Windows XP outshines Vista in benchmarking test

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by lu_chin, Nov 27, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lu_chin

    lu_chin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Posts:
    294
    Full story
     
  2. Huupi

    Huupi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Posts:
    2,024
    We are not the only ones here on Wilders who shy away from Vista,inexperient end users are easy prey to hooked by Vista but corporate users with their smooth XP environments will hardly ever chance.After a few years from now we shall remember XP as the latest unbloated best Windows ever.
     
  3. SystemJunkie

    SystemJunkie Resident Conspiracy Theorist

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Posts:
    1,500
    Location:
    Germany
    Why remember it is still alive.
     
  4. Huupi

    Huupi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Posts:
    2,024
    I don't think MS will ditch Vista so we have to live by the fact that at some time XP become obsolete.
     
  5. dNor

    dNor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    212
    Location:
    Irvine, CA, USA
    Horrible test. Vista's going to run slow on 1GB of RAM, no matter the circumstances.

    Most people seem to forget every Windows release causes increased hardware requirements and low performance if you don't meet the right level. Minimum and recommended specs are the bottom line so Aunt Jane's Gateway can safely say it's "capable."

    Most people forgot all this especially with XP's long lifespan.

    Vista's fine. I've used it in a network environment for a year, and just like with all the other Windows releases I've dealt with if you handle it properly it runs properly.

    Vista had a pretty bad release at first, especially with such terrible driver support. Manufacturers finally got their stuff straight and Microsoft patched Vista nicely.

    If one doesn't like how each Windows requires more resources than the next and under-performs its predecessor on lower hardware, I'd suggest Linux. Bloggers using tests that make no sense to prove their point of "Hey, look, this Windows that recently came out does worse on its minimum hardware specs than the Windows that came out 6 years ago! Huhuhuh" are worthless.

    But that's this network admin's thoughts. I run Vista, XP, and Ubuntu all fine. ;)
     
  6. 19monty64

    19monty64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Posts:
    1,302
    Location:
    Nunya, BZ
    When upgrading software that doesn't make my pc obsolete, it makes me wonder why upgrading an OS should. A pc's shelf-life is limited as it is so there is no need to shorten it for the sake of pc sales. From the articles that I've read about Windows 7, this doesn't look like a continuing trend with Microsoft for future releases.
     
  7. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,042
    I can go along with this up to a point. Being an FDISR user, I have two snapshots on my disk. A primary which is essentially my machine as I use it, and a very stripped down secondary snapshot, which is just a boot refuge for FDISR. Total space under XP is 23gig used on my drive. Just upgrading both snapshots to Vista and adding nothing else ran the usage to 48gig. Sorry but I have to see some really fantastic gain to justify that. So far all I've seen is half my software doesn't run.

    Not impressed...yet.
     
  8. WSFuser

    WSFuser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Posts:
    10,632
    So true. Vista is one memory hungry OS. It like eating hard drives too.

    All the years of running XP while my computer becomes more and more obsolete for Vista.
    Again true. Shame the jump is so big; Id rather not get a new computer just for a new Windows :'( :doubt:
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2007
  9. dNor

    dNor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    212
    Location:
    Irvine, CA, USA
    More hardware requirements and software not designed for it doesn't run properly. Yep, sounds like a new Windows release. This happens with just about every one, with them being more drastic each time.

    That's why I recommend something like Linux if someone can't handle that. It's not going to change, and XP will eventually be obsolete. People need to either deal with it or use an alternative. I'd love if this weren't the case, especially considering my career. But at some point you have to accept it.

    Might as well stay with XP as long as you can if you don't have the hardware or updated software to make it run smoothly. W2K is even still fantastic. :)
     
  10. farmerlee

    farmerlee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Posts:
    2,585
    Makes me glad i decided to stick with xp for my new system.
     
  11. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    well its quite relivent to me since im ordering a new pc tonight.
    pc gamers will eventually have to get vista due to directx 10 so im just gonna get vista now and dual boot windows 2000 pro just incase stuff dont work with vista.
    lodore
     
  12. Cerxes

    Cerxes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2005
    Posts:
    581
    Location:
    Northern Europe
  13. Huupi

    Huupi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Posts:
    2,024
    Ask myself is there anything missing out in XP that Vista will give,i am not a gamer so will stick for the time being with XP,anything else in Vista is not essential for my workflow.But has to admit as Vista will become every better with time and driver issues sorted ,i will give it a second chance on a multibootsystem.
     
  14. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,042
    dNor, this made me laugh. What you didn't realize when I posted is I am running on a machine, that has a 2.93gig Intel Core2 duo processor with 4gig of ram. A 640g C: drive, and a GTX8800(I thinK) graphic's card with 640mg of ram. Vista rates it at amost it's max rating. The hardware is Vista ready, but I don't think Vista is yet(yet mind you) hardware ready.

    Pete
     
  15. dNor

    dNor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Posts:
    212
    Location:
    Irvine, CA, USA
    I'm sure Vista runs fine then, as that's nearly the specs of my laptop which features Ultimate and runs perfectly. It's going to use those resources much more than XP will.

    People trying to run Vista on 1GB and then whining about it was my direction, especially with the "Might as well stay with XP as long as you can if you don't have the hardware or updated software to make it run smoothly" statement you laughed at. ;)
     
  16. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i forgot to mention my friend has vista and has no issues with it.
    my tutor at college also has vista and has no issues.
    i dont think its as bad as people think.
    there is certain things that are fixed in vista.
    im gonna get it hope for the best.
     
  17. Chuck57

    Chuck57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2002
    Posts:
    1,422
    Location:
    New Mexico, USA
    I'm curious about something. A neighbor is getting a new computer soon, With Vista and not liking the thought. That made me curious about something.

    Can a copy of Windows XP Home, which she now has, be backed up and saved to a CD, then put on a new computer after removing Vista without the need to validate the license via telephone? Or, is that illegal?

    *edit* Or, on second thought, after reading the MS license, it appears she can just use her copy of XP, remove Vista and install XP then validate it with a phone call. The neighbor's old machine's HD died according to the local computer guru. According to MS's license, XP can be installed on a single machine, which would be the case.

    All the talk about Vista makes me glad I've got a fairly new machine, a year old, that I hope will survive at least several more years. Then, I may be stuck buying a Vista machine or whatever else MS comes up with by then. By then, maybe Vista or whatever replaces Vista will be ready for prime time. Ninety percent of what I do is word processing or surfing the net, and playing with Microsoft Flight Simulator. I've no need for the latest and greatest, especially from Microsoft.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2007
  18. Ghostcloak

    Ghostcloak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Posts:
    27
    Location:
    New York, USA
    Windows Vista is a resource hog & lags even a sem-fast computer.
    I went back to windows xp after unin stalling it.
     
  19. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Security vendors from HIPS to Sandboxes to Virtualizers to Scanners and all others make owning an XP a premium delight unmatched by Vista.

    ResHack shell32 + msgina dll's and decorate Dialogs such as adding sysanimate to Run box and System Information Properties as well as the copy/downloading avi's along with VistaMizer plus GlassToast and a whole host of other tweaks and your XP transforms into Vista right befor your eyes without the overhead or high-end system demanded to run Vista.

    I got ALL these tweaks implimented perfectly stable as well as high-quality security programs and imaging apps. Add FD-ISR as a bonus to any windows system, extending it's usefullness far beyond the common restraints of relying on a single system, and XP becomes VISTA in XP with ease.

    On my enemic system of only 512Mb i don't suffer from any resource drains or disk access delays thanks in part to todays latest Super-Defrag innovations.
     
  20. markymoo

    markymoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Posts:
    1,212
    Location:
    England
    Are you not aware of the serious bug in Vista. It takes ages to delete the box hangs around for so long after you delete, when you copy alot folders it complains memory low and leaves folders behind. This is with 4 gig. Type 'slow delete vista' into google and see plenty.
     
  21. Huupi

    Huupi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Posts:
    2,024
    Forgive me to say,but thats the poor man solution,i just going the other way to unbloat my system as much as possible in trade for some performance gain,all in all my PC experience has anything to do with performance and stability. note that its about my workstation,almost a must not to disturbed by the default toys from uncle Bill,my other rigs have more general setup with more bloat but i can live with that because there are other users at home.
     
  22. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    im sure i read that has been fixed by a maintance pack or in the upcoming service pack 1.
    lodore
     
  23. mistycat

    mistycat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Posts:
    222
    There's this too, don't know how true but read it somewhere. "When someone is going to spend hundreds of dollars on a piece of software, they usually want it to last. Microsoft has its ups and downs with the software it puts out on the market; the good being XP and Windows 98 and the ugly being Windows 2000 and ME. Since the release of Vista, some have begun to question if it will actually last, and whether or not it is worth spending the $$$ to upgrade to it. Recently Microsoft has announced that the sucessor to Vista (codenamed Vienna, formerly known as Blackcomb) will come in 2009, with the beta to appear by mid-08. Assuming Microsoft adheres to this schedule, this is a suprisingly fast release, giving Vista a life time of only ~2 years. Compare that to Windows XP release in October 2001, and lasting all the way up to early 2007. But of course, Vista was initially intended to be released in '03, and just look how that turned out".
     
  24. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,632
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I quite understand your reasonings there of course, but also the fortunate reality & pure satisfaction of having XP compared to Vista is that even with ADDING vista tweaks theres NO BLOAT! I run an enemic 512Mb where i could easily make it over 1Gb, but even with security programs PLUS all these tweaks, XP zips along smooth as silk, stable as a rock, and is under superior protection at all times. I might also add mine is Xp Pro (Sp1,SP2) which adds even more to the overall framework not to mention .NET 2.2 & Direct X. I regularly play DVD movies all on the same system.

    PCChips mobo/AMD cpu (overclocked) No bloat here, just excellent results and snappy response.
     
  25. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    No surprises, Vista is more resource-hungry and has more background processes.
    Still, this benchmark is so flawed that it's not worth my opinion.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.