Windows Vista Gaming Performance Reports

MistWeaver · Unread postby **MistWeaver** » 29 Jan 2007, 14:34

Just to make things clear:
http://techgage.com/article/windows_vis ... ce_reports

[/img]

vhilhu · Unread postby **vhilhu** » 29 Jan 2007, 19:21

it never is a good first sign when an operation system gets mainly known for its rights management...

and the awesome performance.

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 01 Feb 2007, 06:27

saw one at Tom's hardware as well, not a good start at all I'm afraid, if you're mainly into games, I suggest sticking with XP, especially so if the games you like are OpenGL, cause Vista has no OpenGL support and games like UT2004 run like a dog on it .... upto 25% slower then on an identical system with XP

Vlad976 · Unread postby **Vlad976** » 12 Feb 2007, 09:06

Well, the results are not really suprising given the system resources that are going to be necessary just to run vista.

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 13 Feb 2007, 03:12

but my post above shows it's more then just that, it's also the policies they've adopted for it, like the OpenGL support, or lack thereof

Vlad976 · Unread postby **Vlad976** » 13 Feb 2007, 04:19

Well then there's a couple of possibilities:
Microsoft could be trying to force people to use Direct3D.

or

Vista is an incomplete release, and will have GL support(even if they don't mention it) in the future.

or it could be one of the other 800 billion possibilities out there...

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 13 Feb 2007, 05:53

the toms article I mentioned had it due to a security issue (that's if my memory is completely crap)

MistWeaver · Unread postby **MistWeaver** » 18 Feb 2007, 20:36

http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-6159700.html

The market research firm's data showed the number of copies of Vista purchased was nearly 59 percent less than the number for its predecessor XP, looking at the first week of sales.

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 18 Feb 2007, 22:43

MistWeaver wrote:
The market research firm's data showed the number of copies of Vista purchased was nearly 59 percent less than the number for its predecessor XP, looking at the first week of sales.

I guess ppl are learning, even if it takes them a while. A whole lotta while. WHY ARE YOU ALLL SO STUPID PEOPLE? WHY?!

MistWeaver · Unread postby **MistWeaver** » 18 Feb 2007, 23:02

ThunderTitan wrote:
MistWeaver wrote:
The market research firm's data showed the number of copies of Vista purchased was nearly 59 percent less than the number for its predecessor XP, looking at the first week of sales.
I guess ppl are learning, even if it takes them a while.

Well, sort of. But more .. intensive.. learning will begin after some time. When ppl would realize what sh1t did they bought for 300$ (+/- 100$) When all DRM side effects, raw drivers issues, weak security & low perfomance problems will show up.

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 19 Feb 2007, 07:30

MistWeaver wrote:When all DRM side effects, raw drivers issues, weak security & low perfomance problems will show up.

Pls, if they really would be able to do it that fast XP would have tanked.

MistWeaver · Unread postby **MistWeaver** » 19 Feb 2007, 07:52

ThunderTitan wrote:
MistWeaver wrote:When all DRM side effects, raw drivers issues, weak security & low perfomance problems will show up.
Pls, if they really would be able to do it that fast XP would have tanked.

Show me this kind of "features":
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/p ... _cost.html
in XP or ANY other OS.

As for Perfomance it was slightly higher in XP than in previous MS OS' . At least on my PC and those tests that I saw in PC related publications.

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 19 Feb 2007, 08:03

MistWeaver wrote: Show me this kind of "features":
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/p ... _cost.html
in XP or ANY other OS.

Yes, it's getting worse with each new one... and ppl think this is news.

As for the preformance, that's more about the PC tested on. Give it a few months to a year and i'm sure most new PC's will run it just fine.

MistWeaver · Unread postby **MistWeaver** » 19 Feb 2007, 08:12

ThunderTitan wrote: Yes, it's getting worse with each new one... and ppl think this is news.

I dont agree. So far every new Windows was better that previous. The only exception was crappy WinMe. And Vista, of course

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 19 Feb 2007, 08:13

the main point being that people should know by now to avoid the first release of a new MS OS .... give it til the second release, and then only if you actually need the change

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 19 Feb 2007, 16:42

MistWeaver wrote:Deluded ravings

Sure dude, sure....

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 21 Feb 2007, 06:10

I'm with ya on that TT, but only because "better" is a dangerous word!

ThunderTitan · Unread postby **ThunderTitan** » 21 Feb 2007, 09:24

stefan.urlus wrote:"better" is a dangerous word!

I heard that if you look at it wrong it'll cut you...

It's Windows ppl... the same crap, just shinier.

asandir · Unread postby **asandir** » 21 Feb 2007, 23:22

and slower!

Zamolxis · Unread postby **Zamolxis** » 21 Feb 2007, 23:24

ThunderTitan wrote:same crap, just shinier.

...and bigger (9GB on HD freshly installed... who knows in time)

The Heroes Round Table

Windows Vista Gaming Performance Reports

Windows Vista Gaming Performance Reports

Who is online