Releaselog

Don’t install Vista if you are hi-tech gamer

Chaps over FiringSquad published an interesting article comparing results of various benchmarks on Windows XP and Windows Vista. These tests were focused on gaming video cards, ranging from GeForce 7600 to high-end GeForce 8800. And the results? Pretty convincing: almost all video cards demonstrated better results (higher FPS) on Windows XP.

This difference grows with power of the accellerator and higher resolution - the very same and most powerful GeForce 8800 GTX achieved up to 22% difference on these two operating systems. It looks there’s still a lot of place to work on, especially optimizing the performance in new drivers…

Comments (30)

Feel free to post your Don’t install Vista if you are hi-tech gamer torrent, subtitles, samples, free download, quality, NFO, rapidshare, megaupload, filefactory, netload, crack, serial, requirements or whatever-related comments here. Don't be rude (permban), use only English, don't go offtopic and read FAQ before asking a question. Owners of this website aren't responsible for content of comments.
  1. Me
    February 10th, 2007 | 15:08

    Thx! Great info!

  2. ElKiNG
    February 10th, 2007 | 15:15

    Gamer or not, Dnt use Vista untill it’s patched

  3. eviiil
    February 10th, 2007 | 15:15

    wait for the first sp

  4. fca
    February 10th, 2007 | 15:31

    nicxe in fo but the 8800gtx is actually 768 mb pci-e ddr2
    ihave the same card cost mer like 700$
    its the bomb!

  5. fca
    February 10th, 2007 | 15:48

    yeah vista requirement are way too high (its nice, eye candy stuff)
    but if ur a gfamer stick whit xp pro for a whil;e till vista service pack is out and if u have atleast a dual core and 3 gigs of
    high-speed ram like ddr3, and for sure awicked vidoe card for all the visual effect in vista o/s!!!!!!!

    : TESTED IT MYSELF_______ MARTIN is 100% right!

  6. chippxero
    February 10th, 2007 | 16:01

    To be fair, vista is very new and so drivers for the cards haven’t gone through all the versions that they got to on XP.

  7. ocxz
    February 10th, 2007 | 16:15

    8800GTX uses GDDR3 and certainly not DDR2! and yeah it’s pci-e only.

  8. adyta
    February 10th, 2007 | 16:18

    Well, this test is quite unfair. NVIDIA hasn’t released a proper driver for Vista, so the performance with Vista is bound to be worse than XP.

  9. February 10th, 2007 | 16:23

    in the begin of windows xp I remember me havind win 2000 :D
    till somewhere 2003

    i want to use in my xp the vista style, somebody suggestions ?

  10. February 10th, 2007 | 16:43

    @Mike, you can use the vista transformation pack 6.0.

    Oh yeah i will stick with XP

  11. ScytheNoire
    February 10th, 2007 | 16:59

    other than the lack of mature drivers, Vista is lacking security software, most notable, good firewalls. until i see some Vista compatible firewalls from a company i’d use, Vista is still a no-no.

    and no, the included Vista firewall doesn’t count since it’s insecure and doesn’t properly stop outbound traffic. go-go keyloggers, trogans, spyware, etc.

  12. arqentus
    February 10th, 2007 | 17:02

    adyta:

    So? Its not because they release a bad driver that the results are untrue. They knew for freaking months that Vista was going to release on 30 January. It was available for the business market for several months already. Yet, if you as a company can not deliver correct working drivers, on the release of a new operating system, that you know for years is coming, that has been on the market for months …

    Its no surprise that people are starting a lawsuit. You buy maybe a 8800GTX months in advance with the promise of power under Vista, and then you end up 20 a 25% slower … painful. Even worse is the fact that the older & slower cards, do not seem to have the same performance drop. So, its defiantly related to the new drivers.

  13. TripleT
    February 10th, 2007 | 17:23

    Gota tell you guys, sooner or later you WILL have to migrate to Vista. Why the hell do you think they did all those agreements with Nvidia, ATI , Gigabyte, etc . . . ???
    The new Direct X ofcourse. Games will require the new version which is to my sad believes is Vista-compatible only.

    unless someone figures away to clone the DX10 in XP we’ll bow to their rules.

  14. Michael
    February 10th, 2007 | 17:26

    Duh, don’t use Vista untill you have to.

  15. [deXter]
    February 10th, 2007 | 19:31

    Mike: For a *complete* Vista look (and some functionality like real vista games), check this out:

    http://dexnet.blogspot.com/2007/01/vistaize-your-xp.html

  16. rqn
    February 10th, 2007 | 21:26

    This is the obligatory “Vista sucks, use Linux”-post.

    Vista sucks, use Linux.

    Nothing to see here, move along.

  17. Seeker
    February 10th, 2007 | 21:37

    ATi Card perform better than Nvidia cards in Vista. Nvidias shitty driver quality is on overdrive with Vista.

  18. sam
    February 10th, 2007 | 23:19

    suggest you change title to: Don’t install Vista if you have a brain

  19. Flame
    February 11th, 2007 | 00:01

    Nvidia cars were always crap, expensive crap.

  20. Flame
    February 11th, 2007 | 00:02

    cards* , ma bad

  21. February 11th, 2007 | 01:08

    the previous post was not posted by Mike of RLSlog…

    i will deleted it!

  22. ScytheNoire
    February 11th, 2007 | 04:01

    Linux-fanboi’s

    Linux does not support gaming, and has no chance ever at DirectX 10 gaming. So Linux isn’t even in this battle, they couldn’t even make it in, so they are even behind Mac OSX. Now that’s lame, behind Apple. Suckers.

    As for ATI/AMD video card, we can’t judge that until they release DirectX 10 video card. Until then, nVidia is the only Vista DirectX 10 gaming card in town.

  23. m3zero
    February 11th, 2007 | 04:34

    you have no idea mate, LINUX is the way forward, its the a OS with actually has multi-tasking abilities unlike windows. IF you never used Linux then you don’t know. Most reason people don’t use Linux is because its not as stupidly easy to use as windows!… if u ever played a game on Linux you would understand, yes your right not many top line games are not out of Linux… that’s out of my hands… but Linux all the way, Windows is for amateurs, who need BIG ICONS to see where they are navigating to… don’t be LAME… try something that’s challenging and that gives you the option to change every settings…

  24. [deXter]
    February 11th, 2007 | 08:06

    Actually, m3zero, based on your argument, Windows would be more challenging than Linux! According to you, Linux gives you the option to change every settings, meaning which, windows doesen’t, meaning which you really have to dig into gpedit, regedit, hexing, win32api, ntapi and undocumented stuff to change every setting! Thats more challenging, right? Plus, with Windows, you get viruses, spyware, crashes, buffer errors, memory leaks, security holes… phew! I definately say its much more challenging than Linux! Boring Linux, its so secure and stable, nothing interesting ever happens on it.. ;)

  25. queef
    February 11th, 2007 | 08:07

    ScytheNoire - software firewall? what the fuck are you talking about? spend some money you cock gobbler and buy a router with NAT. All software firewalls are shit, you have no clue wtf your talking about.

    m3zero - actually he is right in some aspect. Linux is challenging, albeit totally useless right now for modern day gaming, and whether you want to believe it or not, thats the truth, end of.

  26. [deXter]
    February 11th, 2007 | 08:27

    @queef:
    a router with NAT won’t stop outgoing connections of rogue programs from connecting to the net- it won’t stop spyware from downloading trojans, etc. Just having a hardware firewall isn’t enough these days.

  27. RocK
    February 11th, 2007 | 08:55

    Why only GeForce cards was tested? NVIDIA vista drivers are very poor vs Ati. Toobad their didn’t include Ati cards in their tests. I’m sure ATi vista is not that far from XP.

  28. Leechy-kun
    February 11th, 2007 | 12:07

    Sadly we’d all have to switch to Vista sooner or later. Atleast for a new computer that is. You can still keep the 2nd computer with XP =3 Thing is Halo 2, Crysis, UT2k7 use DX10 so it’s sort of a forced move. But as everyone was saying above there is no need to move to vista atm until SP1 is out or unless one of the inspired DX10 game comes out. But the performance drop isn’t that bad since you are using the latest graphics card with much of everything else being supposedly high end. You only need a minimum of 60fps to run a game smoothly anyway.

  29. elc
    February 11th, 2007 | 14:21

    exactly the same thing hapened when moving from 2000 to xp.
    its up to nvidia to polish the vista drivers

  30. February 13th, 2007 | 19:09

    Давайте поговорим о какашках.
    (Let’s talk about poo).

Your Ad Here

Leave a reply

Hot info about new scene releases!