Printable View
So I'm getting a whole new computer, mostly based off suggestions I've seen people on this forum give. But I'm wondering about the operating system. I've seen mentioned that XP 32bit and XP 64bit and Vista recognize different amounts of RAM. Is this the only significant difference, and are there other differences that should be specifically noted from a multiboxer's point of view?
whatever you choose.. don't choose vista.
Vista = Eye candy and lag.
XP 64bit IMO
I have to respectfully disagree in one scenario, If you have two monitors with widely divergent sizes then Vista should be considered. The xp directx slowdown sucks, and if you have, say a 24" and a 17" monitor then you might have big issues with horizontal span in xp.
Depends on your ram tbh imo. With 3+ vista works fine
If you're buying a new machine, choose Vista Home Ultimate (32 bit).
There's absolutely nothing wrong with it and it's more than capable of running multiple instances of WoW.
Somewhere in the forums, there's a post about my own experiences with Vista when I first adopted it on two of my 6 machines.
Having been told with great authority by somebody on these forums that it was impossible, I ran 5 instances of WoW on a new 2Gb Vista notebook. The memory usage was marginally lower than the same scenario on an XP desktop and there was no perceptable difference in performance.
I have limited experience with the 64 bit Microsoft offerings, but there's anecdotal evidence that they will cause you more pain than gain due to driver availability and support, so I avoid them myself.
Buying a new machine with an old OS makes no sense to me, although as you may have noted from Keyclone's comment, he does not support his application under Vista so that may be a consideration for you.
Running 5 Instances of WoW on 2GB seems nothing short of suicidal.
I'd be interested to hear about your performance stats, as it seems like you'd get unplayable FPS. Totally useless for PvP.
I'm not in any way suggesting that as a recommended configuration.
As I recall, somebody made some throw-away post about WoW using twice as much memory under Vista than under XP and I set out to prove or disprove that theory, nothing more.
My original thread is here.
The bottom line, though, is that Vista can support the same number of WoW instances as XP can, all other things being equal.
The only problem is the memory overhead which comes with Vista.
Certain apps certainly perform better using Vista, I was doubtful as to wether WoW would be included in this.
there is nothing wrong with Vista x64 drivers. You can find them everywhere, so no worries there. There used to be a problem about 6-10 months back when they were scarse, but microsoft has done a good job of getting everything done in x64 bit along with x86 bit.
Overall though, you are going to see a knoticable decrease in FPS on a machine with vista, everything works...but not like it used to on XP.
If your making a gaming machine go with XP, other than that, it honestly doesnt matter.
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
Vista takes a fair bit more customizing to get "how you want" than previous versions of Windows. Although once you've spent the time figuring it out, its superior in most ways. As for driver support, on older hardware it can be a bit flakey, but everything made in the last 6 months or so is pretty decent.
yep, and you'll likely need another 2gb of ram since vista uses 600-1gb all by itself.... which means you need vista 64 bit to use all 4gb of ram.... it's a downward slope....Quote:
So I basically have to put up with Vista?
I use Mac OS X :D
Get Out.Quote:
I use Mac OS X
:P
...no seriously, Get out.
Funny you should ask. My buddy dual-boots into Ubu64 and has been trying for a while to get a team going as well under it using WINE. he's gone through hoops and chutes to make it happen but he's still getting some lousy results. he's no slouch on his comp hardware either as he upgrades about twice a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by torelorm
I'd say no, but there are those that have a LOT more experience with Ubu than me (and I only used x86 version).
your running basically the same pc as mine, and i run visat x64, you will be fine, if your running the 2 different monitors like that i would suggest vista definately.
Not trying to start an argument here but I have the first Intel iMac 1.83GHz 2GB Ram and an ATi 1600 128MB VC running Leopard. Not saying this is the best way to go. But I am Trip-Boxing and get right around 30FPS. The only reason not to use Macs is if you don't want to manually start the games. Which I have to admit is a nice feature of WoW Maximizer. The only other prob I have is over lapping game screens because of the 17" monitor, but that is not a problem any more since there is no 17". Just my two cents. Now I think I should try and exit before everyone drops the bomb on me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Contents