XP 64 or Vista 64

ChewieTobbacca · 06-13-2007, 08:22 PM

I'm wondering what OS i should use now. I have 4GB of RAM sitting around and I can get XP64 and Vista 64 for free (thx MSDN) but i'm wondering if its worth using Vista64 right now? I've heard theres issues such as changing the location of SATA ports and having to reactive Vista cause of stupid authorization issues. XP64 is supposed to be pretty stable atm but of course XP doesn't support DX10 at all. Anyone have any experiences or insight?

Millie · 06-14-2007, 08:02 AM

As long as you can get both for free, my vote would be to go with XP for the time being. It's a much less buggy operating system. Not that it doesn't have its ton of bugs, but compared to Vista, it's a fucking Swiss watch.

But really, this depends on which games you're playing right now. If the majority of your games are from the XP era, and you don't see that changing anytime soon, then stick with XP. It'll be awhile before decent Vista-exclusive games are released. Also, if you have any games you still play from the pre-XP era (as is the case with me; not sure about others), you can kiss them goodbye when you switch to Vista.

I'm actually thinking about turning my current laptop into a dedicated music storage / pre-XP/XP gaming rig and then buying a new Vista machine in mid-2008 for my main computer. But I'm not going to get rid of the XP machine. I'll keep it around for as long as I see fit. I just have too many old games* that I still play obsessively to ever give them up.

* i.e., Warlords II, Star Wars Rebellion, Starcraft, etc.

Vorph · 06-14-2007, 08:49 AM

Are you talking about XP64 Millie? There have been tons of issues with XP64 since it was released, mainly with compatibility and drivers (kind of like Vista, but with much less incentive for anyone to fix them). How it is today, I have no idea, but I would seriously doubt it's in any better shape than Vista 64 is, and there's a much greater chance for Vista's problems to be ironed out soon.

EmiliaEQ · 06-14-2007, 09:12 AM

None of the above, stick with XP normal.

Using Vista until we get SP1 or SP2 is pure masochism.
As for 64 too many software issues.

Anyway you still have 3.5GB -Video Card Ram, so 2.8GB minimum.

Hachima · 06-14-2007, 09:33 AM

Too many problems with compatibility issues with Vista64 when I used it. And there was no real advantage to using it. Vista 32 has worked fine for me though.

Depending on what you are using the OS for an x64 could hurt you more than anything. In order to address more memory, pointers for everything need to be larger and that could mean a performance hit. Vista 64 requires ALL drivers to be signed where Vista 32 still allows unsigned drivers (no signed driver for your hardware, you are sol unless you want to do some major tinkering that can have negative side effects)

The real advantages to x64 OS would be for:

* Applications for creating digital content in computer-aided design and digital video editing
* Applications that require mathematical precision and floating-point performance
* Applications that involve large, high-performance databases
* Vision acquisition and analysis applications with large amounts of data moving directly into memory at rapid rates

kegkilla · 06-14-2007, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millie

I just have too many old games* that I still play obsessively to ever give them up.

* i.e., Warlords II, Star Wars Rebellion, Starcraft, etc.

so you can't run starcraft using vista? does the same go for warcraft 3?

Millie · 06-14-2007, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kegkilla

so you can't run starcraft using vista? does the same go for warcraft 3?

WC3 works fine on Vista. The one and only time I ever tried Starcraft on Vista, I couldn't get it to work. YMMV, but that was my experience.

Phelps McManus · 06-14-2007, 10:19 AM

I second the motion to stick with normal XP. I know two people who used XP 64 and had a lot of gaming issues (WoW, EQ2, a few FPS, even AIM). I run 2003 Server 64-bit. I don't game on it but SQL Server 2005 and Daemon Tools no worky when I tried them about 9 months ago. Maybe they work now but that is the story of your life when you run a 64-bit O/S; you are always waiting for fixes to shit that works fine on normal XP.

I can't argue Vista one way or the other since I haven't installed it on my own machines. I have set it up twice for people who just want to surf the web. I am still waiting for evidence of ze revolution of 3D gaming that was promised.

Hachima · 06-14-2007, 11:22 AM

SQL Server 2005 doesn't work right on Vista 32 let alone 64 still.
For just gaming Vista 32 seems to work great. No real performance difference with the current drivers available. Vista 64 is trouble for gaming, especially if you want to play games that are a few years old. I would only recommend Vista 64 if you have some vital application that will specifically perform better on Vista 64. I would never recommend it for gaming for now.

ChewieTobbacca · 06-14-2007, 02:18 PM

So Vista 32 works okay? Does Vista 32 also have the same thing where you can't even change a SATA port without having to reactivate it completely?

The more I think about it the more I wonder wtf microsoft was thinking in the first place w/ half the crap they put in vista.

Hachima · 06-14-2007, 03:32 PM

Some hardware changes require re-activation. Not like its a big deal,it takes a couple seoconds online

Warrik · 06-14-2007, 03:42 PM

Apples new OS comes out soon....

Hatorade · 06-14-2007, 05:00 PM

I just ordered a gamming PC with Vista I will keep yall posted when it gets here.

Surlok TP · 06-14-2007, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hachima

SQL Server 2005 doesn't work right on Vista 32 let alone 64 still.
For just gaming Vista 32 seems to work great. No real performance difference with the current drivers available. Vista 64 is trouble for gaming, especially if you want to play games that are a few years old. I would only recommend Vista 64 if you have some vital application that will specifically perform better on Vista 64. I would never recommend it for gaming for now.

As of mid May, my Vista 64 rig has been running games without issue. I haven't tried many older games, Oldest being Battlefield 2 maybe,outside of MMO's .

For anything new it's been running great.

System is Dual FX-72, 2g DDR with an 8800GTX. I originally removed my second GTX because of driver problems,which still persist for SLI although apparently not as bad,in any case I haven't put it back in because I haven't needed it on anything I have been playing.

The only other issue I had with Vista and gaming was with Creative drivers, whoever posted earlier about not being able to install no WHQL drivers on vista 64 is wrong. You don't need to turn off UAC or anything like that, I am and have been since installing Vista when it went live , using various beta drivers for various hardware/devices on it. Most notably my soundcard drivers which very recently recieved a nice update,in addition to a working console for the Extreme-Music card I have.

The annoyance with older games for most people is with the lack of D3D though the alchemy project has been working fine for me to that end.

That said. I can't get my printer to work, I could possibly if I really took the time to read the various forums on it,but I never use printers so can't be bothered. The other issue I have is with my Sony-Ericsson phone, it's a W810 .I picked it up for 100 bucks only because it came with a 4g card and I figured that was a pretty decent deal for an mp3 player . Trouble is, Sony doesn't yet have working drivers for the Vista with the phone. So it sits empty...

The first two months with Vista were incredibly frustrating, now things have smoothed out,though the bad press won't for a long time I suppose.

In the end, I'll probably end up picking up a decent sized USB storage device ,dump the contents of my PC on it and go back to XP. Even though Vista isn't really giving me headaches atm, I use none of it's features and until a good DX10 game comes out, I won't. The only bonus to it is UAC which really isn't intrusive at all but if you aren't a dip shit with your pc you shouldn't ever need it.

Drave · 06-15-2007, 01:59 AM

I would say avoid both 64 bit versions, unless you have a certain application that you know will work with either of the two... and stick with XP, at least until there's a service pack...

Like a dumbass, I bought Vista, loaded onto my iMac to experiment with Bootcamp and Parallels... well I know how to get it running (much easier than I thought it would be), but afterwords, I found that I had no real reason to use Vista. So it just sits there. (Warrik, go ahead and laugh!)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warrik

Apples new OS comes out soon....

Seriously can not wait for Leopard! ...in all of its 64 bit glory!

Edit - Christmas will come soon this year! yarrr!

06-13-2007, 08:22 PM	#1 (permalink)
ChewieTobbacca is a maverick pirate. Yarrrrr Join Date: May 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 1,707	XP 64 or Vista 64 I'm wondering what OS i should use now. I have 4GB of RAM sitting around and I can get XP64 and Vista 64 for free (thx MSDN) but i'm wondering if its worth using Vista64 right now? I've heard theres issues such as changing the location of SATA ports and having to reactive Vista cause of stupid authorization issues. XP64 is supposed to be pretty stable atm but of course XP doesn't support DX10 at all. Anyone have any experiences or insight?

06-14-2007, 08:49 AM	#3 (permalink)
Vorph Never Go Full Retard Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hell Posts: 5,657	Are you talking about XP64 Millie? There have been tons of issues with XP64 since it was released, mainly with compatibility and drivers (kind of like Vista, but with much less incentive for anyone to fix them). How it is today, I have no idea, but I would seriously doubt it's in any better shape than Vista 64 is, and there's a much greater chance for Vista's problems to be ironed out soon. __________________

06-14-2007, 11:22 AM	#9 (permalink)
Hachima Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,695	SQL Server 2005 doesn't work right on Vista 32 let alone 64 still. For just gaming Vista 32 seems to work great. No real performance difference with the current drivers available. Vista 64 is trouble for gaming, especially if you want to play games that are a few years old. I would only recommend Vista 64 if you have some vital application that will specifically perform better on Vista 64. I would never recommend it for gaming for now. Last edited by Hachima : 06-14-2007 at 11:24 AM.

06-14-2007, 05:00 PM	#13 (permalink)
Hatorade Cause its better then water. Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 6,621 +21 Internets	I just ordered a gamming PC with Vista I will keep yall posted when it gets here. __________________ www.houseforsaken.com reopened recruitment.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

06-14-2007, 08:02 AM	#2 (permalink)
Millie Loves the Powerglove. It's so bad! Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,782	As long as you can get both for free, my vote would be to go with XP for the time being. It's a much less buggy operating system. Not that it doesn't have its ton of bugs, but compared to Vista, it's a fucking Swiss watch. But really, this depends on which games you're playing right now. If the majority of your games are from the XP era, and you don't see that changing anytime soon, then stick with XP. It'll be awhile before decent Vista-exclusive games are released. Also, if you have any games you still play from the pre-XP era (as is the case with me; not sure about others), you can kiss them goodbye when you switch to Vista. I'm actually thinking about turning my current laptop into a dedicated music storage / pre-XP/XP gaming rig and then buying a new Vista machine in mid-2008 for my main computer. But I'm not going to get rid of the XP machine. I'll keep it around for as long as I see fit. I just have too many old games* that I still play obsessively to ever give them up. * i.e., Warlords II, Star Wars Rebellion, Starcraft, etc.

06-14-2007, 09:12 AM	#4 (permalink)
EmiliaEQ Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Paris 94 ! Posts: 591 -4 Internets	None of the above, stick with XP normal. Using Vista until we get SP1 or SP2 is pure masochism. As for 64 too many software issues. Anyway you still have 3.5GB -Video Card Ram, so 2.8GB minimum.

06-14-2007, 09:33 AM	#5 (permalink)
Hachima Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,695	Too many problems with compatibility issues with Vista64 when I used it. And there was no real advantage to using it. Vista 32 has worked fine for me though. Depending on what you are using the OS for an x64 could hurt you more than anything. In order to address more memory, pointers for everything need to be larger and that could mean a performance hit. Vista 64 requires ALL drivers to be signed where Vista 32 still allows unsigned drivers (no signed driver for your hardware, you are sol unless you want to do some major tinkering that can have negative side effects) The real advantages to x64 OS would be for: * Applications for creating digital content in computer-aided design and digital video editing * Applications that require mathematical precision and floating-point performance * Applications that involve large, high-performance databases * Vision acquisition and analysis applications with large amounts of data moving directly into memory at rapid rates

06-14-2007, 10:19 AM	#8 (permalink)
Phelps McManus I'm dangerous! Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Atlanta Posts: 853 -4 Internets	I second the motion to stick with normal XP. I know two people who used XP 64 and had a lot of gaming issues (WoW, EQ2, a few FPS, even AIM). I run 2003 Server 64-bit. I don't game on it but SQL Server 2005 and Daemon Tools no worky when I tried them about 9 months ago. Maybe they work now but that is the story of your life when you run a 64-bit O/S; you are always waiting for fixes to shit that works fine on normal XP. I can't argue Vista one way or the other since I haven't installed it on my own machines. I have set it up twice for people who just want to surf the web. I am still waiting for evidence of ze revolution of 3D gaming that was promised.

06-14-2007, 02:18 PM	#10 (permalink)
ChewieTobbacca is a maverick pirate. Yarrrrr Join Date: May 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 1,707	So Vista 32 works okay? Does Vista 32 also have the same thing where you can't even change a SATA port without having to reactivate it completely? The more I think about it the more I wonder wtf microsoft was thinking in the first place w/ half the crap they put in vista.

06-14-2007, 03:32 PM	#11 (permalink)
Hachima Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,695	Some hardware changes require re-activation. Not like its a big deal,it takes a couple seoconds online

06-14-2007, 03:42 PM	#12 (permalink)
Warrik Ive been reading these boards since noows....that makes me uber Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Rhode Island Posts: 2,090 -3 Internets	Apples new OS comes out soon....