Gaming and Vista?

[[cTx]SGT.Viper]

Tell us what the pros and cons of this operating system are when it comes to gaming please. Thanks in advance,[cTx]SGT.Viper

[Verisimilitude]

Cons: Minimal FPS drop versus XP
Driver maturity
Software support
Less RAM available to games since OS takes more


Pros: ...


Vista currently does not have any competitive edge over XP for gaming.

[Verisimilitude]

...

Xp is old, and once you go to Vista you wont go back to XP, Vista feals so much better it looks better it runs better IMO, Vista to me feals more whole, XP feals like an empty shell


Very true, the OS overall is the progressive step I'd want in an OS. I currently use Vista in all but my gaming rigs and laptops (Not enough driver support yet). However in the context of what Viper wants (gaming) and what I'm thinking he wants (competitiveness of Vista vs XP) he will get better performance and have less compatibility issues with all games with XP.

[XS2K]

It depends on what game you are playing,for example in Oblivion I get more framerates with Vista than with XP the same with Tomb Raider Colector's edition and other 2-3 games but for the other games usually I get lower framerates or the same,it depends on what video card you are using also,since ATi has better support with Vista than Nvidia...

[PanteraGSTK]

I think the main issue is driver support. Once support is where it is with XP the problems should be minimal. I remember when XP came out it was the same with driver support. I had a few pieces of hardware that only supported W9x and when I switched to XP I had to buy new hardware. Manufacturers just need to stay on the ball with driver support to eliminate these problems before the OS is released. WE all know that will never happen.

[NickS]

My games seem to run the same as in windows xp, asside from the fact that my fps dropped a little. I soppose if you have an older video card thats already having issues with fps. Vista right now wouldnt be very good to go to, cuss my fps drop was about 10 or so average.

Yup, same. I expect it to even out or even beat out XP once SP1 comes out as well as newer, better drivers.

Cons: Minimal FPS drop versus XP
Driver maturity
Software support
Less RAM available to games since OS takes more


Pros: ...


Vista currently does not have any competitive edge over XP for gaming.

Drivers are maturing rapidly, to the point where they may become better than XP's in the near future. I've had no major software incompatibilities thus far either. Less RAM is free because Vista caches less, it doesn't require RAM for no reason. When I exit out of a game such as BF2 and check my RAM usage, it is less than XP's nominal usage.

The OS uses the ram better thne xp does, once your in a game the os drops the ram usage and it runs just like windows XP.

As a matter of fact i am using only 480 mb right now typing to you. If you tweak and shutdown services like you would with your XP os, it doesnt use much more ram, in fact i belive XP uses about 350mb when it turns on or it did for me. 130 more mb isnt a big deal, i dont know the whole process in how vista uses its memory but the more memory usage is due to it actually using ram and and not a crap load of pagefile slowing the system down like XP would. Its alot more efficent.

Xp is old, and once you go to Vista you wont go back to XP, Vista feals so much better it looks better it runs better IMO, Vista to me feals more whole, XP feals like an empty shell

Yup! Totally agree. I'm running Firefox with a few tabs open and plenty of task bar programs and I'm using roughly 33% of my RAM, or 681MB.

Very true, the OS overall is the progressive step I'd want in an OS. I currently use Vista in all but my gaming rigs and laptops (Not enough driver support yet). However in the context of what Viper wants (gaming) and what I'm thinking he wants (competitiveness of Vista vs XP) he will get better performance and have less compatibility issues with all games with XP.

It's true. If you truly want the MOST performance you can get for benching/gaming, XP is the way to go. No way would I ever bench on Vista, not for a few years.

[itznfb]

what drivers have you seen problems with? from what i've seen, if its available for XP, its available for Vista.

i run Vista on all my machines. i started the migration with my media centers. my gaming rigs may have some issues with Vista. i get some Steam games crash on exit (which isn't a big deal since its on exit) except for Insurgency. Insurgency crashes constantly, and i haven't heard many other people complain about crashing. so it may be my vista install. other than that i've had no problems.

[[XC] mysticmerlin]

I can play EA games with my 7950gx2 on Vista that I can't on XP64 but I don't notice any difference gaming or whats it called? Oh yeah working :hehe:

[NickS]

How did I double post? I think thats when FUGGER was screwing with the database.. hmm

[[cTx]SGT.Viper]

Nick, i have had the double posting problem in the past to.

[gillll]

everything right now if fully xp optimized in terms of development adoption and eventually money.

till dx10 will be for the mid range of pc we won't see vista getting larger in pc market.right now the newest gen the gf8xxx and amd 2xxx can't handle a game in dx10 and as i had said there are enough software being developed for xp atm.

vista will wait for after the quad barrier and next gen of gpus.

[drunkcarlos]

well since some of you have made the plunge, which version of vista are you using? and are you using the 64bit version? I have been comtemplating making the switch as I have my new machine ready to go... just unsure about which version (premium vs ultimate) I should get and how are the drivers on 8800gtx's on vista shaping up?

[[XC] mysticmerlin]

If you have XP just run on that till the first major service pack comes out for gaming. I played with Ult Prem 32bit and it did ok on my rig.

[bigdaddy25fb]

Current DX10 performance is as supspected....sucky. The World in Conflict beta left me feeling like the 5 series all over again.

[gillll]

i had 64 ultimate.

it's all nice and kewl but still average gaming.

fps+loading time+game setting levels on the average are lower on vista then xp.

xp gaming experience is still more enjoyable then vista at the end. and i'm talking only dx9 here. dx10 is as i said and ppl agree is not playable at all.

[eXceededgoku]

Current DX10 performance is as supspected....sucky. The World in Conflict beta left me feeling like the 5 series all over again.

on the hd2900 the game was silky smooth on my system below @ 1680x1050 all settings max full AA/AF DX10 mode. I wish I had it on me now so I could give you some solid results... Or maybe its one of those games (like DiRT - which is unplayable on 8800 but playable on hd2900) that the 2900 is good at.

[Baleful]

Gaming on Vista dosn't really cut it right now. Like everyone else said, you lose a few FPS but that's about it. As far as Vista being stable, I feel it's as stable as XP. I've used Vista Ultimate 32-bit since the day it was released. At first there were a few nominal problems but now it's just as reliable if not more reliable than XP. On my gaming rig I still use XP because without DX10 games, theres not much point in upgrading yet.

[trans am]

Current DX10 performance is as supspected....sucky. The World in Conflict beta left me feeling like the 5 series all over again.

I agree if you play with everything maxed out. I thought it played fine at medium settings @1920x1200 res. 163.11 drivers
The hdwr will catch up eventually to play at high settings. We're still talking 1st gen dx10 cards here.

I think gaming on vista is just fine. My problem is the current Creative audigy 2zs platinum drivers do not support EAX so the sound is running off the software and sounds like crap.

[gillll]

as morpheus said to neo : i know exactly what you mean.

the os isn't the issue here . game are.

why playing on average 25 if u can play 30 or playing 60 when u can have 70 vista/xp.
every frame counts and right now the next gaming api is not matured.

dx9 is therefor xp is still the best platform for gaming.
till next gen of gpu which will do(please....) run dx10 games smoothly.
only then vista will be adopted by the gamers.

who to remind u all ain't xs user and have mid market products (c2d+gf86xx/amd26xx

[chiefhog]

WiC beta runs great for me at 1650x1080 with everything maxed and 163.11 drivers. I have had no major problems with Vista as of yet.

[railmeat]

only respond to this if your a GAMER(not a bencher) and thinking about switching to vista.i know 5 ppl personally who installed it then completly removed vista trying to game on it.if u want a cool o\s to surf the web,hey its the 1 for u.if your a true die hard gamer,then xp is the way to go period.hell it took 6+ years to get xp to run somewhat decent and games runs amazing on it(dx9 or not).i guess its cool to say "i got vista" but realistic gamers who wanna game should let the masses pull hair out of there skull til drivers,patches or atleast a official service pack is released before they try this o\s(trust me).i actually think its kinda cool that others can wait for m$ and cool hip ppl can figure out all these bugs that ppl all over the world are having and until that point its a complete half ass dud o\s.totaLy rushed onto the shelves that ppl were demanding to be released and now nightmare city.the ppl who are not complaining are the average joes who surf the web and burn dvd,s etc.but for gamers the only o\s is to use is x\p period.thanks m$ for your new nightmare o\s for the masses that have it installed and have to wait for driver support and other things to be worked out properly.

crysis,enemy terortory,ut2007, will all play flawlessly on xp with no issues.shame for the poor souls who are currently running vista and already know deep down that vista users will not be enjoying these newer games coming out very so0n.sux cause i actually wanted to install vista too for dx10 reasons and proper memory allocating reasons.after persoanlly trying vista on friends pcs i must must admit that yes"it looks cool"and allocates ram better but thats about it....sad.well theres always next year after a million fixes,patches,and bugs hopefully will be ironed out to finally truely enjoy it for games.as far as surfing the web,burning dvds in style then its great

[eXceededgoku]

lol at you railmeat, I guess all the games I've been running fine on Vista have been fictions of my imagination. ATI drivers are very good in Vista and Nvidia are getting better (gradually).

[gillll]

drivers ain't the issue . fps is.

u'll always gain more fps on xp. for dx9 games.

[eXceededgoku]

wow 10 fps difference at most with slightly greater variations on nvidia drivers. Fact is it can only get better on Vista.

[gillll]

diff between 30avg fps to 40avg is visible for me.

[itznfb]

only respond to this if your a GAMER(not a bencher) and thinking about switching to vista.i know 5 ppl personally who installed it then completly removed vista trying to game on it.if u want a cool o\s to surf the web,hey its the 1 for u.if your a true die hard gamer,then xp is the way to go period.hell it took 6+ years to get xp to run somewhat decent and games runs amazing on it(dx9 or not).i guess its cool to say "i got vista" but realistic gamers who wanna game should let the masses pull hair out of there skull til drivers,patches or atleast a official service pack is released before they try this o\s(trust me).i actually think its kinda cool that others can wait for m$ and cool hip ppl can figure out all these bugs that ppl all over the world are having and until that point its a complete half ass dud o\s.totaLy rushed onto the shelves that ppl were demanding to be released and now nightmare city.the ppl who are not complaining are the average joes who surf the web and burn dvd,s etc.but for gamers the only o\s is to use is x\p period.thanks m$ for your new nightmare o\s for the masses that have it installed and have to wait for driver support and other things to be worked out properly.

crysis,enemy terortory,ut2007, will all play flawlessly on xp with no issues.shame for the poor souls who are currently running vista and already know deep down that vista users will not be enjoying these newer games coming out very so0n.sux cause i actually wanted to install vista too for dx10 reasons and proper memory allocating reasons.after persoanlly trying vista on friends pcs i must must admit that yes"it looks cool"and allocates ram better but thats about it....sad.well theres always next year after a million fixes,patches,and bugs hopefully will be ironed out to finally truely enjoy it for games.as far as surfing the web,burning dvds in style then its great

pretty much everything you said in that post in false.

[gillll]

itznfb;2319686']pretty much everything you said in that post in false.

not true and u can see that if u try max fps settings.

1600*1200*85HZ aa8 af16 max settings was playable on xpsp2
while on vista x64 wasn't playable.

pc is mine with 2gb ram vista was ultimate .

now take heavier games like fear or stalker they won't max on vista machine unless u have a monster pc.

xp is the choice for gaming right now.

beside that everything can move to vista.

[itznfb]

his post had nothing to do with FPS, and every game i've played, has run with the exact same FPS as it did on windows xp. exact same hardware. in some cases there's +/- 5 fps. chances are that's unrelated to the OS itself. i have 3.0ghz C2D w/2gbs of RAM, and a 8800GTS 640mb stock speed and it runs stalker perfectly at full settings. just like it did on XP

[gillll]

which vista ?

and aa anf af were also on ?

which res were u running ?

[itznfb]

home premium, full settings, everything on, 1680x1050, runs every game i've played perfectly smooth. that includes, stalker, insurgency, CSS, HL2, UT2004.. and a few others i don't play often

[gillll]

fear ?

what was average fps ?

[Verisimilitude]

The OS uses the ram better thne xp does, once your in a game the os drops the ram usage and it runs just like windows XP.

As a matter of fact i am using only 480 mb right now typing to you. If you tweak and shutdown services like you would with your XP os, it doesnt use much more ram, in fact i belive XP uses about 350mb when it turns on or it did for me. 130 more mb isnt a big deal, i dont know the whole process in how vista uses its memory but the more memory usage is due to it actually using ram and and not a crap load of pagefile slowing the system down like XP would. Its alot more efficent.

This might not be true.

This article supports my claim that Vista takes much more RAM than XP.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3044

[littleowl]

raising the dead here! Does it really matter how much ram the OS uses as long as the game runs great?

[Inteleron]

im having real dirver isues with vista ut 32. Im trying to upgrade to 162.18 then 162.22 but i just get black screen and have to restore my windows to an earlier point in time. Anyone else having these issues?