What OS is better for games?


Recommended Posts

For pure performance XP x86 by a long shot, dx10 is still worthless and Vista has less compatibility and worse benchmarks almost across the board just read some reviews don't take these peoples words for it just because they happen to like an os.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For pure performance XP x86 by a long shot, dx10 is still worthless and Vista has less compatibility and worse benchmarks almost across the board just read some reviews don't take these peoples words for it just because they happen to like an os.

yeah .... lol !

XP is DEAD !!!!! And don't tell me to run XP on my quad core or even running a 32bits O.S. . You obviously don't know what you're talking about ...

Edit : Everyone writing that the OP should use an x86 O.S. is just stupid because if the OP runs a 32 bits OS then he'll be wasting 2 gigs of RAM that can't be used due to inherents limitations of an x86 OS.

Edited by kazuyette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For pure performance XP x86 by a long shot, dx10 is still worthless and Vista has less compatibility and worse benchmarks almost across the board just read some reviews don't take these peoples words for it just because they happen to like an os.

So your relying on 2 year old or more Reviews as your source of Proof . cause i Dare ya right NOW today Find me a review that is up-to date and proves your point...........Waiting ........... Oh well guess ya cant find one . so get your head out of 2005 through 7 and come back to reality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah .... lol !

XP is DEAD !!!!! And don't tell me to run XP on my quad core or even running a 32bits O.S. . You obviously don't know what you're talking about ...

If you're using <4GB of RAM, then there is no point in using a 64bit OS over a 32bit OS. In fact, as all of the binaries are larger than their 32bit counterparts, MORE resources are wasted on the 64bit OS than they would on the 32bit counterpart.

And as XP can be optimised for multicore processors using the patch from Microsoft or your CPU vendor, the point about multicore CPU's is also moot.

Do you know what you're talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're using <4GB of RAM, then there is no point in using a 64bit OS over a 32bit OS. In fact, as all of the binaries are larger than their 32bit counterparts, MORE resources are wasted on the 64bit OS than they would on the 32bit counterpart.

And as XP can be optimised for multicore processors using the patch from Microsoft or your CPU vendor, the point about multicore CPU's is also moot.

Do you know what you're talking about?

I, of course, agree about the <4GB . But since the OP got 6GB, he "must" go 64bits (Vista or 7 but not XP64 imo, since XP is near EOL ). When I bought my laptop, it came with a 32 bits Vista ( strange mistake from Packard Bell if you ask me ). Then I updated to 64 bits and I managed to gain more Fps because of the 64bits OS.

And yes, I know what I'm talking aboot ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're using <4GB of RAM, then there is no point in using a 64bit OS over a 32bit OS. In fact, as all of the binaries are larger than their 32bit counterparts, MORE resources are wasted on the 64bit OS than they would on the 32bit counterpart.

And as XP can be optimised for multicore processors using the patch from Microsoft or your CPU vendor, the point about multicore CPU's is also moot.

Do you know what you're talking about?

now we have in Windows 7 that is running a new threading engine here all just post some videos from channel 9

Dave and team, working very closely with the Parallel Computing Platform People, have created a very compelling new user mode thread scheduling/management system in Windows 7. In a nutshell, the User Mode Scheduler provides a new model for high-performance applications to control the execution of threads by allowing applications to schedule, throttle and control the overhead due to blocking system calls. In other words, applications can switch user threads completely in user mode without going through the kernel level scheduler. This frees up the kernel thread scheduler from having to block unnecessarily, which is a very good thing as we move into the age of Many-Core... Speaking of Many-Core, remember the piece we did on the Concurrency Runtime (ConcRT)? ConcRT is built on top of UMS and is the best way to most effectively utilize this new user mode thread scheduling model in Windows 7.

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/...-Scheduler-UMS/

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/...side-Windows-7/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ancient Computer? Windows 2000 SP5

With 6GB RAM? XP x64 (supports up to 128GB I believe?)

With 4GB RAM? XP x32

Don't care about RAM? XP x32 because WoW slows down x32 apps just a tiny bit and also gives more overhead to XPx64.

DX10? vLited Vista x64. Vista ain't bad as long as you remove the overhead BS.

I am not recommending a BETA OS. Be patient, XP and Vista sucked when they were released.

Whichever OS you choose, make sure it is up to date!!

Why are you so gung-ho in suggesting "tweaked" versions of perfectly stable and working OSes? Run some real-world benchmarks and find out for yourself that 1) There is no noticeable performance loss in x64 from x86, in fact the availability of being able to run applications in 64bit far outweighs any down-side; 2) Littering a thread regarding a new build saying he needs "vLited" Vista is ridiculous to say the least. Install the Vista Service Packs and it will run perfectly well on his system.

What is with so many people still sticking to old and outdated information regarding Vista. I feel like I'm back reading a thread when Vista just came out.

And really? Have you even tried Windows 7? XP and Vista may have sucked when they were released but 7 does not. Again, please inform yourself before posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XP x86 USED to be the best for gaming. However, if you have a modern system (especially with 4GB or more RAM) then Vista x64 is the best. Numerous benchmarks and tests have proved this. Anyone who says otherwise is still living in 2005. Vista even has really good compatibility now, which is great too.

I would advise staying away from Windows 7 for now. It IS great, but there are a few games (more specifically a few anti-cheat/piracy solutions) that don't work with Windows 7 yet. I haven't been able to play CoD4 since I moved to Win7 RC because the waste-of-bits that is Punkbuster doesn't work. I've tried all the workarounds found on the web but none worked. Hopefully they'll fix when Win7 goes official.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool - great info! Thanks for sharing :)

now we have in Windows 7 that is running a new threading engine here all just post some videos from channel 9

Dave and team, working very closely with the Parallel Computing Platform People, have created a very compelling new user mode thread scheduling/management system in Windows 7. In a nutshell, the User Mode Scheduler provides a new model for high-performance applications to control the execution of threads by allowing applications to schedule, throttle and control the overhead due to blocking system calls. In other words, applications can switch user threads completely in user mode without going through the kernel level scheduler. This frees up the kernel thread scheduler from having to block unnecessarily, which is a very good thing as we move into the age of Many-Core... Speaking of Many-Core, remember the piece we did on the Concurrency Runtime (ConcRT)? ConcRT is built on top of UMS and is the best way to most effectively utilize this new user mode thread scheduling model in Windows 7.

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/...-Scheduler-UMS/

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/...side-Windows-7/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah .... lol !

XP is DEAD !!!!! And don't tell me to run XP on my quad core or even running a 32bits O.S. . You obviously don't know what you're talking about ...

Edit : Everyone writing that the OP should use an x86 O.S. is just stupid because if the OP runs a 32 bits OS then he'll be wasting 2 gigs of RAM that can't be used due to inherents limitations of an x86 OS.

well...thats not entirely true there is software that can utilize anything over 3GB even on the 32bit architecture (you can have 3GB for your 32bit xp system and use the other 3GB as a ram disk :p)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well...thats not entirely true there is software that can utilize anything over 3GB even on the 32bit architecture (you can have 3GB for your 32bit xp system and use the other 3GB as a ram disk :p)

I don't think you're right and I need your source mate. How can you use more than 4GB of ram if the underlying O.S. architecture can't support more than 4GB ? This does not compute for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, SQL Server ( when you use the /PAE switch if I'm correct ) can do that kind of stunt but is there any other stuff that can do the same ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phantom Helix,

I agree with you -- a Windows platform would be great for any gaming experience. If one has the hardware, I would defintely recommend Windows 7 64-bit as it was designed to provide optimum results for all users. To learn more on how Windows 7 will benefit everyone and the great features it includes, check out Microsoft Springboard.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/dd361745.aspx

Jessica

Microsoft Windows Client Team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, SQL Server ( when you use the /PAE switch if I'm correct ) can do that kind of stunt but is there any other stuff that can do the same ?

You are correct about that but the PAE switch is VERY buggy (I think there are some bio's that use PAE to hack 32-bit Windows to see more also)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this threads of which OS are everywhere xD i'll say XP 32Bits, i dont like too much the XP 64 Bits, and IMO Vista and Seven ( mostly Vista ) sux for games .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have Vista 64bit and it has been working superb for the following:

Prototype

The Sims 3

Fallout 3

Plants and Zombies

Mass Effect(Even though it has tons of bugs)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this threads of which OS are everywhere xD i'll say XP 32Bits, i dont like too much the XP 64 Bits, and IMO Vista and Seven ( mostly Vista ) sux for games .

the reason is it is your system that sucks not vista and at the same time maby if you bothered to update to the latest Service packs in vista and drivers your chances would be better then YOU running Default RTM witch i take it your running since you make the claim Vista Sux

Now as for 7 it is even better then vista and i myself have been running it without issues so yea your claims are just that Claims

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.