New Gaming Rig Vista 64 or XP Pro ?!! Help!

[Zepharus]

I am making a few major upgrades to my gaming rig... I am replacing the MB, CPU, GPU .

I am adding an Asus Rampage Formula, E8400 and a MSI 4870 X2 to my existing Velociraptor 4 Gig DDR 800 (Corsair ) and Dell 24" 2405fpw

The big question I have is what operating system to use... all my experiences with installing Vista over the last 2 years has been BAD BAD BAD.... I recently ordered a 64 disc fom MS and have thought about going that route.

This may sound pick as hell but my main concerns with Vista have always been slightly lower FPS with Vista (around 10 less!) and the mouse control using the same hardware (Logitech G7 just cant seem to get the right feel)

I realize that the Vista setup would fully utilize my 4Gigs of Ram but at what cost...

I have NEVER had issues with XP Pro and I am very familiar with it.

My question is please help me decide if there is an real benefit to using Vista 64. I mianly play WoW, and I will be playing some of the newer games such that are coming out later this year. Im VERY torn can you please offer advice? Thanks in advance

[heatthegreat]

Im having the same question too.... I have 64 bit vista already, but Ive heard some things about vista... mainly the 32 bit, everyone says the 64 bit is where its at..... I too just upgraded to 4GB of ram and a 4870 (not the x2) so I do want to utilize DX10 and my 4GB of ram. Is there anyone that is very knowledgable on this and can give me pros/cons on going from XP to vista x64. Like FPS drops etc.

[wildfire99]

I say there's no reason to go Vista, but you'll miss out on DX10, which would be a shame with that nice of a video card.

[Gabe3]

go Vista 64!

some of my reasons, better UI, superfetch, better 64bit support then XP x64. For me, the OS doesn't slow down after a few months like XP does.

[pfunkman]

I say there's no reason to go Vista, but you'll miss out on DX10, which would be a shame with that nice of a video card.

Theres no reason to installl a 7 year old operating system on a new machine over vista.

Install vista 64 and join the enlightened crowd. Or you could stick with the backward thinking misers that think 2 FPS is a reason to stick with an older less secure, Rotting operating system like XP.

[Catweazle]

Like FPS drops etc.

I'd suggest that you start to think (and investigate) for yourself. Ask questions of people reporting 'poor performance' for Vista, and check benchmark review reports for figures which relate to actual, real-world performance rather than 'academic' distinctions. I'm sure you'll end up finding that pretty much all of the 'bad reports' information comes from people who are really taking notice of 'ePeen' measurements rather than ones which relate to actual, real-world playability of games!


You'll find:


Bad reports which, when analysed, are showing 'bigger numbers' for XP at screen resolutions you'd never dream of using on your equipment.
Bad reports which indicate 'bigger numbers' in graphics detail settings you'd never dream of using on your rig.
Bad reports which indicate 'higher framerates' when the starting point was alread at a level above where you actually be able to perceive any difference anyway.
Bad reports which, when analysed, reflect the difference between having DX10 enabled (Vista) and not having it enabled (XP). Get real, people! Disable the DX10 graphics goodies and THEN tell me that the rig is slower!


There WILL be differences. Please don't think that I'm suggesting there aren't. But I've never personally encountered any situation whereby Vista adds extra load which makes a game, playable at particular graphics settings and on particular hardware under XP, unplayable under Vista at those same settings and on that same hardware. Want to hear that again? I've never had to reduce graphics settings to get a game playable under Vista rather than under XP!


Qualifier:

I don't have the 'latest hardware' and I don't play the 'latest games'. Others may differ with the opinion I've expressed here, but please check to see how 'recent' their hardware and games are.

But there's NOTHING whatsoever about Vista which would create a generalised, across the board 10FPS reduction in all gaming, in the way Zepharus's topic post would suggest or imply.


@ Zepharus:

I just plain can't imagine why somebody would put together a rig capable of running DX10 at the screen res of a 24" widescreen monitor and NOT have the OS installed which makes DX10 available. To me that's kinda like buying a 3-ton truck to go do the weekly shopping in!

That means Vista, the 4Gb of installed RAM begs for 64-bit Vista. End of story!

[RussianInfantry]

XP x64 runs fine for me :)

[gsr1379]

i would say vista 64. Or how about dual boot them and then you can get a real comparison.

[Monkey God]

XP32

Compatibility, performance issues, UAC annoyances, etc. Thats personal preference though.

[Somnambulator]

Vista 64.

i spent 4 wonderful years running XP x64 and made the shift to Vista 64 when SP1 came out. no regrets and havent looked back. Vista is ready for prime-time gaming and power users.

all the BS you hear about Vista these days is outdated. the majority of games now run as fast or almost as fast as under XP. UAC has been severely toned down, but i still disable it. non-WHQL drivers no longer need action before loading Vista. almost all major sound card issues/drivers have been fully updated to work with Vista without losing much, if any, features.

sure your 10 year old printer probably wont work, but its 10 years old...if you keep up with technology you shouldnt have any problems with Vista drivers or lack-there-of.

I was never a Vista hater, but i didnt feel it was ready for primetime [H] readers like myself wanting the best gaming performance and as little annoyances with advanced computing as possible. It's definitely there now.

[SuperSubZero]

One of the great things about Vista is that it will allow you to install without entering a key, and will give you a lenient 30 days to actually put one in.

While I do not condone piracy, I do condone "Try before you buy." It's stupid MS will allow people to download the retail Server 2008 for free from their site (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/trial-software.aspx), but doesn't offer Vista. If they DID, maybe it would get people to actually try it before they talk about it.

[Rebel44]

i would say vista 64. Or how about dual boot them and then you can get a real comparison.

QFT!

http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/259553/27/0.png (http://www.hardfolding.com?go=38&tnum=33&id=259553)

[pfunkman]

One of the great things about Vista is that it will allow you to install without entering a key, and will give you a lenient 30 days to actually put one in.

While I do not condone piracy, I do condone "Try before you buy." It's stupid MS will allow people to download the retail Server 2008 for free from their site (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/trial-software.aspx), but doesn't offer Vista. If they DID, maybe it would get people to actually try it before they talk about it.

Well to be fair server 2008 is geared for a specific market that actually has competition. Whereas Vista is just a general use OS meant for the masses, if you have ever used XP you should know what to expect from vista with the exception of a few changes.

[Proxy]

I say there's no reason not to go Vista, and you won't miss out on DX10, which would be a shame with that nice of a video card.

Fixed.:p

[Sovereign]

I run Vista x64 on my primary game rig. It works great, and I haven't had an issue since before SP1 dropped.

[Volcanon]

If you're starting a new build with new hardware, the performance hit of going Vista 64 will be negligible (probably not even 5% anymore).

I'd say go for it, it's what I run on my rig and it's nothing close to yours:)

[MrGuvernment]

I say there's no reason to go Vista, but you'll miss out on DX10, which would be a shame with that nice of a video card.

Please list all games out now that are DX10 only.... or any game that uses any DX10 features that make a noticeable diff in games...

[Serpico]

Vista 64 Vista 64 Vista 64.

The only issue I've run into is limited Gametap compatibility. If that is a concern then go Vista 32. Otherwise there is no reason to go with XP now that they've gotten the kinks out. Vista is solid as a rock for me since SP1 came out.

[wildfire99]

Please list all games out now that are DX10 only.... or any game that uses any DX10 features that make a noticeable diff in games...

I don't know why people have to hate on the idea that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If XP works and you have a license for it, great, use it. It won't give you cooties.

But that's besides the point. I recommended Vista, sheesh. It gives you the best future upgrade path. My next game box will run Vista 64.

I have one game box on XP and one on Vista(32). When I'm, you know, actually gaming it doesn't make a difference. The XP box has less annoying "features" (*cough* bugs). The Vista box runs a little slower (on less than cutting edge hardware), memory usage is higher. I don't see much difference between DX10 and DX9 80% of the time either. It doesn't matter. I play games, not operating systems.

With the BC options for Vista, it isn't so bad. I even have System Shock 2 running on Vista32. I have my opinions on the OS outside of the game, but that's irrelevant. For a high end box, I think the forward-going options of Vista (DX10, 64bit support, drivers) will outweigh the slight performance issues, not that you can't just strip the OS config down to something more XP-ish anyway if you really need every last 3DMark.

There sure seems to be a lot of knee-jerk, rabid Vista/XP people. It's like the civil war, you have to pick a side or get shot, and whichever side you pick, everyone hates you anyway. Does everyone own MS stock or something? I don't remember being burned at the stake for liking Windows2k Workstation when XP came out. ;)

[SuperSubZero]

if you have ever used XP you should know what to expect from vista with the exception of a few changes.
Obviously not many people really understand this. That's why it might be nice to have Vista as a free download like Server 2008 is.

[pfunkman]

Obviously not many people really understand this. That's why it might be nice to have Vista as a free download like Server 2008 is.

I just dont see what anyone stands to gain with a free trial. Most of the vista haters will simply continue to hate it free trial or not and then you open the door for some serious pirate action.

What most people dont realize is that these people hate vista because they simply want to and theres really nothing microsoft or anyone can do to convince them otherwise.

[SiG357]

I run Vista x64 on my primary game rig. It works great, and I haven't had an issue since before SP1 dropped.

Yep. If you have the lastest hardware and enough memory go Vista 64.
I have not found a game I play, not work