Considering dropping Vista to run XP...

A

Atech

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
3,946
I am THIS close to dropping Vista.
Why?

I have the last month (for experiment) run only Vista.
Now, tody I then booted into XP for the first time in month.

The result?

XP screams preformance wise.

No (miniscule) when opening programs, much faster repsonse times...Vista feels slow/sluggish compared...and I can do without the extra bling-bling.

Time to consider format and Partition Magic..Vista still have a long way to go.
 
Vista what? 64bit or 32bit? And how long have you had it installed?
 
4gb of ram and you going to run a 32bit OS?

Vista is not that bad...I think it really depends on the setup. I just swapped Vista Ent onto my work laptop from XP Pro and it's actually faster. XP bogs down so easily once you start crapping up the install with program additions and removals.


If you didn't already, use Vista 64.
 
Yeah I'd like to know if you used Vista x86 (32 bits) or Vista x64.
 
I honestly feel they both scream on the same hardware, but Vista isn't slower, that's for sure. I notice a huge difference in Vista's feel if I disable the option to Animate windows when they are minimized and maximized.
 
Vista Ultimate 64-bit...

Had a pal from Microsoft look at Vista...it runs a little faster now...but my XP still kicks it ass...
 
ScretHate said:
XP x64 is the answer.
Click to expand...

depends on what you do. If you have a Zune (or iPod, so I've heard), XP x64 doesn't play so nice. the same is true of XP x64 and a lot of Palm devices.

I _love_ XP x64, but you have to go into it with your eyes open.
 
Driver support in Vista is also bad. If you have a business printer with all the options, you will not be able to use them in vista. I am also thinking about going back to XP 32.

I have been using Vista Ultimate 64 since the release. It has a lot of draw backs for me.:mad:
 
Personally, I don't see any sluggishness with Vista. I just wish it supported more software(compatibility mode hasn't worked once yet). I didn't have this much software not work when I went from ME to XP.
 
crewzen said:
Driver support in Vista is also bad. If you have a business printer with all the options, you will not be able to use them in vista. I am also thinking about going back to XP 32.

I have been using Vista Ultimate 64 since the release. It has a lot of draw backs for me.:mad:
Click to expand...

o_O
 
Atech said:
Vista Ultimate 64-bit...

Had a pal from Microsoft look at Vista...it runs a little faster now...but my XP still kicks it ass...
Click to expand...

How long have you been running Vista 64?

I can give you great input on the difference between XP Pro and Vista x64. I've only recently switched to Vista. I refused to run Vista at all until then, and held off as long as I could using XP Pro. Granted, I was satisfied with XP, but not happy by any means. My system had become bloated, and felt like it needed to be wiped clean with a fresh install, which is something I ABHORE.

I've been running Vista x64 for the past 2 months. And I've found the exact opposite. Vista x64 SCREAMS compared to XP. Try loading the same amount of software that I'm running on Vista x64 onto XP, and XP will flat out CHOKE. I like the fact that Vista always keeps itself in tiptop shape. I've loaded 230GB worth of programs and files onto it, and it feels like it did 2 weeks into its clean install. It's simply outstanding.

You need to give the system time to adjust to your usage patterns. Superfetch as well as Readyboost. And check to make sure you have the proper drivers for your system. Also, a peek into your Event Log may do wonders in helping you ascertain any problems that your system may be having.
 
Atech said:
No way, driver support is awfull...look at my sig...I got loads of hardware that needs drivers.
Click to expand...

OK.

Q6600 - CPU, XP64 supports natively
P5K Mobo - http://support.asus.com/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=P5K (XP64 drivers are offered)
8800 GT - http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp64_178.13_whql.html
X-Fi Elite Pro - http://support.creative.com/downloads/welcome.aspx?nDriverType=1#type_1
PhysX P1 - http://www.nvidia.com/object/ageia_8.04.25_whql.html
Killer NiC M1 - http://www.bigfootnetworks.com/Supp...ads&_a=viewdownload&downloaditemid=62&nav=0,2

What's the problem again?
 
to the OP:

Vista should not be running sluggishly on your hardware.

Can you give some specific examples of what operations are taking longer to complete than they are on XP? (your application load times, for instance?)

Are we talking about window operations, opening and closing files, gaming? Any specific program?
 
 
TOOL1075 said:
to the OP:

Vista should not be running sluggishly on your hardware.

Can you give some specific examples of what operations are taking longer to complete than they are on XP? (your application load times, for instance?)

Are we talking about window operations, opening and closing files, gaming? Any specific program?
Click to expand...

One example is WMP.
2 x click a file in XP *SLAM* it plays, not matter what type.
2 x click a file in Vista...1...2...3...4...it plays.


The same goes for opening windows, but not so big a "lag"...it's less than ½ sec, but I still notice it...and it annoys me.

And just now Vista won't recognize my PPU...won't even show up in the device manager under Vista...but its fully working(and visable) in XP.
 
Atech said:
The drivers themselfes...
Click to expand...

All of those drivers are in parity with the XP32 drivers. Same version numbers and everything.

I don't really recommend XP64 at this point, even MS has pretty much scrapped the XP64 website in favor of Vista x64, but it's not like there's no support for it. I ran XP64 on a gaming rig for over a year without any driver problems. Every game I threw at it worked fine. It's not a bad OS, and not a bad compromise for the "I need 4GB+ RAM support but not ready to go to Vista" crowd.
 
And now my PhysX is installed under Vista...heck if I know what made it appear out of the blue...
Enabling(why isn't tha on per default?!) "enhanced preformance" under "policies" in HD properties fixed most (but not all) of the "lag" my WMP was having when opening a file.

Time to see what Vista thinks about Creative's Media Center that accompanied my X-Fi...

Salavat23 said:
Holy shit that's close!
Click to expand...

It's so close you can't even see it ;)
 
Atech said:
Enabling(why isn't tha on per default?!) "enhanced preformance" under "policies" in HD properties fixed most (but not all) of the "lag" my WMP was having when opening a file.
Click to expand...

If you have "enhanced preformance" enabled and you lose power at the wrong time it can cause data corruption on your HDD - It happened to me 6 months ago :(

 
ScretHate said:
XP x64 is the answer.
Click to expand...

That's worst possible answear - no advantages of Vista , and all the same problems as Vista x64 (actually worse becouse support for V64 is very good today while support for xp64 is as slow as always)
 
It's a fact that MS keeps a lot of features that corporate IT wants over what consumers would rather have. That is why they are working on Windows 7 to be a stronger choice for enthusiasts & casual users.
 
Michaelius said:
That's worst possible answear - no advantages of Vista , and all the same problems as Vista x64 (actually worse becouse support for V64 is very good today while support for xp64 is as slow as always)
Click to expand...
Whatever. I use it and it's great. It's XP that supports 4GB+ RAM. Its best feature, however, is that it's not vista.
 
ScretHate said:
Whatever. I use it and it's great. It's XP that supports 4GB+ RAM. It's best feature, however, is that it's not vista.
Click to expand...

It's great if all of your hardware is supported. Vista64 gets support because there is a _requirement_ from Microsoft for vendors to support both x32 and x64 if they're going to declare that their product is "certified" for either.

There was no such requirement for XP, so XP x64 suffered and still suffers. Don't get my wrong. As I stated above, I _love_ XP x64, but it's nowhere near pleasant if you run into driver/app incompatibilities.
 
I have to admit, that I'm starting to get frustrated with Vista as well. I've been using it since last november. Drivers are up to date, drive is defragmented every 6 months.

But Vista is getting consistently slower. Vista takes an ETERNITY to boot to the login, and an ETERNITY afterwards as well. Superfetch: makes no difference. Nothing I use regularly ever opens any faster than in XP. (Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, Foobar, Musikcube, VLC Player).

I have some older hardware that won't work at all in Vista, so I still have to keep my ANCIENT (2 years atm) XP install. I hate reformating, reinstalling, because stuff always gets missed/forgotten/lost. But that ancient XP install, is faster than Vista.

I wonder if disabling Superfetch would speed up Vista... *ponders*

Selling Points FOR Vista:
1. 64-bit drivers for more hardware, super. 4GB+ RAM is nice. XP64 can do it too, but you have to be careful with hardware.
2. You can setup multiple clocks and a calendar at a click, great, I have friends around the world. Now I can know when they wake up.
3. Task manager works during a program lockup 70% of the time, versus 50% for XP.


I really don't see much else. Snazzy effects slow it down and thats dumb. The menus are spread all over the place now, chaos. Its slower, event viewer CRA..........WLS... . It still blue screens, crashes, etc. (rare, but it was the same in XP).


I'd go back, but I'm lazy.
 
dumb question but is Vista gona be around as long as XP is/was or are they gona drop it like they did ME? I haven't bought anything from M$ since ME... can you blame me? if it is around as long as XP was I think I might buy Vista x64
 
I have both and I am wondering if the slow laggy hesitation is something build into vista.

At work we all use XP, last month they got the bright idea to install forefront. NOW XP runs a little worse than Vista. Everything loads slow, refresh on screens and stuff sucks.

So if you want slow bloatware use XP with forefront or Vista.

Does Vista have the same functionality as forefront built in. After seeing XP this way I am thinking that they have done something that is pure BS to all OS's.
 
I forget to mention the messed up sound problems (creative driver/Vista combo gangbang) whenever I listen to music and do ANYTHING else (open a folder, open a webpage, etc). Has nothing to do with an overworked system.
 
Much of the problems mentioned above are not typical of Vista, so that would lead me to believe something else is wrong. As for the lagginess, I installed Vista on my laptop a year ago, and felt that it was too laggy, so I went back to XP on it. Just recently, I tried Vista again and it seemed laggy. However, I disabled the option to animate Windows as they are maximized/minimized, and that made a world of difference in terms of how Vista "felt".
 
DeaconFrost said:
Much of the problems mentioned above are not typical of Vista, so that would lead me to believe something else is wrong. As for the lagginess, I installed Vista on my laptop a year ago, and felt that it was too laggy, so I went back to XP on it. Just recently, I tried Vista again and it seemed laggy. However, I disabled the option to animate Windows as they are maximized/minimized, and that made a world of difference in terms of how Vista "felt".
Click to expand...

This.

The entire GUI feels so much "snappier" once you disable the animation, which, whether it's merely perception or not, improves the feel of things a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top