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

    • "just $100 per TB"? Just? Are we trying to make this seem like the new normal? Kinda weird to make it sound like that is not a ridiculously expensive asking price.
    • The reviews you refer to mean nothing. Where there is no journalism there is no reason to call the gaming media's opinion pieces "reviews". For GP games there is indeed a metric for success - increasing subscriptions. Which turns in revenue. The only circumstance in which subs do not rise when great is being released is a Game Pass system where the company is close to fully saturated with customers in a subscription. However, in that case as the theory goes you spend aplenty in all kind of games - from shady live service cash cows and customer offending agitprop crap in purple colours to robust and entertaining single player games. And keep a solid level of profitability. Ignoring the simply innocuous but mid games MGS has released primarily of the second kind.
    • Report: Microsoft to use AWS to help GitHub deal with a major surge in demand by Pradeep Viswanathan Thanks to the surge of coding AI agents, GitHub's usage has skyrocketed over the past 12 months. To meet this demand, GitHub started with a plan in October 2025 to increase capacity by 10x. However, by early this year, the company realized that it needed 30x scale. This rapid growth has caused severe strain on the platform's reliability, resulting in several small outages over the past few months. In April, GitHub published a long blog post explaining the steps it is taking to resolve these reliability issues. In the post, the company also confirmed that it is working toward a multi-cloud architecture for better resilience. Today, Business Insider reported that GitHub is turning to Amazon Web Services to help deal with a major surge in AI-driven coding activity. It is important to note that GitHub is still in the process of moving completely to the Azure cloud. The current plan is to move the platform fully to Azure by 2027 so that it can scale better as per developer demand. Therefore, the current decision to utilize AWS might be part of a short-term plan to meet immediate demand. A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed that GitHub is using multiple cloud providers with the following statement: For Microsoft, the decision highlights the operational pressure behind the AI boom. GitHub has to stay reliable for developers at a time when rivals such as Codex, Cursor, Claude Code, and other AI coding tools are gaining attention. And the decision to use AWS for computing capacity seems practical given the circumstances.
    • It's growing on me, however, your right, it make better usability sense if the tabs were bellow the address bar.
    • Qwen 3.6 is better value per dollar, and you can run it locally for free.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Conversation Starter
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      Console General earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      106
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!