.
BTW Grats Honda, excellent decision IMO, more hardware $$ and XP you already own is far greater value in my book than less hardware and $$ for POS Vista.
GPU will be the prime factor, but 2 gigs of ram is Par these days, it's not the "ultimate" as was once believed.
For example, about a year ago, I had a similar system to my friend Dave. Only he had 2gig of ram and I had 1gig. The difference when playing BF2 was incredibly noticeable - and that was just a BF2, last gen. I really think people undermine the importance of ram and the demand the newer games are placing on System Resources.
Yeah BF2 also had a terrible memory leak. Ofc so will AoC most likely. I am not sure RAM req will have increased quite that much though, but we will see.
The thing with RAM is you either have enough, or you dont. There arent many stages of varying performance.
I was looking at the specs on the MOBO that I am getting and it can support up to 16 gig of RAM. So if I do get Vista I know I will beable to upgrade my ram without a problem
Quote:
I was looking at the specs on the MOBO that I am getting and it can support up to 16 gig of RAM. So if I do get Vista I know I will beable to upgrade my ram without a problem
i.e. if the OS is x86-64 or x64 for > 4 GB RAM.
I have noticed a vista conundrum especially with people believing they are truly uber "yeah d00d I upgraded to 8 GB RAM in this biotch! Now Vista 32bit Home works even faster then before!"
Ya ask khi about vista 32bit. He tried more then 4gigs of ram and had to give the other 2 gigs to ryu because it didnt read it rofl.