To run vista you will need fairly high end hardware, is your machine good enough now?

CDsDontBurn · May 24, 2006, 05:45 PM

that desktop looks clean

***Zardon*** · May 24, 2006, 05:49 PM

I didnt initially like it, but it has grown on me, its really snappy too. the tab/windows key is nifty too.

The one thing ive really noticed apart from the eye candy is the fact with beta2 most things ive tried have worked, applications etc. from filezilla to photoshop. It is great to see search indexing and instant finds across multiple hard drives, windows XP built in search was the worst ever.

its shaping up well, and the transition shoudnt be that hard for many people when the time comes, it tends to run quite well on non cutting edge hardware too.

CDsDontBurn · May 24, 2006, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zardon

I didnt initially like it, but it has grown on me, its really snappy too. the tab/windows key is nifty too.

The one thing ive really noticed apart from the eye candy is the fact with beta2 most things ive tried have worked, applications etc. from filezilla to photoshop. It is great to see search indexing and instant finds across multiple hard drives, windows XP built in search was the worst ever.

its shaping up well, and the transition shoudnt be that hard for many people when the time comes, it tends to run quite well on non cutting edge hardware too.

those are really promising words there big Z

brutusmaximus · May 24, 2006, 06:02 PM

That looks really nice and clean. still has a certain XP charm about it which is good, I dont want XP destroyed just improved. I like the idea of GFX acceleration, helps keep the load of the CPU while having some great transition effects.

Ive been hearing positive things about beta2 from the MSDN guys like yourself Z who have it, im looking forward to a dual boot

***Zardon*** · May 26, 2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDsDontBurn

those are really promising words there big Z

well I wouldnt get too carried away, its still far from final IMO. some stupid things in it, and performance should be higher on final release, it had better be, as XP is not only using less ram and overhead it responds faster.

the rating system is a joke. you get rated on CPU, hard drive, graphics card etc etc. then it takes an average of all those and you get your rating. sounds fine in theory, however this performance rating is not taking into consideration hard drive cache or 10k speeds etc, its just a rating on size. so if you have a 320 gig hard drive which is slow, its going to be getting a higher rating than a 10k raptor 150 gig hard drive. this factor alone will lower your rating by 1 regardless what the rest of the system comprises.

To compound this inexcusable ratings failure, it doesnt matter if you have a TOTAL storage space of 1 terrabyte, it only reads the boot drive. so a 320 gig hard drive will give a 5 rating, while a 150 gig Raptor boot drive, 10k with 16 meg of cache, with 3 or 4 other 250 gig drives gets a four.

ElfjeTwaalfje · May 28, 2006, 11:53 AM

I bought RAM and CPU power to play games, not to run an OS like Windows VISTA. Billy wil cost me ! NOT !

CDsDontBurn · May 28, 2006, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zardon

well I wouldnt get too carried away, its still far from final IMO. some stupid things in it, and performance should be higher on final release, it had better be, as XP is not only using less ram and overhead it responds faster.

the rating system is a joke. you get rated on CPU, hard drive, graphics card etc etc. then it takes an average of all those and you get your rating. sounds fine in theory, however this performance rating is not taking into consideration hard drive cache or 10k speeds etc, its just a rating on size. so if you have a 320 gig hard drive which is slow, its going to be getting a higher rating than a 10k raptor 150 gig hard drive. this factor alone will lower your rating by 1 regardless what the rest of the system comprises.

To compound this inexcusable ratings failure, it doesnt matter if you have a TOTAL storage space of 1 terrabyte, it only reads the boot drive. so a 320 gig hard drive will give a 5 rating, while a 150 gig Raptor boot drive, 10k with 16 meg of cache, with 3 or 4 other 250 gig drives gets a four.

yea, it is a joke. up until you had mentioned that in the other thread, i was all excited about vista. now, my level of excitment has come down a notch

Sandok · Jun 11, 2006, 02:18 PM

I personally installed the Vista Beta 2 and well, I found out that my PC is a bit too weak for it

3GHZ CPU really wasn't enough

Anyways, I think that even though Aero and all add some nifty features and that Vista has much better disk management and searches, it's just too powerhungry for what it offers. Honestly, I thought that my current CPU and 2048mb of ram would be enough but at bootup, it took a good 120seconds before everything became smooth. Sure it was just a beta but I had quite a few probs with performance! Oh well, we'll see with time

For the moment, I'm back on XP

~~Alien1~~ · Jun 11, 2006, 03:39 PM

I would not be so kind with it as some of you in here
Yea it's a Powerhungry POS

I will stay with XP as long as needed
until Vista mature enough

I am not going to build a NASA computer and spend my Euros just for Vista to run smooth and to run my games without trouble

BWX · Jun 11, 2006, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandok

I personally installed the Vista Beta 2 and well, I found out that my PC is a bit too weak for it

3GHZ CPU really wasn't enough

Anyways, I think that even though Aero and all add some nifty features and that Vista has much better disk management and searches, it's just too powerhungry for what it offers. Honestly, I thought that my current CPU and 2048mb of ram would be enough but at bootup, it took a good 120seconds before everything became smooth. Sure it was just a beta but I had quite a few probs with performance! Oh well, we'll see with time

For the moment, I'm back on XP

That is ridiculous.. What was the CPU usage during that 120 sec? What the hell does an OS need that many CPU cycles for?

Sandok · Jun 11, 2006, 03:55 PM

The CPU usuage was damn high! 80-100% most of the time (and I got HT which is still something...) and dunno, it barely had 15 processse to load (Antivirus and all included!) while on XP, within seconds all 45 processes are loaded. Honestly, I like Vista but if the Beta is anything to go by, I'm sticking with XP as long as possible

ozalon · Jul 14, 2006, 08:31 AM

wasnt this kinda made clear when they were developing it? its a OS for high end comps. well, now that i think of it, XP was for high end comps when they reliesed it, and a year later windows 2000 was obsolete and everyone was able to run XP. i think the same thing will happen with vista in 1-2 years. as for now, ya mine could run it. (your forgetting conroe and the AMD procs, whitch i ferget the name of)

CDsDontBurn · Jul 14, 2006, 12:17 PM

i installed vista RC1 last night. and i like it alot

. i'm still getting used to alot of the features of vista and their location(s) compared to winXP. one thing i must say though, it makes my computer lag pretty bad at times (system specs in my sig). the thing vista consumes most of is my RAM. it's averaging 500-600Mb of consumed RAM. My other beef w/it so far is that i can't get my audigy drivers to install. And the last thing i can't find is the "add/remove software" in the control panel. imna go poke over in the vista forum for now to see if i can have some of these ?s answered

BWX · Jul 14, 2006, 12:36 PM

Sounds like a freaking PIG of an OS. Maybe in 2 years or so it will be worth the "upgrade"..

CDsDontBurn · Jul 14, 2006, 12:39 PM

it's worth a shot to try out or experiment with. if you don't want to have it as your main OS, then run a smaller partition just to see what's all the fuss about for yourself. I'm planning to run Vista for this school semester, and switch back to XP once the semseter is over.

BWX · Jul 14, 2006, 12:43 PM

Oh yeah definitely cool to play around with, I am just talking about when I might actually buy it.. Seems like it it just needs a lot of refinement and optimization still from what I have seen.

CDsDontBurn · Jul 14, 2006, 12:45 PM

i actually like the way it is.....except for the memory hog part, lol. but then again, i've only been using vista for about 12hrs. so i still haven't come across any issues yet.

~~Alien1~~ · Jul 14, 2006, 12:49 PM

What about drivers

Are Windows XP drivers compatible with Vista

CDsDontBurn · Jul 14, 2006, 12:52 PM

the only winXP driver i've been able to use were those for my RAID controller. aside from that, the gfx driver is specifically for Vista, and i'm still looking for an audio driver for my audigy sound card. apparently, the winXP driver isn't supported

CDsDontBurn · Jul 14, 2006, 02:39 PM

now.....what about daemon tools? i went to their site to check to see what the latest version is, which i already had (v4.03), and it supposedly works w/vista, but it doesn't. can anybody help me out w/that? i need daemon tools!!!! lol