Bob Vila0 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 amd x2 3800+ @ 2.3ghz, 1 GB RAM, Radeon x300, doesn't run too bad, but it eats ram pretty fast, even after turning off some services, i need more ram, and DEFINITELY a new video card lol, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windam Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Well all I know is that my friend's Sapphire x1600 Pro isn't very good in any of the OSes with any drivers. And yes, that is the exact model of the card. So from a personal experience account, I believe that instead of the reviews. The XT is different from the Pro, it's a higher class of performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:: Lyon :: Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Mine is fast, bootup quick, and very responsive, opening applications very quickly, etc Maybe because I just upgrade to DualCore with 1 Gb DDR2..so... (still using RC2 - can't wait to use RTM) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldaccount1 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Very well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halcyoncmdr Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 The XT is different from the Pro, it's a higher class of performance. That I know, but nowhere else in this thread is the x1600xt mentioned other than in your post. KoL said he was running an x1600Pro which is also what my friend was using, so therefore my comments were directly relevant. I was just trying to come up with an explanation as to why his computer might be loading Vista slowly. My friend has similar problems in every operating system he has tried except XP really, and even there it has quirks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted November 15, 2006 Veteran Share Posted November 15, 2006 I only have RC1 running under VMWare (virtualized with 512MB of RAM), and even then it's fast, bit slow on some things (considering how it's setup), but still quite snappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBinder Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 AMD64 X2 4400+ 2mb cache (2.2ghz) 2gb Ram well i must say before i installed it i thought it would be a bit sluggish but i was wrong, its very fast it even installs some programs faster than it did in xp just ashame i cant set my res to 1440 x 900 its a little blurry at 1280 x 10124 on my widescreen monitor :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iscariah Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Intel P4 670 @ 3.8 GHz 2 Gb DDR2 RAM 500 Gb SATA HD and running Vista Ultimate RTM, works like a charm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenin91 Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 AMD64 X2 4400+ 2mb cache (2.2ghz) 2gb Ram well i must say before i installed it i thought it would be a bit sluggish but i was wrong, its very fast it even installs some programs faster than it did in xp just ashame i cant set my res to 1440 x 900 its a little blurry at 1280 x 10124 on my widescreen monitor :( Vista is ****.. Look at this guy, can't have 1440x900 which i can, but my dual screens are totally fuc0rzing, when it runs perfect for my other friend.. What the hell is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gh3ttoRoM3o Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I cheated on XP with Vista... ...and don't plan on going back. That's how good she is to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
»X« Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Its hard to say. Using a phrase "fast as hell" doesnt make sense. As far as I am concerned its running like a good install of xp. Nothing more. Im not blown away. Gaming is the same also, which no noticable increase or decrease in FPS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGSPro Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Vista feels a lot faster to me than XP for some reason. Maybe Vista is just my placebo, but I like it nevertheless. Games? that I cant tell until nvidia releases some descent drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illicit Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 It runs pretty fast for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meshuggah Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Vista feels a lot faster to me than XP for some reason. Maybe Vista is just my placebo, but I like it nevertheless. Games? that I cant tell until nvidia releases some descent drivers. Same. It seems to be a lot faster than XP for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Wan Kenobi Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 Same. It seems to be a lot faster than XP for me. Yup...a whole lot faster for me too! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gism0 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 It's so much more responsive than XP! You can really tell they've streamlined everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunter1234 Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 running fast but software and driver issues here and there is annoying me amd 64 3500+ 2gb ram geforce 6800gt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorbing Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 It sucks on mine. :no: I mean, it runs but not as fast as it would on a better machine. But then again, my CPU is not exactly the best. Vista lasted 10 minutes on my laptop. Back to XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted November 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted November 16, 2006 [Thread Moved from Customizing Vista to Vista Beta] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo411m Posted November 16, 2006 Share Posted November 16, 2006 I have a Core processor with 2gigs of ram and Windows XP MCE and it felt slugish at times (especially MCE). MCE uses like 400mb of compared to Vista using 550+ but everything is much more responsive in Vista. I click on a program and in less then 2sec its open. Vista in my opinion is a much faster OS though. It also get you annoyed alot faster then XP too, with all its security. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litespeed Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 On my wife's Acer laptop (Cel 1.6 with 512mb) it's noticeably faster than XP and has better battery life. On my PC (Sempron 2800+ with 512mb), bootup and shutdown are slower than XP, but the desktop runs faster. I could do with another 512mb ram though. On my work PC (Pentium D820 with 1gb and GF6800) it runs flat out. Visual Studio 2005 opens in about 3 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aero Ultimate Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Seems to be somewhat faster than XP for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted November 17, 2006 Veteran Share Posted November 17, 2006 Games? that I cant tell until nvidia releases some descent drivers. What's the latest driver they've released? I haven't tried any games... but I think the latest 97.x Nvidia drivers I installed made my laptop (with a 6200 Go I think?) Experience score jump like a whole point or something. Certainly gave a noticeable perf boost overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted November 17, 2006 Veteran Share Posted November 17, 2006 [Thread Moved from Vista Beta to Vista Support] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septimus Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Quicker than XP on both my desktop and laptop. Makes better use of the 2GB of RAM in each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts