Using XP with new build

[flobottom]

Hi-
I'm trying to save some dough by using my existing XP copy with a new build. Is this logical, or should I try to cut some costs and get Vista? I've been told 32bit Xp will dramatically reduce my computer components' speed and effectively trash my build. Thanks

 

[shortstuff_mt]

A new build really needs a 64-bit OS. There is a 4GB RAM limit with a 32-bit OS which usually only leaves 3GB - 3.5GB available to the OS depending on what other hardware is installed (the GPU RAM is taken out of the 4GB limit which means that if you pick up a GPU with 2GB of RAM you will be left with less than 2GB for your system). There's also no option of adding more than 4GB of RAM in the future with a 32-bit OS. If you're buying in the USA you can get 64-bit Vista for $100.

Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 64-bit for System Builders - OEM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116488 $99.99

I guess another option would be to download 64-bit Windows 7 (if you can still find it) and use that until the RTM version is released.

 

[Outlander_04]

I would stick with XP for now .

Its true that 32 bit OS's cant use more than about 3.3 gig of memory , but this isnt a big issue .
If you read this article
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-module-upgrade,2264.html
you can see there is almost no benefit from more than 3 gig of RAM even when you use a 64 bit OS that can potentially use it .

Add to that that XP is quite a bit faster than Vista on the same hardware and IMO sticking with XP till the new Windows 7 is released in 6 - 12 months seems like a clever idea

The following is from a non gaming application suite used by a computer magazine to assess computer speed with combos of RAM and OS .
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/128551,does-faster-ram-really-make-a-difference.aspx
XP with 512 MB of ram is faster than vista with 4 gigabytes .

What you lose by sticking with xp is some eye candy , and directx 10 . Games play on high but not ultra high which doesnt make a huge difference IMO

Upgrade to Windows 7 later in the year , but vista is a turkey and its being replaced so soon for a reason

 

[pen_and_paper]

Depends as well if your copy of XP is an OEM version or Retail. If it's the OEM version you will probably run into activation problems, tho' you may be able to blag your way through it!
XP Home Ed approx. £70
Vista Home Premium 32/64 bit approx. £85
XP PRO 32 bit approx. £110 (silly money , since you used to be able to get it for approx. £70)
Windows 7 beta or RC1 soon Free and a bit of your time
DON'T bother with XP Pro 64 bit

Good Luck

 

[apache_lives]

Outlander_04 your an idiot - vista x64 is solid and works a treat, what it doesnt like is old hardware and low amounts of ram so i suggest to you so Outlander_04 - ditch your Pentium 4 or K7 or whatever dinosaur you use and try it again 😉

wait for the other experienced vista x64 users to post there comments

 

[halcyon]

Apache, come now..."idiot" no...he just prefers XP, as do many. I look @ XP and see a 9-year old OS that looks like it. Is it stable? Well damn, at 9 years old it should be. ...but then again, Win2K is stable too and games pretty well one might add.

Vista's gotten a bad rap and that's not going to change no matter how well it works for those that are actually using it. It doesn't really make a lot of fiscal sense to purchase Vista now knowing you're going to buy Windows 7 later this year, that's just true.

...and if you've lived with XP this long, another 9-12 months won't matter.

 

[Outlander_04]

Outlander_04 your an idiot - vista x64 is solid and works a treat, what it doesnt like is old hardware and low amounts of ram so i suggest to you so Outlander_04 - ditch your Pentium 4 or K7 or whatever dinosaur you use and try it again 😉

wait for the other experienced vista x64 users to post there comments

Pity your parents never got married , you might have turned out a little politer if they had .

Vista is not a bad OS . Its stable and it works .

There a fair few bugs and some of the set up is poor compared to XP . The whole UAC thing is rubbish .... XP users have the same protections if they choose by using the "run as" command .
But vista's main problem is that its slower than XP . The only time vista beats xp/ DX 9 on the same hardware is when you play the latest generation of DX10 game .. but thats because the games dont play well with dx9 and not because vista is superior .

Every where else its slower . Does that make it better?

IMO you'd have to be pretty brainless to burn the $100 to buy Vista now , when its going to be replaced with Win 7 in a few months time .

And on a personal note you show how inadequate you and your arguments are by playing the man and not bothering with the facts . Here have a fanboy badge . It the same color as your spots
so it suits you

 

[halcyon]

Pity your parents never got married , you might have turned out a little politer if they had .

Vista is not a bad OS . Its stable and it works .

There a fair few bugs and some of the set up is poor compared to XP . The whole UAC thing is rubbish .... XP users have the same protections if they choose by using the "run as" command .
But vista's main problem is that its slower than XP . The only time vista beats xp/ DX 9 on the same hardware is when you play the latest generation of DX10 game .. but thats because the games dont play well with dx9 and not because vista is superior .

Every where else its slower . Does that make it better?

IMO you'd have to be pretty brainless to burn the $100 to buy Vista now , when its going to be replaced with Win 7 in a few months time .

And on a personal note you show how inadequate you and your arguments are by playing the man and not bothering with the facts . Here have a fanboy badge . It the same color as your spots
so it suits you

Guys come on. Let's kill the stone throwing. There's arguments in XP's favor and their's arguments in Vista's favor. ...and those that prefer their platform are not likely to be swayed. I agree if you don't own Vista at this point there's not a lot of reason to pay for it given you've held on to Windows2000/XP for so long already.