Printable View
Go with XP, you know it, you love it, and it always calls you later.
Vista...never calls you back, gives you herpes, and kills kittens.
I'm biased, I know. But really XP is much nicer for gaming with the higher FPS. also Vista requires 2g of ram just to run, so you'd need at least 3g, 4 would be suggested.
I dual boot xp 32bit and vista 64bit. Needless to say since installing vista 64bit, I have pretty much never gone back to XP.
Play 4 instances of wow on 64bit vista, runs great.
i run vista ultimate on my laptop, with keyclone. Haven't seen any problems.
Running 4 instances and i get (outside of shatt) between 40 and 60 fps.
Running just one, full screen and i get an average of 59 fps. (haven't changed the console settings, the fps meter that comes with necb is always at 59 or 60.)
4gb of ram, dual 7950go's though, so not an "average" laptop.
I echo Fursphere's post; Vista may work fine if not good for some, but why take chances? You know XP and love XP and it always calls ;p I can't really add on to what's been said, avoid the shitty OS and stick to what works, if it ain't broke don't fix it lol
There are a number of things that bug me about Vista, but at the moment Vista64 with 4GB and an 8800GT is rocking some serious FPS both raiding solo and running up to 5 clients (trial keys FTW).
I've gathered some issues with drivers under XP64 and with 4GB I need something above 32-bit.
On the other hand, has anyone tried running Ubuntu 64 and WoW?
I found that Vista 32 Ultimate couldn't even sustain refresh rate FPS on a single copy of WoW with a 7800 GTX when under XP there is no trouble with this at all, so I moved back. If I try Vista again, it won't be as an upgrade thats certain.
Running Vista 64 Ultimate for great justice. And so I can use all of my ram. I avoided Vista for quite some time, but it's honestly not that bad. Couple of hours of fighting with it, now it knows who's boss, and doesn't cry at me every 10 minutes because I don't have AV software, or UAC is off. With a midrange machine the resources vista eats aren't as noticable. Mine idles with 1% of each core used, and about 800MB of RAM, and I haven't overclocked anything yet. The fix to dual view was a big plus, and I wanted DirectX10 to be an option.
people made the exact same argument with xp vs 95/98. Probably happened back in the dos days if you knew where to look..
Give it another year or 2 and everyone will defend vista, just the normal cycle for these things.
Now I'm not sure about my decision....
I have 1 PC, 2 monitors, 5 WoW instances.
1 monitor is a 19" 4:3, 1280x1024
other is a 21.6" Widescreen, 1680x1050
I bought the widescreen because it had the same vertical height as my 19" and side by side looks neat.
I do not want to use Horizontal View, due to everything on the widescreen being stretched when not playing WoW.
I want to use Dual View with main account on 19" and 4 windows on 22".
So I basically have to put up with Vista?
Comp Specs:
Intel Quad Q6600
2x2GB PC8500 DDRII RAM
8800GT Video
Thanks
Lokked
Pretty similar to my setup. Vista 64 ultimate isn't too bad. After a couple of hours of making fight with it I pretty much have it playing nice. The driver problems of 10 months ago are no longer present, so that's not a concern.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokked