Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Vista vs. XP in Performace Test


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 kaironxp

kaironxp

    black cat sexy girl

  • Member
  • 468 posts

Posted 23 May 2007 - 10:09 PM

All the people said that Aero is cool and what? How need Aero.

I've been reding this article and benchmark there is very usefull to understand performance in many scenaries.
Cool, dx10 and.... what that thing aren't necesary for people that uses computer productively.

Read conclution.

...my computer perform better in Windows XP. Right now I’m dual booting Windows XP and Vista.

If you really need your PC to finish huge encoding, transcoding or rendering workloads within a defined time frame, yes, it is. Don't do it; stay with XP.


And now see the graphic.

This is Windows XP
Posted Image

This is (fatty) Windows Vista
Posted Image

If you want to read the full article please click here

You can use Windows Vista if you want to see Aero, but if we talk about performance Windows Vista suck and that's the truth if you don't want to see the truth that's your problem but the truth is the truth.

bye B)

#2 tominorlando

tominorlando

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 396 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 12:10 AM

Vista was made to run on newer PC's.

You didn't post any specs for yours.

But I think you're right.

I bought a video card so I could run Aero.

After I got over the GUI with Vista, the thing that made me say WOW was, WOW! this OS sucks.

Anyone remember Windows Millennium Edition?

XP stays on my hard drive at least until they release a service pack for Vista. (Probably longer.)

It looks nice, though. So just mod your GUI.

Edited by tominorlando, 24 May 2007 - 12:35 AM.


#3 WinMatrics

WinMatrics

    LinMatrix Founder

  • Member
  • 893 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 01:42 AM

@tom: Well, an opinion's an opinion, and in my opinion, your opinion sucks. Just my opinion.

#4 kaironxp

kaironxp

    black cat sexy girl

  • Member
  • 468 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 03:22 AM

Vista was made to run on newer PC's.

You didn't post any specs for yours.

But I think you're right.

I bought a video card so I could run Aero.

After I got over the GUI with Vista, the thing that made me say WOW was, WOW! this OS sucks.

Anyone remember Windows Millennium Edition?

XP stays on my hard drive at least until they release a service pack for Vista. (Probably longer.)

It looks nice, though. So just mod your GUI.


NO, men it's not my computer that's a computer from a keznews' guy he did this bench to see what better is Vista compared with Windows XP.

For now Windows Vista suck that's the truth. If you buy a new computer just to see Aero may be you are a compulsive consumer nothing more.

#5 Frylock86

Frylock86

    WinMatrixian 1337

  • Member
  • 3,075 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 04:24 AM

For now Windows Vista suck that's the truth. If you buy a new computer just to see Aero may be you are a compulsive consumer nothing more.



Mind if I make an observation here, but you seem to really hate Vista. Thats cool, your opinion is your opionion and I respect that. But, I might suggest you make posts like these a little less biased. I really don't like coming on here and seeing people going back and forth saying "you suck" and "No, you suck" and so forth. If you want to post comparisons between Vista and XP or whatever, you should try do so with a little more neutrality (Is that even a word?).

Just making an observation......


:windows:

#6 kth7

kth7

    WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 161 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 08:43 AM

Vista was made to run on newer PC's.

You didn't post any specs for yours.

But I think you're right.

I bought a video card so I could run Aero.

After I got over the GUI with Vista, the thing that made me say WOW was, WOW! this OS sucks.

Anyone remember Windows Millennium Edition?

XP stays on my hard drive at least until they release a service pack for Vista. (Probably longer.)

It looks nice, though. So just mod your GUI.

Yup, i remember Windows Millennium Edition, it was the worst post 3.X Windows ever. It always crashes and had lots of problems. Well, for me now XP is the most stable windows build ever (Previously Win98).

#7 Freka

Freka

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 2,758 posts

Posted 24 May 2007 - 12:03 PM


For now Windows Vista suck that's the truth. If you buy a new computer just to see Aero may be you are a compulsive consumer nothing more.



Mind if I make an observation here, but you seem to really hate Vista. Thats cool, your opinion is your opionion and I respect that. But, I might suggest you make posts like these a little less biased. I really don't like coming on here and seeing people going back and forth saying "you suck" and "No, you suck" and so forth. If you want to post comparisons between Vista and XP or whatever, you should try do so with a little more neutrality (Is that even a word?).

Just making an observation......


:windows:

Exactly what I was thinking.

#8 tominorlando

tominorlando

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 396 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 10:28 AM

Fair enough Frylock86.

I could have been more detached and diplomatic regarding my opinion of Vista.

But I didn't flame any Winmatrixians.

#9 _deXter_

_deXter_

    The Lord of the Scripts

  • Member
  • 306 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 12:25 PM

Before you jump to any conclusions saying that Vista sucks, if you read that very blog, it's mentioned at the end that:

* Vista runs considerably more services and thus has to spend somewhat more resources on itself. Indexing, connectivity and usability don't come for free.
* There is a lot of CPU performance available today! We've got really fast dual core processors, and even faster quad cores will hit the market by the middle of the year. Even though you will lose application performance by upgrading to Vista, today's hardware is much faster than yesterday's, and tomorrow's processors will clearly leap even further ahead.
* No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor.

Although application performance has had this drawback, the new Windows Vista performance features SuperFetch and ReadyDrive help to make Vista feel faster and smoother than Windows XP.


I think the key point here is that "No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor."

If you wanted the fastest performance, would you be using windows 3.1?
Why single out only vista?

I think it's quite obvious and everyone knows that vista isn't a better performer than XP for current hardware, but for future hardware AND software - vista is where I'd put my money on.

And the opinion on gaming/3D performance is also biased- Everyone knows that Dx9 games work slower in Vista than XP. But that's because Vista doesn't have any native support for Dx9. Dx10 is where the future of gaming is. Suppose a particular game came in two variants - a dx9 and a dx10 version, then you can bet that the dx10 version will not only deliver a better performance, but also better graphics.

#10 kaironxp

kaironxp

    black cat sexy girl

  • Member
  • 468 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 02:15 PM

I think it's quite obvious and everyone knows that vista isn't a better performer than XP for current hardware, but for future hardware AND software - vista is where I'd put my money on.


yes, i agree with you in that point. But windows vista may be could be better with a better hardware but if you use Windows XP on better hardware may be the performance will be better too.

Are you going to buy Vista to have the same performance? I don't know.

I use my computer productively, rendering audio, video, etc. At the moment I have a single Athlon 64 3200+ @2.4ghz (venice core) with 2gb of ram. In my case Windows XP run better than Vista. In the future I want to buy a PHENOM :D

Other thing. I have a Presario M2015LA with Windows XP but I want to buy a new laptop with Turion X2 but all laptop have Vista, :( and I hate Vista and the OEM said me that only work with Vista, WHY?? :cry: I want to buy a new computer with Windows XP, but I can't :cry:

#11 Merforga

Merforga

    Iron Man = Fe Male?

  • Member
  • 1,090 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 08:30 PM

I don't think that anybody should have just vista installed on their hard drive, at least until Vista becomes the "primary" operating system.

#12 yanike

yanike

    I am YM. If you don't know me, you will.

  • Global Moderator
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 08:53 PM

OK OK!!

Bottom Line....

PCs run XP and Alien Motherships run Vista.

It's funny when you really think about it. If you want Vista start up quick like XP you need to use a USB Drive to Ready Boost it or buy a new PC.

Vista is a money maker OS period. If Vista was the best thing yet, people would be dropping XP left and right.

Microsoft had a lot of Hype on Vista and saw that it was on everyone's mind and released it premature. If they would have waited until August or October and give 3rd party companies more time to fix drivers for it, it wouldn't have been so bad.

#13 kaironxp

kaironxp

    black cat sexy girl

  • Member
  • 468 posts

Posted 25 May 2007 - 09:16 PM

OK OK!!

Bottom Line....

PCs run XP and Alien Motherships run Vista.

It's funny when you really think about it. If you want Vista start up quick like XP you need to use a USB Drive to Ready Boost it or buy a new PC.

Vista is a money maker OS period. If Vista was the best thing yet, people would be dropping XP left and right.

Microsoft had a lot of Hype on Vista and saw that it was on everyone's mind and released it premature. If they would have waited until August or October and give 3rd party companies more time to fix drivers for it, it wouldn't have been so bad.


Yanike, many expert thing and tested that ready boost lack significant boost.

Yanike Do you always buy any new product because it's new? and belive any marketing promise.

Read this article http://keznews.com/2...gnificant_boost

Edited by kaironxp, 25 May 2007 - 09:18 PM.


#14 Frylock86

Frylock86

    WinMatrixian 1337

  • Member
  • 3,075 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 12:00 AM

Fair enough Frylock86.

I could have been more detached and diplomatic regarding my opinion of Vista.

But I didn't flame any Winmatrixians.



I actually wasn't referring to you. I was referring to Kaironxp.

Edited by Frylock86, 26 May 2007 - 12:03 AM.


#15 Freka

Freka

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 2,758 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 05:31 PM

For me I would pick Vista on a new pc. I like how it looks, it is powerful, safer than XP and I don't know it just looks cool.

#16 ShamusHand

ShamusHand

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 1,574 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 07:30 PM

I don't know about you guys, but for me Vista runs much faster than XP. The only thing Vista is slower at is copying, deleting, and unzipping files, but otherwise it outperforms XP. Boots faster, programs load quicker, and look like a million bucks. Mind you, this is on the same machine - a dual boot.

#17 TituFama

TituFama

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 2,392 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 04:32 AM

Everything runs faster in Vista for me except DirectX 9 games.

#18 yanike

yanike

    I am YM. If you don't know me, you will.

  • Global Moderator
  • 4,631 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 06:17 AM

Yanike Do you always buy any new product because it's new? and belive any marketing promise.


No. I bought VIsta so I can already have it. I like trying new things anyways to see if it is all that it's cracked up to be. If you are running a high powered machine then you might not see the problems other people are seeing. Right now Vista sucks and a lot of people would agree on that. Me and a other person went back and forth on this. Even he thinks VIsta was the worst thing ever made. He loves Ubuntu though because he's a command junkie. He hates IE and that he has to use MS Win sometimes. Still, even he admits after SP1 Vista will be a powerhouse OS. I hope the same, but I really want Ubuntu to take over. Once you get used to Ubuntu, Vista's bells and whistles are muted. A lot more people are finding out about Ubuntu and wanting to see more.

I laugh sometimes when I see people saying it wouldn't bring any profit. I guarentee if Adobe, MIdway and other mainstream companies started to develop on Linux Ubuntu, people will soon enough start buying their products. Because in the end, the only thing people will be paying for is the products they need and not the OS itself. If a company releases a product someone needs, they will pay to get it. I hope all the best for Linux Ubuntu.

Also, it's very hard for a company to break into mainstream and have their OS mentioned with Windows and Macintosh. Ubuntu has done a great job and I hope more developers come and help out to build it better :)

For once, we can have an OS made for the people, by the people and given to the people for free. Microsoft didn't care about anything until people started searching for alternatives and finding out the truth of MS Quick and Dirty Operating System (Q-DOS aka MS-DOS)

Edited by yanike, 27 May 2007 - 06:20 AM.


#19 Frylock86

Frylock86

    WinMatrixian 1337

  • Member
  • 3,075 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 02:24 PM


Yanike Do you always buy any new product because it's new? and belive any marketing promise.


No. I bought VIsta so I can already have it. I like trying new things anyways to see if it is all that it's cracked up to be. If you are running a high powered machine then you might not see the problems other people are seeing. Right now Vista sucks and a lot of people would agree on that. Me and a other person went back and forth on this. Even he thinks VIsta was the worst thing ever made. He loves Ubuntu though because he's a command junkie. He hates IE and that he has to use MS Win sometimes. Still, even he admits after SP1 Vista will be a powerhouse OS. I hope the same, but I really want Ubuntu to take over. Once you get used to Ubuntu, Vista's bells and whistles are muted. A lot more people are finding out about Ubuntu and wanting to see more.

I laugh sometimes when I see people saying it wouldn't bring any profit. I guarentee if Adobe, MIdway and other mainstream companies started to develop on Linux Ubuntu, people will soon enough start buying their products. Because in the end, the only thing people will be paying for is the products they need and not the OS itself. If a company releases a product someone needs, they will pay to get it. I hope all the best for Linux Ubuntu.

Also, it's very hard for a company to break into mainstream and have their OS mentioned with Windows and Macintosh. Ubuntu has done a great job and I hope more developers come and help out to build it better :)

For once, we can have an OS made for the people, by the people and given to the people for free. Microsoft didn't care about anything until people started searching for alternatives and finding out the truth of MS Quick and Dirty Operating System (Q-DOS aka MS-DOS)



I hope M$ take a few ques from the development of Ubuntu too. As much as I hate Linux, ubuntu, or whatever, I still feel as if open source is the future of computing. If so, M$ and Apple might have to do the same if they want to stay in business..............

#20 Freka

Freka

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 2,758 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 03:38 PM

I think it will take a very very long time to get Microsoft out of business, in fact I don't see that possible right now. They are the biggest and richest company in the world right now.

Want to comment?

Register or Sign In to go completely ad-free!