• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

What are you running?

D

dynasty

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 3, 2003
Messages
131
I recently just built a new gaming rig and installed Vista Business. There really haven't been that many headaches, but, there have still been a few. I was wondering what everyone else out there was running for their gaming rigs and if I should just reformat with XP PRO? Thanks
 
I still feel like XP is better, DX10 isn't that big of an improvement in my case, and xp has worked nice for me for a long time now.

I have a laptop with vista and some of the new features are good for mobil computing, but I don't think they are really necessary for gaming and general usage.
 
Well I don't play games aside from Quake 3, but as for OS it's XP x64, has been for years now, will continue to be so for years to come.

If you decide to drop back to just XP, definitely give XP x64 a chance before dismissing it. It'll surprise you at how quick and snappy it is primarily because it's not based on that old XP Pro 32 bit codebase: it's Windows Server 2003 and therefore it stomps XP x86 into the ground and twice on Sunday (that happens to be today, go figure). ;)
 
I had been running Vista Ultimate 32 bit for a while. I just loaded the 64 bit version a couple of day ago. The 64 bit version is more responsive and seems a little more stable. On the down side, there are still things I would like it to do it doesn't. Autologon.exe does not work. Virtual CloneDrive does not work, I used that to run some game CD's from iso's with that. My exceptions for UAC created with the Application Compatibility Toolkit do not work. But as for gaming, it works as well as if not better than the 32 bit version, and better than XP with the current drivers. I was running HL2 EP2 last night, could not believe how smooth it was. I also play some UT3, and it runs very well. Vista sucked for gaming a year ago, but at this point I would not go back to XP.
 
Vista Ultimate x64. I've never used XP on this machine, it being new, but I don't regret my decision; Vista's been very stable, and I've not encountered 64-bit compatibility problems, other than a couple of utilities which I found alternatives for. Benchmarks now are showing that Vista is as fast as XP for gaming, now that drivers are mature, and there are little conveniences like start menu search which I'd really miss if going back to XP. Unless you have some very fussy programs which won't work on Vista, I don't see any motivation to go back.
 
Mithent said:
Vista Ultimate x64. I've never used XP on this machine, it being new, but I don't regret my decision; Vista's been very stable, and I've not encountered 64-bit compatibility problems, other than a couple of utilities which I found alternatives for. Benchmarks now are showing that Vista is as fast as XP for gaming, now that drivers are mature, and there are little conveniences like start menu search which I'd really miss if going back to XP. Unless you have some very fussy programs which won't work on Vista, I don't see any motivation to go back.
Click to expand...

IUs that for 32 or 64 or both?

I would really love to see that. Vista still felt a tad slow but then again I was using a laptop.


XP SP2 Corp user here.
 
Unless you have some specific hardware of software compatibility issues which you shouldn't have on a new rig anyway, there's simply no reason to use XP. Gaming performance simply isn't an issue anymore. And with a new generation of GPU hardware that's going to be in Vista first world you actually will probably see Vista performance and stability grow over XP. Remember, that vast majority of people with latest and great hardware are now on Vista.
 
FreeBSD and Windows 2000 on my desktop


just Windows XP on my laptop right now.... I'd load win2k on my laptop..... but I can't get it to install w/o bluescreening for some reason
 
heatlesssun said:
Unless you have some specific hardware of software compatibility issues which you shouldn't have on a new rig anyway, there's simply no reason to use XP. Gaming performance simply isn't an issue anymore. And with a new generation of GPU hardware that's going to be in Vista first world you actually will probably see Vista performance and stability grow over XP. Remember, that vast majority of people with latest and great hardware are now on Vista.
Click to expand...

The reason to continue using XP becomes a personal one: people, like myself, simply don't like what interface changes Microsoft made to the UI, most notably (for myself, this one is) Explorer. I use Explorer extensively and I simply cannot tolerate the way Explorer functions in Vista. I do love the breadcrumb concept and was one of the first people around here and many other forums "preaching it" up big time because it truly is a brilliant concept and wonderfully implemented for directory navigation.

But alas, that one aspect simply isn't enough for me and many others. I will continue to recommend Vista for new computer owners so they don't have to deal with trying to learn the old ways and the new, but as for people like myself that have been using computers for years (just over 3 decades myself), I won't recommend Vista regardless of the amount of power the hardware represents.

Uhmmm... and with that I went off-topic so I apologize... let's not turn this into a Vista vs the world thread, but I felt it necessary to make a point of contention that there are reasons to continue running previous versions of Windows for many of us out here. Just because Vista is the new kid on the block, as the case may be, it doesn't mean "newer = better" in every single aspect that matters.
 
MC FLMJIG said:
IUs that for 32 or 64 or both?

I would really love to see that. Vista still felt a tad slow but then again I was using a laptop.


XP SP2 Corp user here.
Click to expand...

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302495,00.asp

The article in question. It didn't really specify unless I missed it, I assume 32 bit. Doesn't matter though, I have run them all, recently, and gaming on Vista isn't an issue in any way. I has 32 bit last week, 64 bit today, they both run the games just fine, and smoother than XP.

And as for your laptop, was that Vista SP1? I just installed it on mine when SP1 was released. It runs better than XP, and this is on a single core with 2 GB RAM.
 
my Q6600/4GB RAM, i found vista 64bit ran snappier than 32bit XP.. network transfers on gigabit was also faster in Vista. however, i ended up going back to xp because of my creative sound card... i didn't want to deal with the lack of features, stupid creative!!!!
 
Joe Average said:
Uhmmm... and with that I went off-topic so I apologize... let's not turn this into a Vista vs the world thread, but I felt it necessary to make a point of contention that there are reasons to continue running previous versions of Windows for many of us out here. Just because Vista is the new kid on the block, as the case may be, it doesn't mean "newer = better" in every single aspect that matters.
Click to expand...

I agree generally however as time marches on XP is going to continue die off. Windows 7 will be hear in two years, and then XP will two versions back. XP support will take a super hard hit then.

If you stick with XP just be prepared to wake up one day and say, damn, its doesn't work with XP.
 
Joe Average said:
The reason to continue using XP becomes a personal one: people, like myself, simply don't like what interface changes Microsoft made to the UI, most notably (for myself, this one is) Explorer. I use Explorer extensively and I simply cannot tolerate the way Explorer functions in Vista. I do love the breadcrumb concept and was one of the first people around here and many other forums "preaching it" up big time because it truly is a brilliant concept and wonderfully implemented for directory navigation.

But alas, that one aspect simply isn't enough for me and many others. I will continue to recommend Vista for new computer owners so they don't have to deal with trying to learn the old ways and the new, but as for people like myself that have been using computers for years (just over 3 decades myself), I won't recommend Vista regardless of the amount of power the hardware represents.

Uhmmm... and with that I went off-topic so I apologize... let's not turn this into a Vista vs the world thread, but I felt it necessary to make a point of contention that there are reasons to continue running previous versions of Windows for many of us out here. Just because Vista is the new kid on the block, as the case may be, it doesn't mean "newer = better" in every single aspect that matters.
Click to expand...

Not trying to tell you what to run and I am sure you have heard it before but... Explorer was one of the things that turned me off to Vista as well to start with. Out of the box, it sucks. Once I messed with it enough to figure out how to customize it, I prefer it to the XP version. I set everything to detail view, added the columns I wanted, and turned on the preview pane. Simple but not immediately obvious as I didn't know what it would do when I first saw it. But then again I hated the new start menu until I got used to it. Now I hate the XP start menu. It's all a matter of preference. What is better is what you prefer.
 
Yah, I know, we're all in agreement here and what's important is that we understand it's a matter of personal preference and not <x> is better than <y> just because...

I have two big issues with Vista: Explorer and the audio subsystem issues (Microsoft yanked out DirectSound as most everyone knows now). Having been part of Vista's development process since around 2002 I've seen where it originally was in terms of concepts and where it turned up and I promise you, what people run today is nothing like what the program envisioned on the orignal drawing boards. There are some "Longhorn" videos on YouTube and the Internet in various places of some really really pre-alpha milestone builds that had some really wicked evil cool stuff that never made it out of those builds, sad to say.

Could Vista have been the coolest OS in history? Definitely. It had the capability to be more than even Apple could dare dream of making OSX even if they had the nearly unlimited budget of Microsoft for development, but it just didn't happen. :(

So yeah, if someone is new to computers or doesn't have a lot of eXPerience (HA!) with XP itself, Vista is fine for them these days. It's the old bastiges like myself that have been at this "game" entirely too long that just like to K.I.S.S. so I run a clean OS with basically nothing enabled in terms of GUI effects because they are eyecandy and nothing more, really. I don't care about a few processes running, I just don't like that stuff, never really did. </personal_preference> :)
 
Vista Business x64. It's bad ass and Vista rocks. Much better OS than XP.

THANK YOU MICROSOFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Joe Average said:
Yah, I know, we're all in agreement here and what's important is that we understand it's a matter of personal preference and not <x> is better than <y> just because...

I have two big issues with Vista: Explorer and the audio subsystem issues (Microsoft yanked out DirectSound as most everyone knows now). Having been part of Vista's development process since around 2002 I've seen where it originally was in terms of concepts and where it turned up and I promise you, what people run today is nothing like what the program envisioned on the orignal drawing boards. There are some "Longhorn" videos on YouTube and the Internet in various places of some really really pre-alpha milestone builds that had some really wicked evil cool stuff that never made it out of those builds, sad to say.

Could Vista have been the coolest OS in history? Definitely. It had the capability to be more than even Apple could dare dream of making OSX even if they had the nearly unlimited budget of Microsoft for development, but it just didn't happen. :(

So yeah, if someone is new to computers or doesn't have a lot of eXPerience (HA!) with XP itself, Vista is fine for them these days. It's the old bastiges like myself that have been at this "game" entirely too long that just like to K.I.S.S. so I run a clean OS with basically nothing enabled in terms of GUI effects because they are eyecandy and nothing more, really. I don't care about a few processes running, I just don't like that stuff, never really did. </personal_preference> :)
Click to expand...

As far as the direct sound issue, I am not pleased about that either as I'm sure most are not. However I diecided to give up the Audigy2 and got an X-Fi, and I have no complaints. Setting ALchemy up is a little bit of work, but the results are good. The 64 bit drivers seem to work very well. I am actually quite shocked, coming from the days of the Live! cards which really did suck.

And yes, Vista was a huge disappointment after the early Longhorn builds. One of the problems with a publicly traded company. It becomes more important to please the shareholders than the customers. :(

I know what you mean about being at this entirely too long. I remember when I had a hard time moving to Windows 95 from Windows 3.1 because Windows 3.1 was a mature product that just worked. It's the same thing every time. I didn't encourage anyone to use Vista until SP1. It really wasn't that solid until then. It took about a year before there were any decent video drivers, and they still lack from the XP ones. I know there are many that will argue that it was good for them from day 1. Good for them, but it's still not good for many now. We'll see this all again in a few years :D when Windows 7 comes out.
 
MC FLMJIG said:
IUs that for 32 or 64 or both?
Click to expand...

The ones I was thinking of specifically were these:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302500,00.asp

Unfortunately, they don't seem to say in the methodology section whether it's 32-bit or 64-bit, just that it's Home Premium. I guess 32-bit is more likely.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302498,00.asp

Of course, not every single system and every single game will be the same, but since Vista has been released the gap has been steadily closing, with that recent one showing there to be no practical difference.
 
I just finished up my Vista 64 Ultimate install. I tell you as far as games, they all run great. Quake 4 was a bit of a pain to get installed and running, but it runs very well now. I'll keep the 64 bit for now, but there are still some small issues I would like to find workarounds for. None of them gaming related.
 
I upgraded from XP Pro 32 to vista business 32 and haven't noticed much of a difference. The only bad experience so far is with TF2 which loads slower on vista.
 
XP Pro here, no need to fix what isn't broke right? However I will be happy to upgrade from XP to vista/win7 when I absolutely have to (most likely when a game I really want to play requires dx10).
 
Gabriel said:
I upgraded from XP Pro 32 to vista business 32 and haven't noticed much of a difference. The only bad experience so far is with TF2 which loads slower on vista.
Click to expand...

No problems with TF2, but that does remind me, I can't get LAN games to work for the old Steam catalog (Half-Life, Counter-Strike, etc.). It says no servers on the network. On 3 different machines. I reported it to them. They said they were aware of the issue. Months ago. Haven't fixed it. :mad:
 
Got one rig each on Vista Business 64, Vista Ultimate 32, Server 2008, and XP Pro....personally, for my new rigs, I prefer business 64, though server 2008 being a new install, could take the lead for me
 
Vista Ultimate 64-bit for my gaming rig. I've been very happy with it since SP1 came out and I see no real reason to go back to XP now.
 
My rig: Vista Business x64 Dual boot with a Slimmed down XP load for gaming (have had it installed for years, just have never gotten around to reinstalling it....it is setup all the way I like so I have not had to worry about it).
 
Vista Ultimate x64, never had a problem except trying to run core temp a while ago but fixed that. First thing I did was turn of windows defender
 
But 98 can be considered 'broken' since they haven't released patches for it in years!
 
Vista Ultimate x64 on my desktop and Vista Ultimate x32 on my notebook.

Vista is great.

Also, thanks MS for the feedback program :D
 
Right now, I'm running Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit; I just just did a clean re-install after nvgts.sys refused to stop blue-screening every 60 seconds (literally).

However, I do see myself upgrading to Vista x64 by the end of the calendar year. I have no qualms about performance issues at this point; the big thing me for me will be ensuring audio compatibility, since I do a fair amount of hobbyist work in music. Regardless, there are a couple of higher-priority upgrades that I will most likely be addressing first before Vista.
 
I use both. I bought XP Pro years ago so I'm using that on one of my computers. My gaming rig is using the free copy of Vista Ultimate 64 I received from participating in Microsoft's feedback program, and my work laptop came with Vista Business and XP Pro disc. I loaded Vista Business in it.
 
XP pro for gaming, Suse for everything else. I picked up a copy of Vista Ultimate a while ago and have been meaning to upgrade but am torn between using it for my desktop or my laptop(also XP).
 
XP Pro. Why pay for another upgrade when games work as fast, if not faster, in XP vs Vista? Plus, I run riva tuner and other various tweaking tools and can't be bothered resolving vista-software issues.
 
Vista Ultimate x64 here. SP1 and the driver improvements have made Vista a viable platform. The only problem is it's image is already ruined (first impressions are everything). I still use Windows XP Pro on every other computer in my household.

PS: I'd never buy Vista Ultimate (I got mine for free from an AMD party), Vista Business seems to be the best edition out there.
 
compslckr said:
I still feel like XP is better, DX10 isn't that big of an improvement in my case, and xp has worked nice for me for a long time now.
Click to expand...

Based on what? You haven't really had much to go by. There's only a couple games out there, if that, that are actually built from the ground up for DirectX 10. Games like Crysis don't take advantage of DirectX 10 very well, and shouldn't be used to decide how good DirectX 10 is or isn't.
 
Running dual boot, Win XP Pro x86 and Vista Home Premium x64.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top