Just curious

[Family Guy Fan]

my setup...

Card: Nvidia 7600

Ram: 1gb (will soon be 2gb)

Processor: Pentium 4 @ 2.53 ghz (will upgrade soon)

if u need any more info just tell me...

[zape]

Will what run?

[Brian M. Veteran]

Given that this is in the Vista subforum, I'd say he means how will Vista run on it.

Vista will run fine on that machine (aero will work perfectly well with a 7600). 2GB of ram will improve your experience a fair bit though.

[Nightburn]

I always recommend not bothering with Vista if you don't atleast have a dual core processor.

[Family Guy Fan]

im not gonna upgrade to Vista any time soon anyways im just wondering if it'll run on my machine or not if i did indeed upgrade like right now.

[Nightburn]

It'll run.. but not that great with just 1 gig of ram.. 2 gig and it would probably run decently. Again, I still wouldn't bother with it until you have a dual core or better.. XP WILL run faster than vista on single core machines. It's just a good rule of thumb ... we've found this to be the case where I work.

[Brian M. Veteran]

XP will run faster than Vista on single core OR multi core machines - Vista, however, still performs fine on single core machines.

[Nightburn]

XP will run faster than Vista on single core OR multi core machines - Vista, however, still performs fine on single core machines.

You're right. It was just a "general" recommendation though. As single core machines tend to have less RAM, slower BUS speed, slower HDDs, etc. They're running on 3 year old technology.. However, a decent dual core machine will not seem any slower on XP vs Vista.

It's pretty simple:

XP on old machines

Vista on new machines

Part of the reason Vista has a bad rep is because of people loading it up on there **** ass old computers. All the while expecting Vista will be just as snappy as XP. This is why I think it's good to never recommend Vista to anyone who isn't running new hardware. Why fuel the fire?

I'm not saying Family Guy Fan's computer won't run Vista acceptably, i'm saying XP will be the better choice.

[Family Guy Fan]

how much do dual core processors or w/e usually cost?

[Mannlich]

You're right. It was just a "general" recommendation though. As single core machines tend to have less RAM, slower BUS speed, slower HDDs, etc. They're running on 3 year old technology.. However, a decent dual core machine will not seem any slower on XP vs Vista.

It's pretty simple:

XP on old machines

Vista on new machines

Part of the reason Vista has a bad rep is because of people loading it up on there **** ass old computers. All the while expecting Vista will be just as snappy as XP. This is why I think it's good to never recommend Vista to anyone who isn't running new hardware. Why fuel the fire?

I'm not saying Family Guy Fan's computer won't run Vista acceptably, i'm saying XP will be the better choice.

Couldn't agree more. I installed windows vista on my wife's single core, 2gb memory laptop. After only a few weeks of using it, she wanted XP back because vista felt sluggish. I have been using vista on my machines since its beta days, and absolutely love it. However, for older hardware, I would still run XP. Even if that older hardware is vista capable.

[Nightburn]

how much do dual core processors or w/e usually cost?

These days you can build a fairly nice dual core machine for probably around $500. This is without a stellar video card. (you could totally reuse your 7600) Best bang for the buck is probably the e8400 ? Which is currently $169.99 on newegg.com. It's pretty easy to get these overclocked to 3.6 on air. They'll still be plenty fast without overclocking (2 cores at 3ghz).

Another option is a quad core processor. The q6600 (179.99). If you can spend more money then maybe a q9300 (259.99) or q9550 (324.99)...

If I was building a new machine today I would choose the e8400 over the quad cores. Mainly because the e8400 is built on 45nm technology where as the cheaper quad core is built on 65nm. If you're going to do video encoding or things that are very cpu intensive then maybe a quad core would be a good choice but other than that you probably won't notice any difference between a quad core and a dual core.

[soldier1st]

Nightburn:I Disagree that you need a dual core cpu to make vista work well, i have a athlon 64 3000+ single core and it runs vista fine but this system is 5 yrs old from 2003, all you need to get vista to work well is plenty of memory and a good gpu. anways for you vista would work good for you but what will limit vista's potentional is low memory and a crappy gpu,get at least 2GB maybe 3GB and it will work good. i couldnt go back to xp as it would have the lunch affect but vista does not have that.

Wolken007: vista will feel sluggish for awhile as it is learning your habits and once it does that it is fast.if your wife is saying vista is too slow then up the memory and gpu and it will work fine.

[SimplyComplex]

stick with XP on that machine, it's for the better :p