Worth ditching Vista for XP ???

Percy1983

Personally I am running vista and will just buy an OEM windows 7 if it gives better results in games.

To me £70-£90 for a product I am going to use everyday is a no brainer.

System

I prefer XP. I recently reinstalled Vista HP on a dual core Centrino with 4GB ram. My Old knackered P4 1GB system with XP runs far faster

Percy1983

Install windows 3.1 and it will run evan faster, I don't see your point, new OS generally use more system resourses so will run slower, as it computer get faster as this happens so the effect is next to nothing.

Once you start adding different programs etc to each they can effect it to.

Will you stay with XP when 7 is about? eventually you will be forced to change.

HappyIdiotTalk

Vista seems to run quicker than XP did on the same PC here. Not surprising though given the technology built into Vista. It has better memory management, so there is none of the massive lag you get in XP if you walk away from it for a while and then come back.

Also Vista monitors programs you open frequently and loads parts of those programs in to spare memory. So when you come to use those programs they open very rapidly because most of the program is already loaded into memory. Combine this with readyboost which uses a USB stick as a cache area, and the PC should leave XP in the shade. It certainly does on my PC so I cant understand why anyone elses would be any different, unless its other PC's are under powered or have been preloaded and bogged down with so called crapware by computer manufacturers. I've installed my copy of Vista from a consumer copy of Ultimate, so its just Vista and no crappy extras. I wouldn't say I love it, but I certainly wouldn't want to go back to using XP.

gaming_guy

xp here as well. had vista on another dual core PC (was preloaded with crap) and managed to mess it up requiring a fresh install. even after the fresh install xp booted and ran faster than vista ever did.

warrenpeace

Stick with Vista. I've had it for 2 years and had hardly any problems with it. It's much more secure, doesn't crash half as myuch as XP (for me anyway), and when a program does crash it doesn't tend to lock up the whole PC like XP used to do. That and it's faster, more efficient with memory, and has a bunch of cool stuff that XP doesn't.

robt_2

HappyIdiotTalk wrote: »

Also Vista monitors programs you open frequently and loads parts of those programs in to spare memory. So when you come to use those programs they open very rapidly because most of the program is already loaded into memory. Combine this with readyboost which uses a USB stick as a cache area, and the PC should leave XP in the shade. It certainly does on my PC so I cant understand why anyone elses would be any different, unless its other PC's are under powered or have been preloaded and bogged down with so called crapware by computer manufacturers. I've installed my copy of Vista from a consumer copy of Ultimate, so its just Vista and no crappy extras. I wouldn't say I love it, but I certainly wouldn't want to go back to using XP.

And of course XP fanboys don't realise that and just claim 'Vista uses more resources even when idling' :rolleyes::D

[Deleted User]

After all, where's the logic in having memory if it's not going to be used.

Percy1983

anewhope wrote: »

After all, where's the logic in having memory if it's not going to be used.

Very true, there is no reason not be be running 4GB ram these days. If anything I would recommend people upgrade now as DDR2 will start going up in price very soon.