should I install Vista or XP tomorrow?

unozero

Tank
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
3,449
Reaction score
1
so Im putting new PC togther tomorrow and I'm wondering if I should use WinXp or Win Vista.....




Mobo: ASUS M3A79-T Deluxe AM2+/AM2 AMD 790FX
CPU:AMD9950/zalman 9700
GPU: BFG 8800GT OC edition
RAM: 2.75 cheapo ram (667Mhz.) )might get a new 4gb Patriot Set)
HDD: WD 320gb
PSU: Thermaltake 850watt




discuss,vista or xp???
 
What are you going to use the computer for primarily?
 
I recommend XP all the way up to service pack 3 with the .NET frameworks up to 3.5 installed.

I don't really know a whole lot about Vista, no experience with it.

If you do go with 4gb or more RAM go with Vista I think.
 
What are you going to use the computer for primarily?


games and watching movies:cheers:



edit:Raz I'm also leabing to XP but I heard Vista has improved....the question is if its atleast as fast as XP or faster.
 
i've heard that you cant really use your quad core to its fullest unless you're on vista.
 
Get two terabyte hard drives and put XP on one and Vista on the other.
 
If you get 4 gigs of RAM, go Vista 64...I'm quite happy with it's performance...
 
Second, minus the crazy talk about terabyte hard drives and installing on different drives.

You're not cool unless you have 900+ gigs free after an operating system is installed.

I'm not cool.
 
This is weird. I was contemplating the very same thing. Im going to reformat my drives tomorrow and reorganize my whole PC. Ive been pondering about which OS I want to install.

Ive used both pretty extensively, and I have likes and dislikes of both. Vista is great for gaming, and as a media center. It does however have a lot of annoying tablet services, which causes A LOT of problems with my tablet in certain software packages. I ever feel like doing any work while im on here because I'd have to fight with the tablet in order to do anything. It also works takes more advantage of my hardware, and I like the interface better than XP's.

But then I like XP for working fine with my tablet, having a simpler, more "no-nonsense" interface.


I think im going to do what Raz said and dual boot it. Ive got an awkward number of drives and an awkward amount of space though, so its going to be weird.


If I dual boot with 3 hard drives, can I use the one that doesnt have an OS on it with both installations?
 
You can use all 3 with both installations... but obviously set aside separate places to install apps.
 
You're not cool unless you have 900+ gigs free after an operating system is installed.

I'm not cool.

I am. :smoking:

Although it's not free space now. I could go though my hard drives and delete all the junk on them, or I can buy some 750GB hard drives that are 30% off. Decisions, decisions.

OT: I've been using Vista 64 for a year now, I see no reason to choose XP over it when buying an OS for a new system. This is especially true if you go with the 4GB of RAM.
 
There is no reason not to switch to Vista nowadays. Got XP and Vista on my PC dual-boot, would much rather have just done one whole Vista partition.

Moved to hardware btw.
 
Get over the fear of Vista. It's a perfectly good OS, actually it's a lot better than XP. XP's support life cycle is on the way out and if you don't upgrade to vista with this build you'll probably be sorry if you have to wait all the way until your next one.
 
Vista = Windows ME

If windows 7 lives up to all the hype a more valid comparison would be Vista = Windows 2000. And windows 2000 was a perfectly good and stable OS that was the building block for XP.
 
If you're an experienced XP user, you might want to consider sticking to XP for now. Vista can be terribly annoying and frustrating in some ways, 5but there's definitely things it does better. As long as it's not a laptop, vista should be fine.
 
I went ahead and installed XP :P

my amd 9960 2.6 is running at 2.8 right now :D
 
I've had XP on my older computer for 2 years, and I just got a new computer with Vista Premium 64bit SP1 last week, and I'd recommend it over XP, a very big improvement in stability and ease of use. Installation went perfectly, went from brand new unformated hard drive to installed and setting up in a little over an hour, and I have had absolutely no problems or crashes caused by Vista yet.

Only crashes were the ones I caused when I was overclocking. In Vista when I was overclocking my video card, I'd clock it up a notch, test it in the Crysis benchmark, if it was clocked too high and crashed, it immediately returned to the desktop like normal with a "the display driver crashed, and was reloaded" message in the corner. In XP when I was doing the same thing and it crashed because the clock was too high, it would just freeze there in Crysis with the screen messed up, and it would take me a minute or two of pressing ctrl+alt+del and alt+tab, or rebooting, to fix it.
 
Is this a serious question?
What it is?
Oh in that case, XP.
Burn vista to the depths of hell.
(vista doesn't even deserve a capital letter)
 
But it's not, and thats why you're wrong. He made a horrible, horrible choice, and he's going to regret it for the rest of his LIFE.
I don't really care, I got the better OS for me. Having had both I know I've got the better performance than I would if I still used ol' XP.
 
But XP remains a better OS than Vista. So you get the better OS. Simple as.

:laugh:

Vista is much better.

You get Media Center if you get Home Premium, which is great if you also have a 360 (using a PC as a DVR is sweet too). Search enhancements are great, and I rarely actually go click to open programs now (usually type their name in the start menu, hit enter and it's open), Vista caches all of your most frequently used programs to open mucho grande faster, and it has DX10.

About DX10, if you look and see that slowly but surely, more companies are starting to use it (it and its children, DX11 are the future, no if's and's or but's unless people decided to use OGL more, which pale's in comparison to DX10 in my humble opinion). Look at Far Cry 2. You get better performance with Vista and DX10 than you do if you ran it in DX9 mode. It's actually a 20% speed boost over DX9 on Nvidia cards and 7% on ATI cards. So who the hell can say that Vista is shitty performing? That is very much a lie. I could see initially how everyone could say that. However, that was due to the drivers themselves being inefficient and not ready for Vista, and not the OS itself.

IDK, I mean, if you think XP is right for you, that's cool, nobody is going to make you change (though SP3 was the last of your big updates and essentially from now on it's only security updates). People still use Win98 for some reason too, so whatever works for you. I just don't see why people would stick with an OS that just feels so old now (It's like 7 or 8 years old people... That is freaking ancient in the computer world).

It will be interesting though to see how many people are going to stick to XP when Win7 comes out. I'm sure there will be lots who claim the performance is better and what-not, and while that was true with old drivers, and DX9 on Vista, with Win7, with DX11, it's not even becoming a contest.
 
People still buy XP because they aren't pulling tech knowledge from their arse - XP's performance in all areas bar DX10 (which a mere handful of games use) is superior. I could quote you a google of web results and empirical data on that. Maybe Vista has better user-friendliness but if that was important to you, buy Leopard. Vista is Windows ME, superfluous, gaudy and stagnant - it's not a bad operating system by any stretch, BUT it's inferior to XP, the product it was meant to replace. Hopefully Windows 7 will be the a true leap forward rather than a shop shelf filler like Vista.

Lets see some quotes.
 
Back
Top