Vista Ultimate 64b or Windows 7 Ultimate 64b for gaming?


Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
OH dear god Please get Windows 7. Vista is HORRIBLE, especially for gaming...

Actually, Windows Vista is no worse than Windows 7 for gaming per se (in case some of us have forgotten, both are based largely on server code; Windows Server 2003 in Vista's case, and Server 2008 in 7's case) and therefore are a ton more stable than the XP desktop code core (gamers are some of the biggest multitaskers and multithreaders in all of computing; however, most don't realize it).

The biggest minus the 64-bit versiions of Vista (and 7 as well) have as far as gaming goes has to do with really old games with 16-bit installers; however, few of these games require DirectX, either, which makes them also ideal for running in a virtual machine. (The only game I own that falls into the 16-bit installer category is Microsoft's Fury3, which is so old that it is playable in *Windows for Workgroups", not to mention Windows 9x, or even NT.)

Actually, Windows Vista is no worse than Windows 7 for gaming per se (in case some of us have forgotten, both are based largely on server code; Windows Server 2003 in Vista's case, and Server 2008 in 7's case) and therefore are a ton more stable than the XP desktop code core (gamers are some of the biggest multitaskers and multithreaders in all of computing; however, most don't realize it).

btw Vista has the same codebase as Server 2008 since SP1

I actually had no problems with Vista, in fact it was the most stable 2+ years of computing Ive ever had, not 1 freeze, crash or random reboot. That said, throw away your Vista and never look back as 7 64-bit blows it away.

7.

Hands down.

Vista is a horrible, horrible, horrible, horrible OS.

Vista is horrible overall, just horrible for gaming.

January 2007 called. And said you two would fit right in with it and the rest of the people who obviously havent touched vista since then.

Has anybody tried Crysis on Windows 7 64bit? Playing it a bit last night and it seemed so much more fluid and smoother compared to Vista. All settings at max except for textures (medium) and runs like a dream.

My specs are Intel Q6600, Geforce 8800GTS 320MB and 2GB ram. A better graphic card with more memory and I'm sure I could max the textures as well. Have 4GB ram coming soon which should improve things even more.

7 Owns Vista hands down but for some vista may be slightly better, Vista die 7 Owns Vista.

While 7 Ultimate beats Vista Ultimate (which I have pointed out), Vista Ultimate whacks XP Professional (or Media Center 2005, which is based on Professional) in terms of stability of the operating system and multitasking/multithreading support, both of which are just as critical for gamers as frame rates (especially when it comes to multiplayer gaming).

How many people actually unload *everything* they may have running in the background just to play a game, even in XP? (I certainly didn't in XP, so no way would i do so in Vista or 7.) If you are going to benchmark, make it as close to how you actually use your computer (and this is especially true for gamers and the supposedly-game-focussed benchmarks, such as the 3DMark series). Otherwise, you're deliberately skewing the numbers, and fooling nobody (except maybe yourself).

OH dear god Please get Windows 7. Vista is HORRIBLE, especially for gaming...

that's absolutely not true. please cite some sources or legitimate examples.

Has anybody tried Crysis on Windows 7 64bit? Playing it a bit last night and it seemed so much more fluid and smoother compared to Vista. All settings at max except for textures (medium) and runs like a dream.

My specs are Intel Q6600, Geforce 8800GTS 320MB and 2GB ram. A better graphic card with more memory and I'm sure I could max the textures as well. Have 4GB ram coming soon which should improve things even more.

yeah i've played crysis on 7 64-bit. just as smooth, no faster than Vista 64-bit.

interestingly though, i used to have the same 8800GTS as you. when upgraded to my 8800GTS 512MB, my Crysis benchmark scores more than doubled... one benchmark increased 66%. weird huh?

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
    • I had a feeling this was coming. Picked up my first Mac ever last Saturday. Glad I did.
    • In a major surprise there is actually some good deals for the first time in years. At least for me.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      419
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!