Jump to content



Photo

Modern gaming - windows XP or windows 7?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
90 replies to this topic

#16 Nerd Rage

Nerd Rage

    RAGE!

  • 911 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 02

Posted 23 June 2011 - 14:39

Windows XP is supriorlly faster then W7 (Anyone that tells you otherwise is an IDIOT as W7 has much more processing, more security etc.) but Windows XP has less security, less multi-thread/core compatibility, no DirectX 10 or 11 support, and drivers aren't designed to be optimised for XP anymore, plus it's old, go with W7 and dual boot XP if you need it for old games like dungeon keeper, etc.


Even if it takes more memory and processing power to run Windows 7, Win7 gaming will be faster based off of what you just said. Processor support, DirectX support, Driver support, etc etc etc. For modern gaming, Windows 7 is a faster OS.


#17 n_K

n_K

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,386 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 06
  • Location: here.
  • OS: FreeDOS
  • Phone: Nokia 3315

Posted 23 June 2011 - 14:42

Read my first post ?

#18 ahhell

ahhell

    Neowinian Senior

  • 8,896 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 03
  • Location: Winnipeg - coldest place on Earth - yeah

Posted 23 June 2011 - 14:49

Windows XP is supriorlly faster then W7 (Anyone that tells you otherwise is an IDIOT as W7 has much more processing, more security etc.) but Windows XP has less security, less multi-thread/core compatibility, no DirectX 10 or 11 support, and drivers aren't designed to be optimised for XP anymore, plus it's old, go with W7 and dual boot XP if you need it for old games like dungeon keeper, etc.


Funny, you calling people idiots.

First you say that XP is "supriorlly" (whatever the **** that means) faster than Win7 then you go on to list how ****ty XP is compared to Win7 THEN you say go with Win7 because it's better.

WOW.

#19 n_K

n_K

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,386 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 06
  • Location: here.
  • OS: FreeDOS
  • Phone: Nokia 3315

Posted 23 June 2011 - 14:52

He talks about a netbook in his first post.
Windows XP's shell runs faster, it's got less features and a lot less security.

Going with either XP or 7 you make a choice, both have downsides, both have upsides.

#20 Sadelwo

Sadelwo

    Neowinian

  • 1,075 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 07
  • Location: Look up...
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Lumia 820

Posted 23 June 2011 - 14:55

If you were going to get a gaming machine for today and the future... which OS would you pick?


Would you build a machine with less than 4GB of RAM?
Would you want to be limited to a 2TB HDD?
Would you want to miss DX10/11 feature thereby loosing alot of your graphics card potential?


I think Windows 7 is the better choice, you get the most out of your hardware, isn't that what a gamer wants?

#21 AnotherITguy

AnotherITguy

    Neowinian

  • 922 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 10
  • Location: 'Merica
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Professional
  • Phone: Iphone 5C 16GB

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:03

Ok good argument but heres my reasoning, Windows 7 was optimized for the modern day multicore cpu, whereas XP barely did Hyperthreading and SMP, if you put windows 7 on a modern day quad core box and XP in the same box hands down XP gets smoked as the optimization in code alone would make the diffrence.

#22 OP kingius

kingius

    Neowinian

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 03
  • Location: UK

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:03

Would you build a machine with less than 4GB of RAM?
Would you want to be limited to a 2TB HDD?
Would you want to miss DX10/11 feature thereby loosing alot of your graphics card potential?


I think Windows 7 is the better choice, you get the most out of your hardware, isn't that what a gamer wants?


As you have asked me directly, here are the answers:

4GB of Ram is more than I currently have on my Netbook, which has 2GB of RAM. I'm not sure what program would require more than this, I don't currently run any that do. That said, I'm unfamiliar with the requirements for modern games, so they might have scaled to the point where anything less than 4GB is insufficient. I believe that about 8GB is not uncommon these days, but I don't know what it is being used for. Nothing that I have today needs anything like that much.

2TB of hard drive space is massive. I use a 40GB SSD (Mtron Mobi, very snappy hard drive) in my netbook and that limits me as things stand now with how many games I install.. and this is for older games. So less than 2TB would be fine be me, and anyway I'd pick SSD for quick access, which does limit storage space anyhow.

Not having DX10 or 11 could be killer though. This alone would push me towards Windows 7 and from what others have said here, it looks like the best choice for me.

#23 Alladaskill17

Alladaskill17

    Neowinian Senior

  • 5,445 posts
  • Joined: 21-July 05

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:08

Fail thread; you answered your own question in the topic's title - keyword: 'modern'.

XP not only lacks DX11 but also has restrictions to the amount of RAM that can be used (i.e 3GB iirc).

#24 Sadelwo

Sadelwo

    Neowinian

  • 1,075 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 07
  • Location: Look up...
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Lumia 820

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:19

As you have asked me directly, here are the answers:


In the opening post you stated you were looking towards building a new machine so i gave criteria which would help guide you. As far as your netbook is concerned its up to you but i would say Windows 7 as its optimized for SSD's.

#25 OP kingius

kingius

    Neowinian

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 03
  • Location: UK

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:24

In the opening post you stated you were looking towards building a new machine so i gave criteria which would help guide you. As far as your netbook is concerned its up to you but i would say Windows 7 as its optimized for SSD's.


Thank you for your help.

#26 Xenomorph

Xenomorph

    Gerbil Warlord

  • 1,516 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 01

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:39

Is this a joke thread? XP came out 10 years ago. You mention it and "modern" in the same thread title?

#27 xWhiplash

xWhiplash

    Neowinian Senior

  • 1,662 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:47

Windows XP is supriorlly faster then W7 (Anyone that tells you otherwise is an IDIOT as W7 has much more processing, more security etc.) but Windows XP has less security, less multi-thread/core compatibility, no DirectX 10 or 11 support, and drivers aren't designed to be optimised for XP anymore, plus it's old, go with W7 and dual boot XP if you need it for old games like dungeon keeper, etc.


With that logic, Windows 3.1 will be much much faster than Windows XP. So install that instead. Oh wait, chances are you cannot. XP is getting to the point where you cannot install it without serious workarounds. I have seen BIOS not allow HDD mode to be switched, and sometimes an update fixes that. Otherwise, you will need to slipstream the drivers.

Windows 7 is in no way slower than Windows XP. My Windows 7 boots up much faster than my XP machine did, under 25 seconds. Not to mention with Aero enabled, CPU is actually being saved. Where as in XP it was all on the CPU I believe.

#28 Sadelwo

Sadelwo

    Neowinian

  • 1,075 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 07
  • Location: Look up...
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Lumia 820

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:50

Thank you for your help.


No problem, that's what Neowin is about after all.

#29 +Bryan R.

Bryan R.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,609 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 07
  • Location: Palm Beach, FL

Posted 23 June 2011 - 15:57

I can understand the probable truth in the OP's question. What I don't understand is the idea which apparently still lingers that XP is in any way comparable to Windows 7. Seriously guys, step forward about 5 years. At XP's last days, before Vista even, XP was falling behind in regards to Hyper Threading and multi-core operations. I really can't believe this still has to be debated..

Want to talk about logic and common sense? Common sense and history will tell you that not everything in software that is newer is inherently slower. When put in such simple terms, does it still sound like it makes sense? It doesn't.

#30 Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • 63,024 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 23 June 2011 - 16:00

I'm sure current Windows is going to be better for current games.

At this point, you may as well wait for Windows 8. :laugh: