Windows XP SP3. Much better than Vista SP1


Recommended Posts

Lyric
Can't wait for XP SP3.

Radish?

Agreed. I love Windows XP and will not be switching to Vista anytime soon, unless they start making games mandatory & only for vista...(doubt it) my dad has vista on his computer and I absolutely hate it. It has too many annoying security features, and not to mention I absolutely hate the start menu.

Bring on SP3:); :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Antaris

This thread has become a pointless flame-war, mod please close!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Premgenius

XP for me not interested in Vista thou I've got license for Vista Ultimate

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Right Guy
XP for me not interested in Vista thou I've got license for Vista Ultimate

So you can give it to me :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Windam

I don't think the mods give a crap about this..

honestly lets all be patient, up to 14 threads and the Service Packs haven't been completed, reminds me of the GTA IV thread :laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Aahz

I find myself in an odd testing environment where I just happen to have a desktop and a laptop built for XP as well as a desktop and a laptop built for Vista. (don't ask)

All things equal with service packs+hotfixes, pretty-shiny crap turned off, the use of nLite and vLite to actually remove bloat, general service/system/settings tweaking, and so forth; XP simply gives me more FPS in the games which I throw at it. (anything major released in the last 5 years I pretty much have installed)

That's not a rail against Vista or a rally for XP. It's just one hardcore gamer looking to squeeze every single FPS I have coming to me out of my games.

It's also not rocket science to see system requirements after system requirements for game after game list Vista as needing beefier specs all-around to achieve the same performance. Some of that is, of course, nature of the beast with any new OS but the end result is still me trying out XP and Vista on 4 different machines and having them all relinquish more FPS while using XP.

I want to be using a tweaked out Vista and I want to be taking advantage of DirectX 10(10.1) but until MS can smooth out the sluggish gaming performance I just can't commit to Vista as my primary OS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
david13lt

Windows XP at least for me. Vista can not offer anything new or useful for me. This way I bought Mac with is UNIX operating system and in university there I am studying we are using Solaris as the main OS on every available PC. Also there are Linux, that would be Debian, other UNIX devil that would be FreeBSD and then Windows 2000, which is almost never used only for ASM development. As you can see Windows Vista can not offer me something new, I still would not use most of the new technologies.

But I still used Vista from the early alpha releases and checked new features, tried programing and WPF, and all new some interesting features.

There is one problem, Windows Seven (7) is coming very soon and this might be the reason causing people not to update. Most of the people can and will be living with XP, there is no problem with that. And update only when Windows Seven will be available, because it is going to require some new hardware to run properly want you or not. Vista will not be able to take the same market share as XP. At the same time I would like to mention, that those market share numbers are not accurate, their are done comparing how many licenses there sold (I think so), but there are a lot of people deleting Vista from their laptop (mostly) and desktops and still installing XP. They have their or reasons.

And one more thing, there are no best operating system out in the wild... You can fight, but you will never prove that one or other is the best. So leave it. One is better is one field, the second in other and etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Punio4

OK... Here are some of my experiences with Vista. I have a pretty old computer:

  • AthlonXP 3000+
  • ABIT nForce2 + SStorm mobo
  • 1 GB DDR400
  • 7600GT with 256 MB vram
  • 17' Samsung SyncMaster 757NF - diamondtron panel (good sh*t)

However, that same computer runs HL2 at max details at an average of 45 fps, and ran vista rather fine too.

Alas, I had to dump it, and here are the reasons.

Note that I will *NOT* add to the list stuff like "OMG UAC is annoying!" or "Aero SUXX!", because that is not an issue since those can be turned off, and are not issues by definition.

So, here is my list:

  1. No option to force refresh rates = DotA in 60hz
  2. No Soundstorm drivers = No EAX, or 5.1. Was stuck with the AC97 part
  3. No deathadder drivers (at that time) = no customization
  4. VERY bad nVidia drivers (also at the time, don't know the current status) = over 15 fps less in Guild Wars and HL2 compared to XP
  5. I use Fruity Loops alot. On XP, ASIO required a 1ms buffer. On Vista, the sound was tearing apart even with 150ms.
  6. No way to kill mouse acceleration, or force a 500hz USB rate = no Counter Strike

Not to say that I didn't like Vista, but the previously mentioned points overwaged the good parts.

I use my computer primarily for watching movies, working in fruity loops, and playing DotA, Guild Wars, and Counter Strike.

Until I get a new computer, I will stick to XP, since it satisfies my needs in the fullest.

However, when that day comes, I will probably be posting in a Windows7 topic here on neowin :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
notuptome2004
OK... Here are some of my experiences with Vista. I have a pretty old computer:

  • AthlonXP 3000+
  • ABIT nForce2 + SStorm mobo
  • 1 GB DDR400
  • 7600GT with 256 MB vram
  • 17' Samsung SyncMaster 757NF - diamondtron panel (good sh*t)

However, that same computer runs HL2 at max details at an average of 45 fps, and ran vista rather fine too.

Alas, I had to dump it, and here are the reasons.

Note that I will *NOT* add to the list stuff like "OMG UAC is annoying!" or "Aero SUXX!", because that is not an issue since those can be turned off, and are not issues by definition.

So, here is my list:

  1. No option to force refresh rates = DotA in 60hz
  2. No Soundstorm drivers = No EAX, or 5.1. Was stuck with the AC97 part
  3. No deathadder drivers (at that time) = no customization
  4. VERY bad nVidia drivers (also at the time, don't know the current status) = over 15 fps less in Guild Wars and HL2 compared to XP
  5. I use Fruity Loops alot. On XP, ASIO required a 1ms buffer. On Vista, the sound was tearing apart even with 150ms.
  6. No way to kill mouse acceleration, or force a 500hz USB rate = no Counter Strike

Not to say that I didn't like Vista, but the previously mentioned points overwaged the good parts.

I use my computer primarily for watching movies, working in fruity loops, and playing DotA, Guild Wars, and Counter Strike.

Until I get a new computer, I will stick to XP, since it satisfies my needs in the fullest.

However, when that day comes, I will probably be posting in a Windows7 topic here on neowin :)

not sure where ya got drivers from but Nforce 2 official support for vista with nforce 2 was not Available from nvidia so not sure the drivers ya used but if you used some sort of 3rd party drivers dont blame Microsoft and or nvidia but however it was unofficially supported by Microsoft

now i had a very similar system to yours 1 time and had non of your issues tho

Link to post
Share on other sites
Punio4
not sure where ya got drivers from but Nforce 2 official support for vista with nforce 2 was not Available from nvidia so not sure the drivers ya used but if you used some sort of 3rd party drivers dont blame Microsoft and or nvidia but however it was unofficially supported by Microsoft

now i had a very similar system to yours 1 time and had non of your issues tho

If you used some punctuation, perhaps I could've understood what you were trying to say...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Xilo

I know for sure I'll be skipping Vista and waiting on Windows 7...

Link to post
Share on other sites
reaper1576

cant see the problems people have with vista its just got to the point where its a excuse for some people to troll. ive been using Vista ultimate edition since RTM nov 06. i had one problem due to a lack of a driver from nvidia on my old system what i managed to fix with in a few weeks. apart from that vista has been stable for me fast and reliable. only had one BSOD in around 12 month. XP Sp2 would have one every few days. but before anyone trys out vista have at lest 2gig ram

Link to post
Share on other sites
notuptome2004
If you used some punctuation, perhaps I could've understood what you were trying to say...

sorry but i did not know you was Neowins punctuation police

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yusuf M.
OK... Here are some of my experiences with Vista. I have a pretty old computer:

  • AthlonXP 3000+
  • ABIT nForce2 + SStorm mobo
  • 1 GB DDR400
  • 7600GT with 256 MB vram
  • 17' Samsung SyncMaster 757NF - diamondtron panel (good sh*t)

However, that same computer runs HL2 at max details at an average of 45 fps, and ran vista rather fine too.

Alas, I had to dump it, and here are the reasons.

Note that I will *NOT* add to the list stuff like "OMG UAC is annoying!" or "Aero SUXX!", because that is not an issue since those can be turned off, and are not issues by definition.

So, here is my list:

  1. No option to force refresh rates = DotA in 60hz
  2. No Soundstorm drivers = No EAX, or 5.1. Was stuck with the AC97 part
  3. No deathadder drivers (at that time) = no customization
  4. VERY bad nVidia drivers (also at the time, don't know the current status) = over 15 fps less in Guild Wars and HL2 compared to XP
  5. I use Fruity Loops alot. On XP, ASIO required a 1ms buffer. On Vista, the sound was tearing apart even with 150ms.
  6. No way to kill mouse acceleration, or force a 500hz USB rate = no Counter Strike

Not to say that I didn't like Vista, but the previously mentioned points overwaged the good parts.

I use my computer primarily for watching movies, working in fruity loops, and playing DotA, Guild Wars, and Counter Strike.

Until I get a new computer, I will stick to XP, since it satisfies my needs in the fullest.

However, when that day comes, I will probably be posting in a Windows7 topic here on neowin :)

That's quite unfortunate. Vista isn't so nice to older PCs. As for Counter-Strike, you can set "-noforcemaccel -noforcemparms -noforcemspd" to the launch options to disable mouse acceleration in Vista. I used it when I had Vista Home Premium and it worked fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon

So when is it being released?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason S.
3) People who know how to use/maintain their computers and with up to date current hardware...

(Y) well said.

i think Vista is great. i havent had a single issue w/ it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chosen One

I've been using Vista since it's release in January 2007 and I've just switched over to XP with Sp3. The performance difference I think is incredible..Vista usually uses 4-10 % of my cpu and 49% of my ram.. I know Superfetch stores what programs you use and that's why the ram is being used but still I like seeing my ram usage down to 18% and my cpu at 0%. I do miss all the nice flashy effects but I think I can get over it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
notuptome2004
I've been using Vista since it's release in January 2007 and I've just switched over to XP with Sp3. The performance difference I think is incredible..Vista usually uses 4-10 % of my cpu and 49% of my ram.. I know Superfetch stores what programs you use and that's why the ram is being used but still I like seeing my ram usage down to 18% and my cpu at 0%. I do miss all the nice flashy effects but I think I can get over it.

Question why ? cause on my hardware vista uses 0% CPU unless it is doing some minor background work then it is merly using in reality only 2% of actual CPU now my ram usage is @ 54% but i was just playing crysis and have no issues with the game running i am getting @ 1024x768 settings no AA with 4 things on very high and a couple on medium and some on high i am getting 24 to 32FPS so performance is great

you need to remember tho man Vista does do alot of low level processes in the background from time to time that does not really effect real world CPU usage but still shows in CPU usage graph as being used

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brandon Live
I've been using Vista since it's release in January 2007 and I've just switched over to XP with Sp3. The performance difference I think is incredible..Vista usually uses 4-10 % of my cpu and 49% of my ram.. I know Superfetch stores what programs you use and that's why the ram is being used but still I like seeing my ram usage down to 18% and my cpu at 0%. I do miss all the nice flashy effects but I think I can get over it.

Why???

One of the main goals of Vista was to make use of idle CPU time and unused RAM. That is a good thing. Why are you happier seeing those cycles and that memory go to waste? You're basically saying that you enjoy design flaws / limitations in XP...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Reeg

OK, I have a question. What are your computer specs that are running Vista? I'm thinking about going back to it, but I need another gig of RAM before I do that.

AMD64 @ 1.8ghz

MST Mainboard (not sure on the model)

1 Gig DDR RAM

GeForce FX 5500 w/ 256MB via DVI

120GB SATA @ 7200RPM

Creative Audigy ZS2 (I know of the driver issues. Dealt with it before.)

Think after I get another gig of RAM I'll be good to run Vista or should I wait for a complete overhaul of my entire machine?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chosen One
Why???

One of the main goals of Vista was to make use of idle CPU time and unused RAM. That is a good thing. Why are you happier seeing those cycles and that memory go to waste? You're basically saying that you enjoy design flaws / limitations in XP...

Well I'm finding XP with sp3 is running far better compared to how Vista was running.. Yes I know all those nifty features are suppose to help the experience with Vista be much better compared to XP. But still lets be serious XP is still kicking it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Punio4
That's quite unfortunate. Vista isn't so nice to older PCs. As for Counter-Strike, you can set "-noforcemaccel -noforcemparms -noforcemspd" to the launch options to disable mouse acceleration in Vista. I used it when I had Vista Home Premium and it worked fine.

Haha! Thanks a lot! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Danrarbc
There is one problem, Windows Seven (7) is coming very soon and this might be the reason causing people not to update. Most of the people can and will be living with XP, there is no problem with that. And update only when Windows Seven will be available, because it is going to require some new hardware to run properly want you or not. Vista will not be able to take the same market share as XP.

Well then why would those people update to Windows 7 with Windows 8 another 3 years away? People need to understand an operating system doesn't have to be 5 years old to be worth it. If you get a new computer sometime in the next couple of years there's no reason to not run Vista on it, but it's totally understandable that someone wouldn't want to buy an upgrade for older hardware - but I've always understood that, except in the case of 98 right now given the fact it's not supported any longer.

I know for sure I'll be skipping Vista and waiting on Windows 7...

Windows 7 won't last any longer, and you can bet it too will have teething problems. Every single new Windows operating system does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.