Which OS would you use?

Discussion in 'polls' started by Mike20078800GTX, Aug 9, 2008.

?

Which OS for gaming and video authoring?

Poll closed Aug 19, 2008.
  1. Windows XP SP3

    18 vote(s)
    47.4%
  2. Windows Vista 32 Bit

    8 vote(s)
    21.1%
  3. Windows Vista 64 Bit

    12 vote(s)
    31.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mike20078800GTX

    Mike20078800GTX Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Posts:
    16
    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.
     
  2. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    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.
     
  3. sukarof

    sukarof Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Posts:
    1,714
    Location:
    Stockholm Sweden
    I agree that the space consumption in Vista is ridicoulus, whopping 22GB! on my Vista 64 :blink: 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.
     
  4. Arup

    Arup Guest

    WinXP x64 would be my choice followed by Vista x64.
     
  5. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    Along the Shorelines somewhere in New England
    Hard to answer this question properly without seeing your hardware specs.
     
  6. mata7

    mata7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Mississauga, Canada
    i play allot games edit video and im having 0 problem on my vista x64
     
  7. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,508
    Location:
    Slovakia
    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. :)
     
  8. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    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.
     
  9. mata7

    mata7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Mississauga, Canada
    what do you mean by that?
     
  10. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    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.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2008
  11. sukarof

    sukarof Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Posts:
    1,714
    Location:
    Stockholm Sweden
    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.
     
  12. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    Yes that could be possible. Which software do you use?
     
  13. mata7

    mata7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Posts:
    635
    Location:
    Mississauga, Canada
    i use ghost 14 and image for windows, 4 min to backup, 5 min to restore 20GB C:/ Drive
     
  14. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    Windows 64 bit Vista is quite a bit more popular than 32 bit so far. I'm surprised.
     
  15. HURST

    HURST Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Posts:
    1,419
    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?
     
  16. YeOldeStonecat

    YeOldeStonecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2005
    Posts:
    2,345
    Location:
    Along the Shorelines somewhere in New England
    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.
     
  17. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    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.
     
  18. Al_C

    Al_C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Posts:
    7
    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.
     
  19. Mike20078800GTX

    Mike20078800GTX Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Posts:
    16
    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. :rolleyes:
     
  20. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    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.
     
  21. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    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.
     
  22. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,779
    So far I have not encountered any that do NOT work on x64 Vista, however, it's only been a month now....
     
  23. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    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.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2008
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.