Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: kilz on January 22, 2010, 07:53:57 PM
-
i asked this in my last thread but think i didn't get a responce due to the title
i am going to be reinstalling my OS (XP) but i keep hearing alot of good things about Windows 7. is it worth upgrading to Win7? can my system even upgrade to Win7?
thanks for all the info and tips
-
Most people will say dont, unless you have to, or wait till service pack 1 comes out. but I switched to win7 64 and have no problems. sounds sound better (double positive?) and I get to use all the ram. currently have 4, will go up to 8 when (if) it goes down in price. but over all I like it. but my guess this thread is gonna be something like what do you like better ch stick or saitek. but it would be better if you actually post what you use your puter for. games, applications, etc. you might get more informed responses.
semp
-
What do you mean by your system can upgrade? You want to go from xP to 7 or you don't know if it can handle 7?
Would need specs for that, you can buy upgrade packages for XP to 7, but it's highly recommended to wipe clean and do a fresh install.
-
Kilz, if you have a core duo or newer cpu and at least 2 GB RAM...your system will run Win7...I would go with 64bit just because everyone that has it says it's very stable...I just got a new system at work with Win7 and I'm seriously thinking my game system needs to get off XP.
-
Are the sounds in Win 7 better than Win XP because of the loss of support for Sound Hardware acceleration?
I would to sway to either XP or 7 depending on the answer.
-
Are the sounds in Win 7 better than Win XP because of the loss of support for Sound Hardware acceleration?
TBH, I haven't noticed any loss of sound on my new work system over my old XP unit...we're using VOIP for our phones and I can use either a bluetooth set or the mic/speakers and it's very clear...what music I've listened to is actually better but I have to think that's just a difference in hardware.
-
I would go with 64bit just because everyone that has it says it's very stable...
AFAIK you need a 64bit CPU to run a 64bit OS.
-
AFAIK you need a 64bit CPU to run a 64bit OS.
Its true you do, but...
I haven't seen a non-64 Bit CPU in a few years. As with AMD that's what the AMD Athlon "64" X# means. Brand Model Bit Cores. (Pretty darn sure anyways) Just saying, it's doubtful someone around here (except for the people with 10 year old Dells) have a 32-bit CPU. Now-a-days they just drop the 64 since it's standard in any CPU. :)
-
Nevermind. :p
-
Nevermind. :p
Heh, was about to ask what that was about...was gonna say... :P
Went and looked up the CPU and all! Heck of a Page file that thing has though.
-
Went and looked up the CPU and all! Heck of a Page file that thing has though.
Exactly what I did, since I realized I'd never done it myself. :D I haven't gotten around to toying with the page file yet...I'm guessing it's a percentage, which is bound to be huge on a 640GB hard drive.
EDIT: "Recommended: 4599 MB" :rofl
-
Exactly what I did, since I realized I'd never done it myself. :D I haven't gotten around to toying with the page file yet...I'm guessing it's a percentage, which is bound to be huge on a 640GB hard drive.
EDIT: "Recommended: 4599 MB" :rofl
Well I don't want to hijack this thread too much, but...
The Page File (or Virtual Memory) is set by the user, Typically it's best to put it around 2-4GB. The amount used (the part I was saying was kind of crazy) should stay as low as possible when idle, XP can run under 200MB if done right. Vista/W7 will run upwards of 500MB from what I've seen, and that's after a lot of trimming. The 2GB used by the laptop you showed is just crazy for an idle amount. Unless of course that DxDiag was saved with a lot open (Best to be idle so you know idle Page File usage). If Skuzzy sees a DxDiag with a huge Used Page File, trimming that is always* his first suggestion.
*This may not reflect true stats as Skuzzy has a very complex brain and may suggest different things first before seeing the page file.
As for Kilz XP vs W7 thing: It's really personal preference. I dual-boot XP and W7 right now (just started using W7 few days ago) and personally prefer XP. I love the looks and newness of W7, but XP is still smoother for my system, but that may be I haven't trimmed the system down much (still running a 1GB page file idle). W7 is newer so obviously it's the future, but why fix what isn't broken....much? XP is fine for now if you don't want to get W7 just yet. As for whether you can handle it, most likely yes, but that would require a DxDiag or Parts list since some things aren't Vista/W7 supported very well if at all.
:salute
-
Windows 7 has better memory management and some improvements in networking which makes for faster downloads speeds and upload speeds. XP still outperforms Win7 in most games but already there are games showing up that will not run on XP. Any game that requires DirectSound3D will fail under Vista or Win7 but since most games now support OpenAL there is less of a problem on Win7. Win7 still has audio issues a lot like Vista has but there is a little more improvement also.
If you have an SLI rig you will discover that SLI works with vsync under Win7 (Vista also) but fails under XP even on the exact same rig. It must be a conspiracy. Microsoft needs a strong competitor.
-
(except for the people with 10 year old Dells)
Hey. I resemble that remark!
-
(big snip)
Through research, I've set it at 128MB minimum with 1GB maximum. The massive page file use was because I was playing EVE in the background while I took that DxDiag.
-
ok here is my system info
BIOS: Phoenix ROM BIOS PLUS Version 1.10 A06
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (4 CPUs)
Memory: 3070MB RAM
Page File: 512MB used, 4442MB available
Windows Dir: C:\WINDOWS
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 5.03.2600.5512 32bit Unicode
------------
DxDiag Notes
------------
DirectX Files Tab: No problems found.
Display Tab 1: No problems found.
Sound Tab 1: The file cmudau.sys is not digitally signed, which means that it has not been tested by Microsoft's Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL). You may be able to get a WHQL logo'd driver from the hardware manufacturer.
Music Tab: No problems found.
Input Tab: No problems found.
Network Tab: No problems found.
--------------------
DirectX Debug Levels
--------------------
Direct3D: 0/4 (n/a)
DirectDraw: 0/4 (retail)
DirectInput: 0/5 (n/a)
DirectMusic: 0/5 (n/a)
DirectPlay: 0/9 (retail)
DirectSound: 0/5 (retail)
DirectShow: 0/6 (retail)
---------------
Display Devices
---------------
Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Chip type: GeForce 8800 Ultra
DAC type: Integrated RAMDAC
Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0194&SUBSYS_046510DE&REV_A2
Display Memory: 768.0 MB
Current Mode: 1024 x 768 (32 bit) (75Hz)
Monitor: Plug and Play Monitor
Monitor Max Res: 1600,1200
Driver Name: nv4_disp.dll
Driver Version: 6.14.0011.9062 (English)
DDI Version: 9 (or higher)
Driver Attributes: Final Retail
Driver Date/Size: 8/16/2009 23:57:00, 5845760 bytes
WHQL Logo'd: Yes
WHQL Date Stamp: n/a
VDD: n/a
Mini VDD: nv4_mini.sys
Mini VDD Date: 8/16/2009 23:57:00, 7729568 bytes
Device Identifier: {D7B71E3E-42D4-11CF-0850-6E2403C2CB35}
Vendor ID: 0x10DE
Device ID: 0x0194
SubSys ID: 0x046510DE
Revision ID: 0x00A2
Revision ID: 0x00A2
Video Accel: ModeMPEG2_C ModeMPEG2_D ModeWMV9_B ModeWMV9_A
Deinterlace Caps: {6CB69578-7617-4637-91E5-1C02DB810285}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(YUY2,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalSt retch
{6CB69578-7617-4637-91E5-1C02DB810285}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(UYVY,YUY2) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalSt retch
{6CB69578-7617-4637-91E5-1C02DB810285}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(YV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalSt retch
{6CB69578-7617-4637-91E5-1C02DB810285}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_PixelAdaptive
{335AA36E-7884-43A4-9C91-7F87FAF3E37E}: Format(In/Out)=(NV12,0x3231564e) Frames(Prev/Fwd/Back)=(0,0,0) Caps=VideoProcess_YUV2RGB VideoProcess_StretchX VideoProcess_StretchY DeinterlaceTech_BOBVerticalSt retch
Registry: OK
DDraw Status: Enabled
D3D Status: Enabled
AGP Status: Enabled
DDraw Test Result: Not run
D3D7 Test Result: Not run
D3D8 Test Result: Not run
D3D9 Test Result: Not run
-------------
Sound Devices
-------------
Description: Audio Advantage SRM Device
Default Sound Playback: Yes
Default Voice Playback: Yes
Hardware ID: USB\Vid_10f5&Pid_0200&Rev_0010&MI_00
Manufacturer ID: 1
Product ID: 100
Type: WDM
Driver Name: cmudau.sys
Driver Version: 5.12.0001.0040 (English)
Driver Attributes: Final Debug
WHQL Logo'd: No
Date and Size: 10/3/2005 10:07:34, 1334272 bytes
Other Files:
Driver Provider: Turtle Beach
HW Accel Level: Full
Cap Flags: 0xF5F
Min/Max Sample Rate: 100, 100000
Static/Strm HW Mix Bufs: 65, 64
Static/Strm HW 3D Bufs: 65, 64
HW Memory: 0
Voice Management: No
EAX(tm) 2.0 Listen/Src: Yes, Yes
I3DL2(tm) Listen/Src: Yes, Yes
Sensaura(tm) ZoomFX(tm): Yes
Registry: OK
Sound Test Result: Not run
---------------------
Sound Capture Devices
---------------------
Description: Audio Advantage SRM Device
Default Sound Capture: Yes
Default Voice Capture: Yes
Driver Name: cmudau.sys
Driver Version: 5.12.0001.0040 (English)
Driver Attributes: Final Debug
Date and Size: 10/3/2005 10:07:34, 1334272 bytes
Cap Flags: 0x41
Format Flags: 0xCC0
-----------
DirectMusic
-----------
DLS Path: C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\drivers\GM.DLS
DLS Version: 1.00.0016.0002
Acceleration: n/a
Ports: Microsoft Synthesizer, Software (Not Kernel Mode), Output, DLS, Internal, Default Port
Audio Advantage SRM Device, Software (Kernel Mode), Output, DLS, Internal
Microsoft MIDI Mapper [Emulated], Hardware (Not Kernel Mode), Output, No DLS, Internal
Microsoft GS Wavetable SW Synth [Emulated], Hardware (Not Kernel Mode), Output, No DLS, Internal
Registry: OK
Test Result: Not run
-------------------
DirectInput Devices
-------------------
Device Name: Mouse
Attached: 1
Controller ID: n/a
Vendor/Product ID: n/a
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: Keyboard
Attached: 1
Controller ID: n/a
Vendor/Product ID: n/a
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: T.16000M
Attached: 1
Controller ID: 0x0
Vendor/Product ID: 0x044F, 0xB10A
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: Saitek Eclipse Keyboard
Attached: 1
Controller ID: 0x0
Vendor/Product ID: 0x06A3, 0x8020
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: Saitek Eclipse Keyboard
Attached: 1
Controller ID: 0x0
Vendor/Product ID: 0x06A3, 0x8020
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: Saitek Eclipse Keyboard
Attached: 1
Controller ID: 0x0
Vendor/Product ID: 0x06A3, 0x8020
FF Driver: n/a
Device Name: USB Audio
Attached: 1
Controller ID: 0x0
Vendor/Product ID: 0x10F5, 0x0200
FF Driver: n/a
Poll w/ Interrupt: No
Registry: OK
-----------
USB Devices
-----------
+ USB Root Hub
| Vendor/Product ID: 0x10DE, 0x036C
| Matching Device ID: usb\root_hub
| Service: usbhub
| Driver: usbhub.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:37, 59520 bytes
| Driver: usbd.sys, 8/10/2004 02:00:00, 4736 bytes
|
+-+ USB Human Interface Device
| | Vendor/Product ID: 0x044F, 0xB10A
| | Location: T.16000M
| | Matching Device ID: usb\class_03
| | Service: HidUsb
| | OEMData: 03 00 08 10 10 00 00 00
| | Driver: hidusb.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:27, 10368 bytes
| | Driver: hidclass.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:26, 36864 bytes
| | Driver: hidparse.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:22, 24960 bytes
| | Driver: hid.dll, 4/13/2008 15:11:54, 20992 bytes
| |
| +-+ HID-compliant game controller
| | | Vendor/Product ID: 0x044F, 0xB10A
| | | Matching Device ID: hid_device_system_game
| | | OEMData: 03 00 08 10 10 00 00 00
| |
+-+ USB Human Interface Device
| | Vendor/Product ID: 0x1532, 0x0001
| | Location: Razer 1600dpi Mouse
| | Matching Device ID: usb\class_03&subclass_01
| | Service: HidUsb
| | Driver: hidusb.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:27, 10368 bytes
| | Driver: hidclass.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:26, 36864 bytes
| | Driver: hidparse.sys, 4/13/2008 09:45:22, 24960 bytes
| | Driver: hid.dll, 4/13/2008 15:11:54, 20992 bytes
| |
| +-+ HID-compliant mouse
| | | Vendor/Product ID: 0x1532, 0x0001
| | | Matching Device ID: hid_device_system_mouse
| | | Service: mouhid
| | | Driver: mouclass.sys, 4/13/2008 09:39:47, 23040 bytes
| | | Driver: mouhid.sys, 8/10/2004 02:00:00, 12160 bytes
all i am wanting to know is.
Is it worth upgrading to windows 7?
Can i upgrade to Windows 7?
Is it worth it to upgrade to Windows 7?
-
Your system looks more than adequate. Personally, I don't see a reason to spend money on upgrading, but that's just me and my broke self. :P
-
Hey. I resemble that remark!
Guys, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't:
resemble = look alike something
resent = disapprove/dislike something?
-
I believe the "correct/original form" should be "represent." :)
-
Windows 7 has better memory management and some improvements in networking which makes for faster downloads speeds and upload speeds. XP still outperforms Win7 in most games but already there are games showing up that will not run on XP. Any game that requires DirectSound3D will fail under Vista or Win7 but since most games now support OpenAL there is less of a problem on Win7. Win7 still has audio issues a lot like Vista has but there is a little more improvement also.
If you have an SLI rig you will discover that SLI works with vsync under Win7 (Vista also) but fails under XP even on the exact same rig. It must be a conspiracy. Microsoft needs a strong competitor.
Windows 7, like Vista, has a really screwy network stack. It is not any faster or any slower than the XP stack. It takes more CPU time to run it.
Games that require DirectSound will still work on Vista and Windows 7. Case in point: Aces High requires DirectSound. What Microsoft did was provide a dummy API to re-route all the sound calls through the regular Windows sound API. It sucks, due to the higher overhead and generally inflexible formats, but that is what we are stuck with.
I am sticking with XP for the moment. 2GB of RAM allows me to do videographer work on hours and hours of footage and never swap. Because of the idiotic things Microsoft does with RAM in Vista/Windows 7, you need 8GB of RAM to get almost the performance I can squeeze out of 2GB of RAM.
I find the requirement for more hardware to do the same thing, slower and more unstable than before (the videographer forums are ripe with complaints about Vista/7, always followed by, "it used to work in XP..."), rather idiotic.
-
Windows 7, like Vista, has a really screwy network stack. It is not any faster or any slower than the XP stack. It takes more CPU time to run it.
Games that require DirectSound will still work on Vista and Windows 7. Case in point: Aces High requires DirectSound. What Microsoft did was provide a dummy API to re-route all the sound calls through the regular Windows sound API. It sucks, due to the higher overhead and generally inflexible formats, but that is what we are stuck with.
I am sticking with CP for the moment. 2GB of RAM allows me to do videographer work on hours and hours of footage and never swap. Because of the idiotic things Microsoft does with RAM in Vista/Windows 7, you need 8GB of RAM to get almost the performance I can squeeze out of 2GB of RAM.
I find the requirement for more hardware to do the same thing, slower and more unstable than before (the videographer forums are ripe with complaints about Vista/7, always followed by, "it used to work in XP..."), rather idiotic.
:aok thank you skuzzy i think i will stick with my XP for now but i might up it to the 64bit edition
-
I would not use the 64bit version of XP. It is far more unstable, with less support, than the 64bit version of Windows 7.
-
I believe the "correct/original form" should be "represent." :)
I don't think so. http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/represent
If you 'represented' the thing it would mean you would stand up for it happily which I doubt was the meaning.
Then again if you resent something you strongly disapprove the thing at matter.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/resent
Sorry for hijack but I see this mistake repeated a hundred times on AH BB alone.
-
If you 'represented' the thing it would mean you would stand up for it happily which I doubt was the meaning.
See definition #9 or #4.
-
Ahhh Ripley...the joke went over your head...the term "I resemble that remark" has been, for many years, a tongue in cheek manner of acknowledging that a disparaging description of something or someone would fit you personally rather than being resentful of said description.
It is intentional, not a mistake.
I'm just now getting around to digging into Win7...with the 64bit version, so far attempting to "crash explorer" in similar manner that XP can be crashed easily has been unsuccessful...I've gotten errors, closed the notifications, then windows explorer resets itself and keeps on trucking...with XP I could get a BSOD really easily, even lock the system up so tight all you can do is pull the plug...I'm still working on trying to reproduce many of the things XP is notorious for but so far...Win7 64bit is much better than XP. I have yet to get a process to zombie out with 100% cpu usage. Just make sure you disable anything to do with IPv6 on your network connections...and kill all the fancy eye candy poop.
To Skuzzy's point about XP...no offense sir, but your assertions on XP are based on your system configurations and I seriously doubt you are running the same XP configurations that the players in AH are...without the operating system tweaks you have performed, your system would not do so well with 2 GB of RAM regardless of the hardware...Win7 64bit Pro on just a dual core system with 4GB of RAM will run much better than XP Sp3 on the same hardware without having to trim the processes down to improve performance...the 32bit version of Win7 is more stable than XP but does not offer much increase in performance, just a little more stability...even software incompatibility has been minimized unlike XP.
-
See definition #9 or #4.
So what he said in essence here:
Hey. I resemble that remark!
is "Hey I fit the bill" or did he want to say "Hey I resent that remark" meaning he didnt want to be categorized as 'people with 10 year old dells' in a negative fashion?
-
So what he said in essence here:
Hey. I resemble that remark!
is "Hey I fit the bill"
Yes sir, that's it exactly...just a good natured response.
-
<snip>To Skuzzy's point about XP...no offense sir, but your assertions on XP are based on your system configurations and I seriously doubt you are running the same XP configurations that the players in AH are...without the operating system tweaks you have performed, your system would not do so well with 2 GB of RAM regardless of the hardware...Win7 64bit Pro on just a dual core system with 4GB of RAM will run much better than XP Sp3 on the same hardware without having to trim the processes down to improve performance...the 32bit version of Win7 is more stable than XP but does not offer much increase in performance, just a little more stability...even software incompatibility has been minimized unlike XP.
There is some truth to the performance issue between XP and Windows 7. I do keep a clean XP system, whereas most people do not. If you bloat up any OS, they will all suffer performance issues.
Go tell all the videographers I hang around with how Windows 7 is faster and more stable than XP. They will laugh you off the board. Many have tried 7 and went back to XP. They cannot afford the down time. They do this for a living. Most of the problem has to do with all the software utilities designed to make a videographers life easier not working well, if at all, under Windows 7.
Regardless, with Windows 7, you have to double the amount of RAM to do the same things you could do in XP.
I am not saying Windows 7 is bad. It is much better than Vista. If you are not having any issues with Windows XP, I see no compelling reason to upgrade. I still would stay away from the 64bit version of XP.
Persoanlly, there is no compelling reason to upgrade. I have yet to run into any software I could not install and user under XP. Not saying there is not any, as there is. I just have not run into any yet.
-
So what he said in essence here:
Hey. I resemble that remark!
is "Hey I fit the bill"
This is correct. I meant that he just described me (i.e. I resemble the people he mentioned). I resemble that remark is a common phrase. While I'm not sure of it's origins I believe it was originally a Bugs Bunny quote.
Although I do have a ten year old Dell thank goodness it's not my only machine.
[EDIT] I did an Internet search and as closely as I can tell the phrase was originally credited to Curly of the Three Stooges in response to a comment about riff-raff.
-
There is some truth to the performance issue between XP and Windows 7. I do keep a clean XP system, whereas most people do not. If you bloat up any OS, they will all suffer performance issues.
Go tell all the videographers I hang around with how Windows 7 is faster and more stable than XP. They will laugh you off the board. Many have tried 7 and went back to XP. They cannot afford the down time. They do this for a living. Most of the problem has to do with all the software utilities designed to make a videographers life easier not working well, if at all, under Windows 7.
Regardless, with Windows 7, you have to double the amount of RAM to do the same things you could do in XP.
I am not saying Windows 7 is bad. It is much better than Vista. If you are not having any issues with Windows XP, I see no compelling reason to upgrade. I still would stay away from the 64bit version of XP.
Persoanlly, there is no compelling reason to upgrade. I have yet to run into any software I could not install and user under XP. Not saying there is not any, as there is. I just have not run into any yet.
Basically, it sounds like, "If it aint broke, don't fix it".
-
Basically, it sounds like, "If it aint broke, don't fix it".
That's what I said about Win2000...and it was broke just like XP...only difference this time is Win7 ain't broken out the box the way Win95, 98, ME, 2000, XP and Vista were.
-
i am noticing that. however i do like to reinstall windows ever two years to keep my PC clean and free of space.
-
Guys, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't:
resemble = look alike something
resent = disapprove/dislike something?
It's a play on words. The saying is 'I resent that remark', but since resemble kind of sounds like resent it's used in a kind of a sarcastic way.
On the thread topic, personally XP runs better on my computer than Windows 7. The next computer I get will have Windows 7 but until then I'm going to stick with XP. I don't see the point in upgrading.
-
gents let that topic die and start your own thread before mine is locked. i would really like to see what anyone else has to say or debate about this subject
-
Dual Boot!
Keep XP for gaming, play with Win 7 in your spare time, make up your own mind.
That being said, I have to agree with skuzzy. Until I see a compelling reason to, I'll stick with XP.
-
Regardless, with Windows 7, you have to double the amount of RAM to do the same things you could do in XP.
Actually, with the 64bit yes that is quite true, but like the other 64bit OS's out there, that is it's intended design...to utilize hardware resources beyond the 32bit hardware limitations. As for the 32bit version of Win7 vs WinXP SP3, I just finished a test...on an HP laptop 4GB RAM and Intel P8700 2.5Ghz dual core processor...Windows XP SP3 recognizes only 2.57GB of RAM and Win7 32bit recognizes 2.96GB as usable...after disabling all the eye candy and some fluff leaving all built in processes running...Win7 32bit is faster loading on login...and loading apps, especially the hogs like Outlook 2k7, IE8, Acrobat 8, etc...the full suite of Office 2k7 opened, with IE8 and Firefox 6 tabs each on different sites with at least 1 using a flash intro.
I might try it on a P4 system I have in my office...but it's a lot of work...Vista dogged it so if that's any indication, Win7 won't do any better.
-
i am noticing that. however i do like to reinstall windows ever two years to keep my PC clean and free of space.
Every 2 year ? hehe I reformat every 6 months atleast . Most of the time it's voluntary 8).
-
Actually, with the 64bit yes that is quite true, but like the other 64bit OS's out there, that is it's intended design...to utilize hardware resources beyond the 32bit hardware limitations. As for the 32bit version of Win7 vs WinXP SP3, I just finished a test...on an HP laptop 4GB RAM and Intel P8700 2.5Ghz dual core processor...Windows XP SP3 recognizes only 2.57GB of RAM and Win7 32bit recognizes 2.96GB as usable...after disabling all the eye candy and some fluff leaving all built in processes running...Win7 32bit is faster loading on login...and loading apps, especially the hogs like Outlook 2k7, IE8, Acrobat 8, etc...the full suite of Office 2k7 opened, with IE8 and Firefox 6 tabs each on different sites with at least 1 using a flash intro.
I might try it on a P4 system I have in my office...but it's a lot of work...Vista dogged it so if that's any indication, Win7 won't do any better.
That is mis-stated. The 32 bit version of the Windows OS has to allow the space requested by drivers, and ROMS. That space is private. The reduction in address space is not under Microsoft's control. It is the drivers and other physical address requirements of the hardware that cause the reduction of user addressable memory.
In a laptop, it is all over the place as the video driver will merrily steal away any amount of RAM it wants.
Try running a video application in 2GB of RAM on Windows 7 versus XP then come back and tell me which is faster. That was my whole point, specifically. I can do in 2GB of RAM what requires 4GB of RAM with Windows 7 or Vista. The 32bit version of Windows 7 does not allow a user to access all 4GB or RAM. It will depend on the video card RAM more than anything else.
You ever try running Windows 7 (32 bit) in 2GB of RAM and actually try to get any work done? Chug, chug, chug.
For me to run Windows 7, I would have to buy 4GB of RAM and the operating system. All for the pleasure of not gaining anything at all. On what planet does that make any sense?
-
That is mis-stated. The 32 bit version of the Windows OS has to allow the space requested by drivers, and ROMS. That space is private. The reduction in address space is not under Microsoft's control. It is the drivers and other physical address requirements of the hardware that cause the reduction of user addressable memory.
Not to be argumentative but...that being the case, Win7 must be looking at things differently to have nearly 1/2 a gig difference being reported as usable.
Try running a video application in 2GB of RAM on Windows 7 versus XP then come back and tell me which is faster. That was my whole point, specifically. I can do in 2GB of RAM what requires 4GB of RAM with Windows 7 or Vista. The 32bit version of Windows 7 does not allow a user to access all 4GB or RAM. It will depend on the video card RAM more than anything else.
You ever try running Windows 7 (32 bit) in 2GB of RAM and actually try to get any work done? Chug, chug, chug.
For me to run Windows 7, I would have to buy 4GB of RAM and the operating system. All for the pleasure of not gaining anything at all. On what planet does that make any sense?
If you're doing video rendering, that I can understand. Win7 32 bit wouldn't do a thing for you, and upping to 64bit would require more hardware for only a marginal performance gain. With general applications, that don't do a lot of read/writes...I'm seeing slightly better initialization and save times in Win7 32bit over XP SP3.
-
I built a comp for my grandfather and only put 2GB into it (due to money constraints, plan was 4GB). It seemed to run fine. Specs were as follows:
AMD Athlon II 2.9ghz upped to 3.0ghz (to make it simple)
2GB Mushkin Blackine Enhanced 1066
Geforce 7200GS GFX card (just something so the comp wouldn't take Ram away to use for video, worked out great).
Windows 64 bit...(don't think 64 and 32 matter when it comes to the usage of RAM and performance if only it has 2GB anyway).
IIRC lower amounts of RAM run better with XP because XP uses clickable images instead of rendered stuff for Vista/W7...
-
That's what I said about Win2000...and it was broke just like XP...only difference this time is Win7 ain't broken out the box the way Win95, 98, ME, 2000, XP and Vista were.
Win 2K was a good O/S. How old are you?
-
Win 2K was a good O/S. How old are you?
It wasn't that good. It just seemed like it to anyone moving from ME. :D
Vista was a dog - no two ways about it, but for most folks, Win 7 will work out just fine. That said, other than better 64 bit support and some eye-candy, I've yet to find a compelling reason to upgrade from XP.
-
It wasn't that good. It just seemed like it to anyone moving from ME. :D
Who was dumb enough to fall for ME? :D
Funny thing about MS OS's, even though they've dropped a couple of lemons on the market you've been able to skip em (ie most people stuck with XP waiting for Win7). Whereas some other companies force you to upgrade at every step (*cough* apple *cough*) or find you OS no longer supported very very quickly.
BTW, I've been very impressed with Win 7, I've installed on half a dozen machines so far and it's been perfect.
-
I think a lot of this goes back to area's skuzzy already hit, Configuration. If you installed XP without bloat and bought quality compatible hardware and installed best case drivers and have not loaded your system down with a lot of misconfigured or poorly designed stuff then XP stands head and shoulders above Vista and Win7 for a vast majority of uses. The flip side is as follows...if your not a wiz configuring your system or you have a branded box...especially an older one win 7 can actually be a tremendous upgrade because it's so seamless to install.
As a personal example I have an old toshiba R15-S822 Tablet. I used it as a primary workstation back when I was traveling and my daughter has it now. Like all branded stuff it came with a lot of bloatware and marginal driver support. I spent hours tweaking and eliminating junk before I got what I felt was a reasonably tuned system I could disk image before I loaded up all my business stuff. When win7 came out as an open beta I decided it would be a great test bed. The benchmarked performance across every measure is significantly better then the factory default OS install (by a huge margin) and still much better (15%+) then my tweaked load out. Further every driver is better and more efficient and the system significantly more configurable then I could manage with all the crap bundled in and indecipherable to me despite my best efforts. To me for the "average user" Win7 is potentially a big step forward over XP despite a lot of drawbacks it imposes...
-
Well said humble.
-
Win 2K was a good O/S. How old are you?
I ran Win2k Pro for a couple of years after XP was out. I really liked 2k .... after SP3 . It was stable and fast with a more bare bones feel that i prefer.
-
Win 2K was a good O/S. How old are you?
Compared to what? Win 3.1?
No, out of the box Win2k was a security nightmare let alone trying to get hardware to work with it...even legacy hardware could be difficult...going to the NT core was a good idea but Microsoft almost blew it by not including the built in legacy support that was released in SP1-4...it was almost as easily infected with malware as Win95/98.
You must not have kept track of the updates for it...from the day it was released...nightmare until SP4.
-
Nope, I deployed Win 3, 3.1, NT4, Win 2k, Win 2003, and now 2k8 systems. Win 2k was great,never had any significant issues as neither did many other people I knew/know.