News Windows 11 vs Windows 10 GPUs Tested: Which Games Faster?

[blppt]

Maybe I'm lucky (well, I can't really say that because that's a silly thing to say about computers), but I've used every major Windows release at or near its launch period since Vista and I've never had major or nagging issues that made me want to go back to the previous release. This includes the much derided Windows 8.

So it makes me wonder what I do differently that allows such a hassle free (more or less) experience compared to other people who complain about having all sorts of issues.

Vista was an entirely different situation. At launch, it was notably less stable with existing games and performance could really lag behind XP. It was a big change from XP.

MS allowed the codebase to bloat and OEMs were shipping PCs with too little memory to handle to new OS. But even if you had enough memory, there were some significant framerate dips in the early days of the new OS for games.

11 has some mostly cosmetic upgrades and that scheduler modification, but other than that, its pretty much just a better looking Win10.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Vista was an entirely different situation. At launch, it was notably less stable with existing games and performance could really lag behind XP. It was a big change from XP.

I recall most of the games I ran ran just fine, even without performance problems. I recall doing a test with Counter Strike Source and the Vista side performed slightly better than the XP side (the OSes were on the same laptop). And if there was a problem, it was likely because the game wanted admin rights for some reason.

MS allowed the codebase to bloat and OEMs were shipping PCs with too little memory to handle to new OS. But even if you had enough memory, there were some significant framerate dips in the early days of the new OS for games.

Only Windows Vista vastly improved the underlying architecture of the OS. The only reason why few computers at the time of launch could run it is because Windows XP could run on a potato at the time. A higher end Pentium 3 with 128MB of memory, a configuration that wouldn't be out of place in 2000, could suffice if all you needed to do was basic tasks. The mainstream PCs at the time (here's Dell's website back in 2006) arguably barely added more RAM from that (256 MB in the base configuration, which was also the base configuration for the "midrange" Dell Dimension back then). I had a computer built back then with 2GB of RAM, and while I can't track down the receipt for that, I don't think RAM was that expensive at the time. At least, not approaching the $550 7800 GTX I put in it. In any case, between that an a laptop with 2GB of RAM, I had no issues running Vista.

If anything, it was a rude wake up call that system builders were shipping out garbage PCs. One that people seemed to miss.

11 has some mostly cosmetic upgrades and that scheduler modification, but other than that, its pretty much just a better looking Win10.

And quite a bit more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_11

I would argue that Windows releases since Vista are basically "Vista, with user facing changes." This isn't unlike the development history of macOS

 

[blppt]

"I recall most of the games I ran ran just fine, even without performance problems. "

I can't remotely agree to that---after some time they did, but definitely not at launch. IIRC, I was running it on an AMD X2 at the time with 1 or 2 gigs of RAM.

I think this very site did a Vista review, or maybe it was Anand where they compared Vista to XP in performance, and it didn't do too well---especially in OpenGL games.

Some of that had to do with the new desktop compositor running in the background messing with games, IIRC. It was eventually rectified, but not near to launch.

 

[hotaru.hino]

I think this very site did a Vista review, or maybe it was Anand where they compared Vista to XP in performance, and it didn't do too well---especially in OpenGL games.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/2163/18

Direct3D games performed within a handful of percentage points compared to XP. OpenGL performance suffered because at the time of launch, there was only some OpenGL to D3D wrapper available. From the article:

Moving on to OpenGL and Quake 4, we'll be able to see how well NVIDIA and AMD have done in building their own OpenGL ICD (installable client driver) for the API. This is more taxing on hardware vendors, because Microsoft's implementation of OpenGL is just a wrapper around DirectX. By default, unless an ICD is used, OpenGL applications cannot talk directly to the hardware.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xp-vs-vista,1531-4.html
Aside from Unreal Tournament 2004, the games tested were within a few percentage points.

Both of those articles were released basically at Vista's launch.

I mean either way, my experience is my experience and I had no real complaints using Vista.

 

[tiggers97]

No amount of fps gain or new feature will make me go back to Windows 11.

The OS is a joke, full of bugs, slowdowns & a whole lot of crap multitasking / system response vs Windows 10.

Ran Windows11 since day1 public release, never again... Went back to fresh install of Windows 10 last week and it's night / day !

LOL. I can tell you I know I'm older than you, only because I came to a similar conclusion many years ago. Windows 11 wont' be seen on any of my computers until at least the 1st year and the first major service pack update (or equivalent). And only then might I be interested. There really isn't any rush or benefit to migrating so quickly for many people, so why fret a bout it? Let Microsoft continue to beta test it with "bleeding edge" users till its more stable.

 

[alceryes]

Good stuff. Yeah, I suspected that the results were going to be 'imperceptably' close. I mean, the core of both OSs is basically the same.
Good list for next year's game testing, however, it would be great if you could include a top AAA game (or two) from the last generation with these new games.

 

[froggx]

The UI is better than Windows 8's...

 

[HC1Gunner]

We tested the RTX 3090 and RX 6900 XT on Windows 10 and Windows 11 using identical hardware to see if there's any benefit or penalty to switching to the latest OS.

Windows 11 vs Windows 10 GPUs Tested: Which Games Faster? : Read more

How come review sites always wanted to use Crysis as the ultimate torture test on a PC. So far one of the toughest things on a PC is MSFS 2020 as it taxes both CPU and GPU, but very few review sites go near it.
There are tons of sim fans globally running it, so its not like hardly anyone owns, or uses it.