It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

 
Go Back [M] > Madshrimps > WebNews
Windows 7 Gaming Performance Vs Vista & XP Windows 7 Gaming Performance Vs Vista & XP
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Windows 7 Gaming Performance Vs Vista & XP
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12th September 2009, 16:08   #1
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default Windows 7 Gaming Performance Vs Vista & XP

In the latest of our articles focusing on Windows 7 we look at the gaming performance when compared to Microsoft's older operating systems, namely Vista and XP. Many people (and websites) still hail Windows XP as the OS of choice so today we will ascertain if you should be making the leap to Windows 7 when it is released next month. We think you will find the results very interesting, we know we did !

http://www.driverheaven.net/articles.php?articleid=137
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2009, 16:11   #2
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

what they tested was the SLI scaling in XP vs Vista/7
single GPU performance will paint another picture
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 11:37   #3
Diegis0n
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The main argument to remember is that XP is limited to DX9, whereas Vista engine base OS's rendering DX10 games will put out a better IQ
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 12:03   #4
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegis0n View Post
The main argument to remember is that XP is limited to DX9, whereas Vista engine base OS's rendering DX10 games will put out a better IQ
this is DX9



CryEngine3 = DX9 (multiplatform engine, so needs to be DX9 for the consoles). DX10/11 doesn't necessarily mean higher IQ
AMD would love for CE3 to be DX11 so they can boast their unique feature, but that's not just the case, CE3 is DX9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICjHTa83Qh0
__________________

Last edited by jmke : 13th September 2009 at 12:05.
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 12:27   #5
Diegis0n
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Don't u think that the DX10/DX11 games that will come out say, next year, will show better quality on Win7 then on XP?

My point is, XP days are over unless you are benching imo, Vista wasn't really "de moeite" but Win7 now is, even if the change isn't "yet" noticeable.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 12:35   #6
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diegis0n View Post
My point is, XP days are over
holding still more than 75% of market share worldwide, it's far from over, even if it only holds 30% in a few years, it's still a potential 30% revenue less if your product doesn't do DX9.

games next year will run on XP flawlessly, while DX10/11 features will be minimal
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 13:11   #7
[M] Reviewer
 
leeghoofd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,164
leeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registeredleeghoofd Fully Registered
Default

if they make win7 install sub 10Gb and it boosts as fast as my XP does, then I might consider buying it... I still run XP64 as 24/7 OS and not willing to surrender for all that marketing mumbo jumbo, wizards and waste ridicilous amounts of HD space for apps...eg nero 6 takes 90mb here and does all I need, why am I obliged to install nero 9 or higher version and waste over 1gb for the same basic functions...

A full install of Vista64 at the moment takes me over 25Gb while my XP with the same stuff with with crappy looks is under 5Gb...

Till now a no buyer here... I can miss DX10.1 or even 11 features as I'm not too much impressed by the current games that support it's functions anyway... and there are workaround programs that support DX10.xx on XP.

XP is not dead yet... that review dunno, but the differences between the osses are very very big
__________________

Last edited by leeghoofd : 13th September 2009 at 13:36.
leeghoofd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 14:10   #8
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeghoofd View Post
that review dunno, but the differences between the osses are very very big
that's because he's running SLI/CF; without that XP has the lead
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 14:18   #9
Diegis0n
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I dunno mates, i've had it with XP personally. I like the looks and the feels of Windows 7 That an OS takes 5Gb, or 25Gb of HD Space isn't really an issue, unless you prefer to use expensive SSD's with little room ofcourse ... i mean what is 25Gb these days?

The only reason i would have to switch back is that my G15 G-buttons don't work but hell, the G19 is there to grab too!

PS: Is nero 9 really 1Gb btw? WTH? i use ashampoo burning studio (111mb), never used nero
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2009, 14:27   #10
Madshrimp
 
jmke's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 78,771
jmke has disabled reputation
Default

A few months back the only really affordable SSDs where 30Gb in size, so yes, install size does matter
__________________
jmke is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ATI Catalyst™ 9.5 for Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows XP, and Linux platforms jmke WebNews 0 20th May 2009 10:09
Engineering Windows 7 Graphics Performance jmke WebNews 1 2nd May 2009 12:17
Windows 7 series: NVIDIA and AMD Graphics and Gaming Performance jmke WebNews 0 26th March 2009 10:09
Windows 7 BETA vs Windows Vista SP1 SSD Performance Compared jmke WebNews 2 19th January 2009 17:17
Windows 7 Beta vs Windows Vista 64-bit jmke WebNews 0 16th January 2009 18:29
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for September 2008 jmke WebNews 0 9th September 2008 20:20
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for August 2007 jmke WebNews 0 14th August 2007 23:21
Windows Vista System Performance Report jmke WebNews 0 25th January 2007 10:41
Windows XP vs Vista - Performance Comparison jmke WebNews 0 2nd December 2006 14:17
Windows Vista Review, Part 3: Installing Windows Vista jmke WebNews 0 11th November 2006 11:36

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:05.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO