Vista

My friend says Vista sucks shit for gaming, meanwhile I use vista and I say it runs everything fine, I can even run crysis good on it. He is a stuborn little monkey and won't believe me, say that he could barely run BF2.

The thing is, he has a very good computer, and I dont understand how he could barely run BF2, just because he is running Vista. So he switched to xp, and says everything is peachy perfect. I dont believe him.

My questing is this - is Vista really THAT bad for gaming?

(he later went on to say that he thinks console gaming is superior and that pc gaming is better, which I will slap him for saying this in school)

Vista requires more RAM Than XP does, it eats up something like twice the normal amount I think?

I don't know..

Someone who's smart can probably better answer this, with actual numbers and informational backing linky things.

Vista isn't that horrendous now, ever since SP1. XP does prove to get an average of 15 more fps in almost every game. Before SP1, XP got an average of 30 fps! Also, if you look on the system requirements of most games, they need more ram for Vista. Crysis for example, it need 1 gig for XP while it needs 1.5 for Vista. If you have the time and knowledge to make registry tweaks and such, Vista can be just as well as XP. Of course like most things relating to OS performance, it also depends mostly on your hardware (CPU, GPU, ect.)

XP or Vista, PS3 or 360, Mac or Pc. It is still mostly just a matter of personal preference.

Vista requires more resources than XP.  This is because it is Windows first try at a "pretty" operating system, I would like to just have a functional and safe OS but stupid people out there like having only shiny things (MACs).  If you want to blame anyone about vista sucking resources blame mac users.  Oh and if you have a really good machine you will never notice the difference.  The only real change is that you would want extra RAM in the system.

First off, about the memory hogging issues... totally not true. Vista has SuperFetch, read up on it sometime.

Vista has slightly lower game performance than XP due to the new driver architecture that most games were not built on. Any modern game that has been built with Vista in mind should not be majorly effected (Crysis for example) But if you have a computer capable of running Vista, the FPS drop should be neglible.

I have Vista and don't plan on going back to XP ever.  As of right now I'm waiting for Windows Se7en.

I hate the superfetch arguement to vista not hogging memory.
Turn off superfetch and you will see that vista still uses a butload of memory.

Superfetch is oldhat anyway. Linux has been doing that concept for years and it still manages to have a smaller footprint when you arent counting preload the memory used.

Typically I am the first guy on the block to upgrade to new software. For XP i was using it back when it was beta, and then again after RTM but before you could buy it in stores.

I've tried to use vista/server2008 about 5 times now, and i give it as open of a mind as i can muster each time. IMHO the added "features" (bloat) are just not there to warrant the upgrade, the cost of the license, and it is also not enough to counter effect vista's negatives.

Can anyone list vistas features without going to a website? cuz most of them are NOT noteworthy
gui upgrade
superfetch
a proper security implemenation
speech recognition (which is really shitty)
dx10

i hate the way they redid the windows shell/explorer (not IE)

anyway, fuck vista. they are trying to charge $600 for a meager upgrade to XP.

Quote:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8758141&st=windows+vista&type=product&id=1202650191714

$129.99 <> $600

well, i do appreciate the new look but it does use a shitload of memory. i had 128 ram on my old xp machine (actually may have been 64mb i dont really care anymore) and xp ran perfectly. fresh install of vista was at over 1gb. i have 3g which is enough for me but still, did it really need that much memory? it doesnt look that much better than xp and i cant imagine there is that much more HELPFUL stuff running in the background

Vista runs just fine if you have the proper hardware for it.  I recently built a new pc and I installed vista on it and it satisfies all of my gaming needs.  So yeah, you can't expect a machine designed for xp to run vista with comparable performance.  Same thing with jumping from windows 98 to xp.