Quantcast
Buy Windows Vista... Should I?

Forums - PC Discussion - Buy Windows Vista... Should I?

bla bla

DX10 yea sure and you dont get viruses if you want to watch pron.



 

mM
Around the Network

vista will run good if your computer has 1 gig of ram,at 512 it doesnt go to good
if your computer has high specs then i think you should get itits also good for alot of new pc games



Vista is a PIG! I wish my new laptop came with XP and not Vista. 1 GB of ram is not enough for Vista to run well IMO.

I've made my machine a Linux dual boot. So I use Linux whenever possible. Since I don't play any PC games right now, its not a big deal. And its soooo much faster.



Entroper said:
Sqrl said:
100% do NOT go with Vista 64-bit. It has huge driver issues. You will regret it.

Except that I have NO driver issues, and I don't regret it at all; in fact, I'm much happier than I was with XP.

I can't tell if totalwar23's post was in jest or not, but it illustrates exactly what I'm talking about. Who cares if you get 650 frames per second or 800 -- if you're averaging 100 or more, any difference is completely meaningless. Older games are going to run just fine on newer hardware in Vista 64 even if they don't run as fast as they do in XP, and newer games will be slightly slower, equal, or slightly faster in Vista. I've seen benchmarks to this effect.

I don't think DX10 is a good reason to switch to Vista, at least not until games start looking better or running faster in DX10, which they haven't yet.

Last I checked, 8800 GT cards were in stock at Amazon.com at the MSRP of $249. I haven't heard anything about a 65 nm 8800 GTS, have you got a link that talks about that? Would it be based on the G92 chip? The reason the 8800 GT outperforms the earlier 8800 GTS in most cases is because of all the internal tweaks in G92. If a G92-based 8800 GTS does exist, you'd get the best of both worlds.

Actually fazz, "try before you buy" is probably the best way to go. Don't listen to me or anyone telling you how much Vista sucks, see if you like it. If it doesn't work for you, drop it like a hot potato.


You have 64-bit or 32-bit?

Because MS disagrees with you if you mean 64-bit: click



To Each Man, Responsibility
Sqrl said:

You have 64-bit or 32-bit?

Because MS disagrees with you if you mean 64-bit: click


As I expected, article is from May 2006. 18 months have passed since then.  Vista wasn't even released until late January 2007.  Of course it had driver issues, it wasn't even out for 7 more months!

And I have 64-bit.



Around the Network

Well, the main reasons for a possible change to Vista were DX10, that seems is not worth the change as Entroper said. In the reviews for Crysis I've seen, they say that even in DX9 the graphics are the best.

And for the other reason, was the performance increase in general computing from 64-bit... but nobody has mentioned that :P

I think I'll try it, buy my prediction is that I will stick to XP for at least 6 months :P

Oh yeah, and I introduce you the GeForce 8800GTS 512MB with G92.

Why in hell they didn't used GDDR4 and named it 8900 is beyond my mind. 



Entroper said:
Sqrl said:

You have 64-bit or 32-bit?

Because MS disagrees with you if you mean 64-bit: click


As I expected, article is from May 2006. 18 months have passed since then. Vista wasn't even released until late January 2007. Of course it had driver issues, it wasn't even out for 7 more months!

And I have 64-bit.


As far as I know 64-bit still requires all drivers to be signed. I don't think I have ever installed the latest Nvidia drivers and not seen the "unsigned drivers" warning.

If there has been a change with the driver situation in 64 bit that is a good thing, but I haven't heard a single bit of evidence to support it from any of my normal PC news sites.

 

As for my article I want to point something out that you completely overlooked and is actually the reason I linked to that article.

Microsoft said today that it was aiming for parity between the number of drivers shipped in 32- and 64-bit versions of Windows Vista.

"Are we going to hit that goal? No, we're not going to hit that goal, but we are working to get as many devices supported with 64-bit drivers as humanly possible," said Barry Gough, Director of Windows Vista Product Management.

 

The thing is that the most recent games are generally on the leading edge of drivers as they are released. The result is you can and almost certainly will (as I have in the past) experience issues with drivers when purchasing newer games. So as a gamer I am still steadfastly opposed to 64 bit OS's until the driver issue is resolved. I would love nothing more than to make use of my 64 bit processor but all indications and past experience say its still a major headache.



To Each Man, Responsibility


*drool....*

Good luck finding one of those when its released. I'm still waiting for my 8800gt!



fazz said:

Well, the main reasons for a possible change to Vista were DX10, that seems is not worth the change as Entroper said. In the reviews for Crysis I've seen, they say that even in DX9 the graphics are the best.

And for the other reason, was the performance increase in general computing from 64-bit... but nobody has mentioned that :P

I think I'll try it, buy my prediction is that I will stick to XP for at least 6 months :P



 And in Crysis you can get Very high options (DX10 options) avaible if you adjust little some files. DX10 has been so far total flop.



Vista is merely a placeholder until Windows 7 comes out. You'd be better just to have XP x64 until then.