Primary use of PC: Gaming and Video Authoring I'm real sick of how vista scans my hard drive constantly eating up my system resources when there is no need to be scanning it at all since thats what my a/v is for and the fact that vista is taking up double the space of a program requirement. Every file we install on vista has a duplicate install in a virtual folder under roaming inside users directory. When a gamer installs one of their favorite games on vista, vista makes a full duplicate copy in the roaming folder for no reason than to waste good useable hard drive space. I have been seriously considering going back to XP 32 Bit with SP3, but if I do then I lose the use of 4GB of RAM when using games and video authoring software. So I need your help in deciding what is best. I have been trying to get a game called GRID to run under vista for two days and while it does play it crashes constantly and the nvidia driver stops responding. I have also noticed problems when video authoring and other system instabilities thanks to whatever new patch microsoft released. Whatever they released fixed one thing, but broke alot more stuff. Now for the poll: If your pc was primarily for gaming and video authoring which OS would you use? Keep in mind going from vista 64 to xp 32 you lose 4GB ram usage.
Running Vista 32, I don't lose 4gb of ram I just can't use 4gb but I am running 3gb and it seems to be more than enough. have no problems playing resource intensive games. My Nividia works very well and has never given me any problems at all.
I agree that the space consumption in Vista is ridicoulus, whopping 22GB! on my Vista 64 and then I have not installed any large software. I just hope it is nessecary... I have only tried one game in Vista 64 and it worked fine. In Vista 32 I tried more games but I dont see any benefits for gaming in Vista environment whatsoever. Maybe it will come eventually but for now I keep my games on XP. According to different benchmark tests Vista 64 is much faster when using picture and video authoring thanks to its ability to process more data per cycle.
Exactly, I could not get any game running on Vistax32 with ATI Radeon 9600, but with new PC I have no problem running any game on Vistax64 including GRID.
Vista 64 and 4 Gigs of Ram. But imo Windows XP internals are about 10% faster with equal hardware and eating up not as much ressources. Especially if you make lot of backups you should better stay with XP. If you are curious try vista. But one thing in advance Explorer is a step back in Vista it lacks miniature view and several other parts have become circuitous.
Okay this was meant for maybe older version of True Image, I don´t know how fast latest True Image version is but I tested one that needed at least one hour to restore vista backup, in contradiction the restoration of Windows XP that tooks only few minutes. Vista has a huge amount of imo superfluous files or better said a total mismanagement of dimensions. I think something really genius must be small, up-to-date, universal and fast. Vista shows a paradigm of how complex systems end up and this is definitely not the way it should be. Despite of that fact it is nevertheless a interesting operation system but it should be pre-configurable e.g. minimalistic installation for tuning freaks, standard installation for average user and so on.
Couldnt it be that TI code is not properly optimized for Vista? The imaging software that I use is exactly as fast in Vista as it is in XP (backup in 11 minutes for 39GB, restore maybe a minute slower) I have not yet, due to stupid licensing rules, tried it on Vista 64bit, but I cant imagine it will be slower.
How about latest version of DirectX not being available for XP? Should that be enough for choosing Vista over XP if you want to play games?
Not really a very long list of games...yeah it's bound to grow...but ...slowly. So if I recall, that current list of games are just games that were developed on earlier DX...and patched for 10..so they're still not really native to, or fully utilizing DX10. I don't believe any games that are native to DX10 (thus..really supporting it well and showing off features well) have come out yet.
I thought Crysis pretty well shows off DX10 capabilities. MS announced a few weeks ago that DX11 is being developed now and will be backwards compatible with 10.
Although I am partial to Unix, I am not unmindful of the better support you get from Windows. Is XP still an option to you? It will game and run video authoring programs just as well as Vista does without having as much of an appetitie for drive space, memory and processing power, leaving more of those resources for your applications.
For the one who asked here is my hardware specs: Intel Q6600 Processor E-VGA 680i SLI Motherboard 4GB of OCZ 1066Mhz SLI Ready RAM 1x2 (2GB) kit and 1x2 (2GB) kit MX-2 Thermal Paste 1x 8800GTX Video Card ACS3 KO Edition 1x XFI Extreme Music Audio Card 2x Western Digital 500GB 7200.8 Barracuda's 1x Plextor 760A CD/DVD Burner 1x 22" Samsung 226BW C-Panel Monitor 1680x1050 native 16:10 Air Cooling: Stock video card cooling and Enzotech SLF-1 Air Cooling on 680i SB chipset. Watercooling: Liquid/Pumps/Reservoirs/Radiators/Pumps Destilled water with PT Nuke Solution/ 1x Swiftech Micro-Res/ 1x PA 120.3 Thermochill Radiator/1x DDCT-01 Liang DDC-12 Pump Petra's combo. Waterblocks CPU/NB 1x D-Tek Fuzion Quad Nozzle/1x Swiftech MCW-30 NB The operating systems I own from my previous retail store purchases over the years are as follows: Windows 98 Second Edition Full Version Windows XP SP2 Slipstream Full Version Windows XP x64 Full Version Windows Vista Ultimate Full Version (32&64 bit in one package) Is DX10 important? Not, really as very few games use it. How many times can one person play thru crysis campaign. To give you an idea my current games are: GRID Gears of War Mass Effect Hellgate London Race 07 WTTC I'm not really sure which of these games use Dx10, but I do know from experience that when using a certain tweaked configuration the DX9 setup of crysis can look almost identical to the DX10 ultra high settings. When we compare bioshock, the only difference is realistic water particle movements and debris. I use my single nvidia 8800gtx on 4x MSAA + 4x Transparent SuperSampling + 16x Ansi-stropic filtering which I set as my global configuration in nhancer v2.41 I have been checking this poll daily when I get a chance, as I am still undecided which OS would best suit me so please keep the votes coming. Another problem of vista is losing EAX enhanced audio - ALchemy works in vista, but it also has its problems or this has been my experience when using it on my vista installs. thanks Edit: I totally disabled windows search and I set my vssadmin resizeshadowstorage to 1GB immediately after a fresh reinstall. vssadmin Resize ShadowStorage /For= /On= [/MaxSize=] vssadmin Resize ShadowStorage /For=C: /On=C: /MaxSize=1GB I still am losing a bunch of space, but its not as bad as it was. From the second vista loaded I opened the vssadmin listshadowstorage and resized it to 1GB, then I disabled the global admin switch where UAC still functions, but it doesn't ask for approval everytime you run an app. UAC Still works http://www.wincert.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=1172 finally I removed and disabled error reports and completely shut off windows search service. It doesn't eat quite as much space or system resources, but it still duplicates every installed program in that virtual folder inside the roaming directory.
Really? No surprise, you catch several flies with one hit. 64 = 4 GB, 64 = PatchGuard, 64 = trusted drivers only, 64 = 64 bit apps and 32 bit (wow64) compatibility mode, why should someone need Vista 32 bit? If so just create a virtual machine.
Aren't the number of security programs that WORK on 64 bit limited? I know I've seen a number of posts to that effect. As well as reports of programs that supposedly were 64 bit ready not working.
So far I have not encountered any that do NOT work on x64 Vista, however, it's only been a month now....
Yes unfortunately we have only one real smart company that looked into the future as true 64 bit security app and that is comodo. But Comodo does a great job, quite logical that it can´t prevent static http/s tunneling (NSA, CIA, ECHELON, Internet Mafia, Terror orgs and so on) but most other(all) firewalls are also unable to prevent these global a.s.e. threats, so except from this fact it is the best you can get on 64 bit actually.
