Windows XP vs. Vista: The Benchmark Rundown

[nhobo]

Superfetch can be enabled in XP registry (google EnableSuperfetch XP)

DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc.

Vista's "enhanced" security is unproven, and if previous experience is anything to go by, it is already broken

Vista is simply the next land grab by M$: DRM, enhanced (although already broken) copyright protection, attempt to kill OpenGL, etc.

with any luck consumers won't buy into all the promotional BS and Vista will die on the vine

 

[mad_murdock]

Sure is alot of Microsoft haters out there.

Though I hope for the fall of Vista as well, I guess I just hope for it, not because I hate Microsoft, I just don't like Vista (or XP that much) I hate this need to have an overly pretty GUI and I sure wish there was a theme that I could run that striped away everything I didn't really need. You know a Power Users theme.

I also, am totally against them making DX10 a vista only thing. I understand part of the reasoning, of wanting to have a new OS with a all new DirectX. But I think you have to allow the XP users to have a choice.

What still amazes me, is the difference between MAC users and Windows users are. Mac users dance happy dances and praises Apple everytime a .1 release of their new OS X comes out (which is alot more often than windows) and Windows user curse Microsoft even though it's been 5 years since that last OS release.

I guess if Microsft spent more time being better than Apple, then simply trying to make their OS look and feel like an Apple, then windows users wouldn't despise them so much.

 

[clue69less]

However, only time will tell if Vista is golden or a turd

I think it's a golden turd. MS gets your gold and you get their turd.

 

[Atolsammeek]

A idea for the people who want to try vista and have 160gb hard disk or more With 2 partions 80gb each or higher. is setup a dual os. Like windows xp verson and windows Vista verson. Untel they get all the bugs out of Vista.

But it comes down to one thing. We are going to have to change some time. Best bet to wait untel it cheaper.

 

[croc]

And in my case, for vista ultimate, they get a usd 200 premium simply because I live in AUS! AUD 751 (USD 580)... WTF was the AFTA all about...?

(fortunately, I had already planned a holiday to Hawaii...)

 

[Abidemi]

Wow, there are loads of ppl here that are def. not getting the picture. Kinda scary actually...

All of the buzz surrounding DRM is nothing but FUD. First of all, the DRM in Vista doesn't do anything with your currect media (DVD, CD), but only with new formats like HD-DVD and Bluray. So, you'll experience no performance drop while you're not playing one of these discs. That Peter Gutmann guy should have done his homework a little better.
Secondly, a lot of ppl blame MS for incorporating the DRM in the first place, which doesn't make any sense. I mean, what did you expected them to do? MS doesn't stand a change against all of the big movie studios so not incorporating DRM means that we won't be able to play the new formats under Vista. I'm sure Apple will do the same thing with the new version of OSX (and get away with it). Linux will probably not get any DRM and subsequently Linux-users won't be able to play HD-DVD or Bluray movies. Pity for them, but don't blame MS. Blame the MPAA.

As for the article, I think it completely misses the point with respect to OpenGL. Anybody who has done some research into OpenGL knows that the best solution for running OpenGL under Vista is to use an installable client driver, since it's a much faster solution than Vista's native OpenGL support. ATi just released a driver-set which has a OpenGL ICD incorporated. nVidia's ICD has been available for longer. Yet, the test system in the article uses an old ATi driver which doesn't have a ICD, thereby making all OpenGL-benchmarks not even worth looking at.
Also, the benchmarking in the article strikes me as incomplete. For example, the way in which Vista uses dual-core cpus is very different from how XP does this. Therefore, a multitasking benchmark should have been part of the article.

Superfetch can be enabled in XP registry (google EnableSuperfetch XP)

DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc.

Vista's "enhanced" security is unproven, and if previous experience is anything to go by, it is already broken

Wrong on every account. Three strikes, you're out!

 

[Atolsammeek]

Thing is with me is Untel I see the software. see how it works and everything. I can t base my view on it. Like when I was moving from windows 98 to window xp pro. I always started dual boot.

One thing I notice and this is where the Pre Teen to Teens are going to hate. Is the control. Basicly Mother and Fathers are going to be able to block games they dont want the kid to use.

So games Parents need to look at the games that have ratings.

Also They can control the timeline the pre Teen to teens can be on the computer like 4 to 9pm.

Block websites that they dont want anyone to go on.

Basicly it like the tv setup now. Playboy and such.

All I can say Pre Teens and Teens beware.

 

[bydesign]

I have to agree with you for the most part. I have see no issue at all with DRM.

As for the benchmarks it not really an issue if they get it to about a 10% performance hit. Because if your that close to your target performance you need a upgrade with either OS. Gamespots benchmarks claim that just want to see others confirm that. Driver stabilitly does need to get sorted out though.

 

[russki]

It is not a fair comparison, Vista vs. ME. ME was a minor graphical update plus some new functionality, badly implemente. Vista is a major system redesign. ME lacked stability, and, as you mentioned, features. Vista is entirely different. Now, you may not be satisfied with the features, and that's a valid point. But comparing Vista to ME is downright silly.

And whatever Abidemi said, which is pretty much regergitating what I had said in the numerous posts in a nice concise manner. Except I wouldn't say "article completely misses the point," but rather it should be like one of those CPU charts, updated as new drivers become available. It is a little silly that it was released prior to many of the driver releases.

 

[yakyb]

how about results for 4x4 systems wasnt there a feature of vista that was said to improove performance of this power hungry system

(please no argueing about how power hungry 4x4 is i merely want to see if there is an improvement)

 

[celewign]

Probably because the only place useless enough to put Vista articles is in the most useless section of the forumz. i.e: Cooler and Heatsinks
-cm

 

[sojrner]

Also, I found this review from Firingsquad that seems to be quite contradictory with THG review:

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_performance_amd_catalyst_7.1/

Looking at that we see tom's w/o the 7.1 drivers for vista, but they use them on the XP machine... strange.

It would seem to me that you would want drivers from the same revision time for a true comparison. Yes, vista vs. XP drivers is not apples to apples. (drivers are different) but you would still be closer b/c of release times than brand-new ones vs. month-old ones...

The firingsquad review is not all glowing, openGL being a big snag but the fact that there is ANY improvement at all says that tom's should have gotten the new drivers. JMO of course, and I still think the site does good.

 

[Digitalfiends]

Sorry, I just had to join to share my opinions on Vista and some of the misinformation being spread here.

Vista seems particularly poorly suited for any Enthusiast given it's restrictions on upgrading.

What restrictions? Microsoft has already recanted on the restrictive licensing statements in the original Vista EULA. They quickly reverted back to the XP method; you can upgrade to your hearts desire and transfer the license between devices. You still have to reactivate, like XP, but at least you can upgrade/transfer. You can only transfer the license once to another person though - but that doesn't affect most of us.

Some people effectively get a computer a year. $400/year (or two years I suppose since you're allowed to do one transfer with the retail version) is pretty steep.

As I stated above, you are arguing an non-issue.

For all that, though, Vista also tries to take you more out of control of what you can do with your computer. DRM issues noted (and significant), according to the EULA, MS reserves the "right" to delete applications from your computer without notice. Isn't that crossing a line?

Please show me where it states this in Vista EULA, found here:

http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20Vista_Ultimate_English_36d0fe99-75e4-4875-8153-889cf5105718.pdf

The only mention of removing software is under the Windows Defender clause, which clearly states that:

6. POTENTIALLY UNWANTED SOFTWARE. If turned on, Windows Defender will search your
computer for “spyware,” “adware” and other potentially unwanted software. If it finds potentially
unwanted software, the software will ask you if you want to ignore, disable (quarantine) or remove it.
Any potentially unwanted software rated “high” or “severe,” will automatically be removed after
scanning unless you change the default setting. Removing or disabling potentially unwanted
software may result in
· other software on your computer ceasing to work, or
· your breaching a license to use other software on your computer.
By using this software, it is possible that you will also remove or disable software that is not
potentially unwanted software.

That seems inline with every other 3rd party spyware program if you ask me.

Furthermore, with respect to anti-virus programs, don't believe everything you read. Why do you think the anti-virus utility companies are freaking out? Do you expect them to provide an non-biased opinion of the situation? Restricting access to the Windows kernel and closing loop holes is incredibly important and a very good step forward.

Unfortunately, this type of misinformation regarding Vista is being spread, seemingly unintentionally, by people that don't fully understand the issues at hand. Please note that I'm not saying you are uninformed, just that there are sources out there that contain a lot of biased or skewed information.

My opinions on Vista:

I started using Vista RTM (build 6000) when it was released to MSDN subscribers back in November. My machine is an Althon X2 4400 (o/c to 2.5GHz), 1 GB of Corsair PC3200 DDR (2-2-2-5 timings), ASUS A8N32, ATI X1900XT, 2x 320GB Seagate HDD, and a Creative Audigy 2.

Most of the hardware on my motherboard was supported by Vista but my video card, sound card, and a few other components required beta drivers. For the most part, the beta drivers ran fine and I have experienced no crashes whatsoever. I've played CoH, BF2, GalCiv2, EEII, and other games without any noticeable issues.

For me, as a developer, Vista offers some interesting new technologies to play with. While most of this technology will be ported or made available on Windows XP/2003 Server, there are some features, such as Aero, that will not. Aero offers develops exciting new approaches to authoring GUI applications. The UAC and new security features are also quite interesting as they offer developers more elegant ways to enable security features in their applications.

Yes, Vista's launch is off to a bit of a rocky start, but it will only improve as MS irons out the kinks. I know Vista isn't perfect and I do agree with some of what has been said here. With that said, I get the impression that some people think writing a vastly revised OS is something that is relatively simple. Making extensive modifications and writing completely new OS code is a grueling undertaking. If you've ever tried writing your own OS (or even a compiler) in your own spare time, you know what I'm talking about. Furthermore, a lot of these negative Vista reviews seem to be authored by people that, in general, dislike Microsoft and its products to begin with, leading it coloured or heavily biased reviews. Vista doesn't suck just because someone thinks "Mac or Linux has done it better for years."

Personally, I think Vista, in time, is going to be the OS to dethrone Windows XP.

 

[clue69less]

Personally, I think Vista, in time, is going to be the OS to dethrone Windows XP.

MS will force your prediction to come true when they quit supporting XP.

 

[sojrner]

bit pessimistic aren't ya?

I waited until sp1 before I went to xp but now can't imagine going back to even windows 2000. Vista will be similar methinks. Forget the Darth-Vader view of m$ and just realize that windows is the most prevalent OS out there and in order to move forward things like this have to happen. Stagnation is not progress.

I was upset about winFS and other options being dropped, but vista will still get me to move once it is stable and (relatively) bug-free. It will (and does already) offer some things that I like. The pre-caching thing is nice, and finally dumping 2d for 3d is also nice... not necessary but nice. While there may or may not be valid reasoning for dx10 being tied to vista, it just is. Deal. Gamers will move there, so will enthusiasts... eventually. I will be one of them.

overall, nothing has changed from past track records.

 

[HotFoot]

I would like to know how well ProENGINEER/MECHANICA or other CAD/CAM software are going to end up running in Vista. What's really happening with OpenGL, as I keep reading about how Vista is dropping it, and then I read something about how nVidia and ATI are coming out with work-arounds using a different way of getting OpenGL to work? If OpenGL works to within 5% of how it would perform in XP, then I will retract this particular objection to Vista. Thankfully, departments doing the kind of work that requires a lot of OpenGL-enabled software are going to investigate their options before buying into Vista.

I also hope that whatever changes are necessary to OpenGL and hardware-accelerated sound processing don't result in massive redesigns of the hardware so that open-source code doesn't work on them any more. This is the biggest objection most of the doomsday-sayers have about Vista. If you read things a certain way, it certainly looks like MS is forcing the hardware designers to make everything more difficult to use with non-MS software. It's a sign of a major problem when you have this reality. It's an effective monopoly.

Now I hope that IF fully compliant Vista compatible hardware won't work or won't work as well with open-source software that hardware manufacturers will produce non Vista-compliant hardware that does. What are the odds of that happening? I don't know, but I think the number of people out there running Linux is greater than the number of people who will put down $600 or more for a video card.

 

[nhobo]

Wow, there are loads of ppl here that are def. not getting the picture. Kinda scary actually...

sounds like an M$ hack ...

All of the buzz surrounding DRM is nothing but FUD. First of all, the DRM in Vista doesn't do anything with your currect media (DVD, CD), but only with new formats like HD-DVD and Bluray. So, you'll experience no performance drop while you're not playing one of these discs. That Peter Gutmann guy should have done his homework a little better.

DRM disables hardware that does not have specific technology intended to foil recording. if such hw is not found (or is mistakenly identified, etc.) playback is cirppled or cancelled. maybe YOU should have done YOUR homework

MS doesn't stand a change against all of the big movie studios

non sequitur. M$ has the second largest market capitalization in the world and a near monoply on PC OSs. M$ is not in the least threatened by the movie industry

so not incorporating DRM means that we won't be able to play the new formats under Vista.

unless your HW has the specific technology intended to foil recording ...

As for the article, I think it completely misses the point with respect to OpenGL. Anybody who has done some research into OpenGL knows that the best solution for running OpenGL under Vista is to use an installable client driver, since it's a much faster solution than Vista's native OpenGL support. ...

and Netscape was better than IE, but was crushed because M$ gave IE away for free, killing Netscape's market. since M$ is the predominant OS, new software will be designed to its spec, making this the first attempt to kill OpenGL in favor of DirectX (and it seems to be working if you look at the rush to manufacture DX10 video cards)

despite your single post history and idiotic rudeness, Superfetch can indeed be enabled in XP registry (google EnableSuperfetch XP) and DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc., ensuring the widest possible market for the software

the list of those challenging Vista's purpose and utility is wide and reknowned: John Dvorak on Vista

 

[Guest]

Has DaSickNinja entered this topic? (If not then when he does this will get more interesting). Anyway my opinoin is that you should not get vista right now unless you are running a server of simple computing.

 

[clue69less]

Has DaSickNinja entered this topic?

What, you can't read through for yourself to find out?

 

[bourgeoisdude]

Personally, I think Vista, in time, is going to be the OS to dethrone Windows XP.

MS will force your prediction to come true when they quit supporting XP.

Yes--when Microsoft ends their extended support for Windows XP in 2014...

...seriously, do you intend to use Windows XP for another 7 years?

 

[bourgeoisdude]

despite your single post history and idiotic rudeness, Superfetch can indeed be enabled in XP registry (google EnableSuperfetch XP) and DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc., ensuring the widest possible market for the software

Wow--did you google it? Notice all those results describing at as a Windows XP "hoax" near the bottom of the first page of results?

DirectX 10 hardware will be backwards compatible with DirectX 9/8.1, but DirectX 10 is NOT backwards compatible with DirectX 9. That has been explained many times in great detail from a number of sources, including Microsoft. NVIDIA's website may be misleading, but the hardware and nvidia driver allow the DirectX 10 card to run DirectX 9--this is not the same as saying DirectX 10 is compatible with DirectX 9.

I could nit-pick your entire post apart, but quite frankly I suspect you wouldn't listen to me regardless. Please prove me wrong.

 

[sojrner]

Has DaSickNinja entered this topic?

What, you can't read through for yourself to find out?

going from pessimistic to down right rude... nice progression. :roll:

 

[Ahumado]

"Vista is the better Windows, because it behaves better, because it looks better and because it feels better."


"But it cannot perform better than Windows XP. Is this a K.O. for Windows Vista in the enthusiast space?"


Looks Better..... I guess that's what count these days but I think actual performance is more important.

Ahumado

 

[nhobo]

DX10 software will be backwards compatible with DX9 the same way DX9 software is with DX8, etc., ensuring the widest possible market for the software

DirectX 10 hardware will be backwards compatible with DirectX 9/8.1, but DirectX 10 is NOT backwards compatible with DirectX 9 ...

I could nit-pick your entire post apart, but quite frankly I suspect you wouldn't listen to me regardless. Please prove me wrong.

Vista (DX10 software) runs on DX9 hardware. M$ would be cutting its own throat if it didn't, as would other software developers

nit pick away, if you haven't anything better to do in an anonymous forum

 

[elbert]

I'm with you on the time will tell thing. I think the adoption is inevitable - every new system you buy will have Vista installed.

Speaking of time how long till those buying vista 32bit will have to buy the 64bit version? The funny thing is vista 32bit can only use the same amount of RAM as XP. At 64bit vista in some versions are limited to 8GB's which LMAO is just dumb.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/aa366778.aspx
Windows Vista Home Premium can only use 16GB's but yet theres a 4 none server 32GB motherboard on newegg. Three ECS and 1 abit so Microsoft isnt even covering current motherboards fully with any home version.