Go Back   NGOHQ.com / General / Surveys

Poll: Which Operation System Do You Have?
Poll Options
Which Operation System Do You Have?

Reply
 
Old September 9th, 2008, 12:14 PM   #31
Newbie
 

Posts: 17
CPU: AMD Phenom 9600
GPU: nVidia 8500(8400+8200)
M/B: Asus M3N78-EMH HDMI
RAM: 4GB ADATA
PSU: Apevia AS520W
Default

Server 2008 x64, as mentioned, it's vista without the bloat...and alot more configurable/stable.
DeadSpace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2008, 12:12 AM   #32
Newbie

Posts: 2
CPU: E8400 C0 @ 4GHz
GPU: 2x ATi 4850HD in Xfire
M/B: MSI P35 NEO2-FR
RAM: 8GB Reaper DDR2-1000
PSU: 600w OCZ GameXStream
Wink Reason for Vista x64

I use a customised version of Vista x64. Some people said they moved to x64 at reaching 4gb memory, but the increased native 64-bit app size means the extra 700mb or so is often wasted, especially if they jump from xp 32 to vista 64.

However, I have 8gb of memory, and unfortunately xp was never really designed to be a 64 bit OS. It's performance is not as good as the 32 bit version, and the aforementioned issues with drivers and app compatibility made me choose Vista. Since I used vlite to remove all the junk (2gb of dvd space for voice input, wtf), the os installs fast, takes up a lot less space and runs like a dream. Mind you, I've hardly got ancient hardware so that might excuse my lack of issues with it; the majority of vista problems are with older hardware.
Vigilante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2008, 10:39 AM   #33
Advanced Newbie

Posts: 38
CPU: Athlon 64 - 2.3Ghz
GPU: ATI HD2400 512MB - AGP
M/B: Winfast 760GXK8MC
RAM: 1 GB Kingston
PSU: Agiler 450 Watt
Default

I'm sticking with XP for now since I only have 1GB of memory and could not change to Vista with that little amount of ram. The only reason for me to change to Vista is to take advantage of the fact that my video card supports DX10 and pixel shader 4.0, but other than that I do not need to change OS's to a memory hog of an OS like Vista is. I can just make due with DX9 and PS 3.0 since it's not really going to improve anything much anyway.

When I decide to rebuild (and that should be soon, this rig is barely able to run anything decent anymore) I will probably just break down and buy Vista at that time.
-Shockwave- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2008, 05:13 PM   #34
Master of Disaster

Posts: 1,044
CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3200+
GPU: Radeon x1950pro
M/B: MSI K8MM-ILSR
RAM: 1gig pc3200
PSU: Enermax FMA II
Default

Vista is and always has been a waste of time, even more so now that windows 7 is just around the corner

really your rig doesnt run anything good? asside from that video card you should be ok, ive got a smiliar set up except with a x1950 and i can run every game out there at max settings with rez of 1280x960, well crysis lags some at max but thats just crysis
blindartist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 17th, 2008, 07:22 PM   #35
Senior Buttkicker
 

Posts: 2,868
CPU: Intel E8400
GPU: Geforce 8800GT
M/B: Asus Rampage Formula
RAM: G.Skill 2x2GB DDR21066
PSU: PCP&C Silencer 750w
Default

Well the windows 7 release may be around the corner but as with all M$ releases it will be a while before it becomes stable. The core of windows 7 is still Vista but that's a good thing, there will be less crap driver madness by nv/ati.
__________________
IQ when aggregated follows Ohm's law.

Unixlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2008, 05:18 AM   #36
Advanced Newbie

Posts: 38
CPU: Athlon 64 - 2.3Ghz
GPU: ATI HD2400 512MB - AGP
M/B: Winfast 760GXK8MC
RAM: 1 GB Kingston
PSU: Agiler 450 Watt
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindartist View Post

really your rig doesnt run anything good? asside from that video card you should be ok, ive got a smiliar set up except with a x1950 and i can run every game out there at max settings with rez of 1280x960, well crysis lags some at max but thats just crysis
I'm able to run a good amount of games at playable speeds, but nothing of the newest of the new. I got through Bioshock at 15fps because I couldn't bear to change any settings and had to leave everything on high and all settings that improved graphic quality was left on, so I had to suffer through slow speeds. The game would not have been worth playing at all to me if I had to lower the settings and make it look like crap.
-Shockwave- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2008, 02:34 AM   #37
Advanced Newbie

Posts: 26
CPU: AMD
GPU: HD 3850
M/B: Sapphire 690G
RAM: 2 GB
PSU: 550W
Default

XP because faster and simple
Funerall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2008, 03:03 AM   #38
Newbie

Posts: 2
CPU: E8400 C0 @ 4GHz
GPU: 2x ATi 4850HD in Xfire
M/B: MSI P35 NEO2-FR
RAM: 8GB Reaper DDR2-1000
PSU: 600w OCZ GameXStream
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funerall View Post
XP because faster and simple
I don't technically disagree, but I think Vista has it's moments. For example, with lots of memory (4gb+), Vista's caching subsystem works a charm, especially with large apps - games spring to mind. AFAIK it preloads programs in to memory in the order they appear on the start menu - so the ones you use most get cached first, and so on.

Thanks to DWM being graphically accelerated, alt-tabbing from games is a load faster than in XP, which can be very important if you run fullscreen games and IM apps at the same time.

Vista's actual performance after an app is loaded however, varies massively by system configuration - It clearly isnt optimised for older (XP-generation) hardware - its improved multithreading as evidence of it. But on a modern system (like mine), performance between Vista and XP is negligible to none. In some cases its faster thanks to better thread management in apps.


Sure, I'm not here to defend Vista or anything. I technically use it out of necessity - it does nothing for me that XP cant, except use all my memory. And I use some software that chooses not to run properly on xp x64 - it wasn't designed for x64 based processors initially, and theres such a feeling of xp being "forced" into x64. But I do like to point out the benefits of Vista, albeit the very few of them.
Vigilante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2008, 04:29 AM   #39
Senior Buttkicker
 

Posts: 2,868
CPU: Intel E8400
GPU: Geforce 8800GT
M/B: Asus Rampage Formula
RAM: G.Skill 2x2GB DDR21066
PSU: PCP&C Silencer 750w
Default

I've got a Vista 64bit Ultimate SP1 DVD sitting right here. I'm going to have to install it eventually but I don't have to like it. I wonder if obama was referring to vista when he mentioned putting lipstick on a pig... it's still a god damn fat smelly frickin pig.
__________________
IQ when aggregated follows Ohm's law.

Unixlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2008, 02:15 AM   #40
Dedicated Member

Posts: 165
CPU: Intel e2160 @2.3GHz
GPU: eVGA 7600GT @ 600/800
M/B: Asrock conroe1333-d667
RAM: 1GB ddr2-667 @370MHz
PSU: OCZ Powerstream 520w
Send a message via ICQ to Shadow Lady Send a message via AIM to Shadow Lady Send a message via MSN to Shadow Lady
Default

XP 32, cause Vista failed to impress me and XP 64 simply sux, oh and I use linux too but not as much
__________________
so like... who likes to game?
Shadow Lady is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off






eXTReMe Tracker

Copyright © NGOHQ.com - All rights reserved
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium
without written permission of the site's owners is prohibited.
Powered by vBadvanced - Template by ForumMonkeys
Powered by vBulletin from Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd
Copyright © 2000-2007 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0

Contact Us - Archive - NGOHQ.com - NGOHQ.org - NGOHQ.net - Privacy Policy & Disclaimer - Top