Barnsalot Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 I'm thinking about buying a new PC, but I don't know whether I should get one with Vista or XP pre-installed. A few of my friends have Vista and they all say they hate it because it's a memory hog, it's buggy, etc. Is Vista really so bad that I should spend my money on a PC with XP instead? Or has Vista just not come of age yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwaltzvald Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 You're better off building your PC rather than buying a pre-made PC. As for OS... If you have a lot of programs that run on XP and that are essential, you may want to go for XP Professional. As for Vista, go for it if you are feeling experimental as well as if you want access to DirectX 10 right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBogus Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 As your run of the mill average PC user, I find Vista to be neither revolutionary nor as bad as some people make it out to be. Yes, Aero is a memory hog, but if you're buying a new computer, anything less than a dual-core processor and 2 gb of ram is not reasonable in the first place. 2 gb will handle Aero with ease. And if you need more, memory is ridiculously cheap these days. I bought my PC from Dell a month ago for a very reasonable price. I didn't want to deal with the hassle and headaches of building a PC from scratch. There was a bunch of junk software pre-installed, so I reformatted and reinstalled Vista the day after I opened the box. Now it's clean as a whistle and runs as smooth as silk. There are compatibility issues with older programs, particularly 3D games, I'm guessing in connection with DirectX. I tested the trial version of Far Cry 1 and the game's graphics were messed up to the point of unplayability. Starcraft, emulators, and I'm guessing 2D programs in general work just fine. No noticeable bugs so far aside from 2 freeze ups which I couldn't tell was due to Vista or a program lockup. So yeah, for someone like me who only uses the PC for web browsing, music, Excel / office programs, and 2D games, Vista feels like a fresh change. People who love their older programs should be wary. But think of it this way -- are you going to be using XP forever? You will have to upgrade at some point, and Vista is not so horrible that you risk being the early adopter guinea pig. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katsurugi Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Vista definitely works. If you're a very casual user, it's everything XP is but prettier. I have heard of some quirks with the latest version of Office, but I really can't verify if that's due to human error or buggy programming. I know some people that use it, but you shouldn't get the bare bones version of Vista. A friend of mine suggested that I should only settle for the ultimate version. I don't exactly know why they have so many different versions out in the first place. It's the one that fully makes use of the Aero skin or something along those lines. I didn't really figure out the details since I had already built my new computer. I think that your initial thoughts are correct. Vista takes a lot of RAM. That's about it. If you have enough RAM in the specs, then you should be fine. It runs a lot of background programs in real time, which causes a smooth transition when switching from one program to another, at the cost of RAM. If you're looking to get away with a cheaper set up, then go for XP. I was on the fence about this too. But I ended up getting 2 gigs of RAM but with XP in case I ever wanted to upgrade in the future. This was only because XP was well... cheaper than Vista. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Vista has mostly worked itself out now. Most stuff that worked on XP will work fine, and the ones that don't usually will just by disabling Aero. I have been using Vista with 1 gig of DDR2 400 for about 5 months now and never noticed a hiccup, but it uses nearly all of it. If you are a power user, you will want at least 2 gigs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion5182 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Agree on the two gig factor But op for 64 bit if you can. And make sure you UPDATE EVERYTHING. If you are going for a vista machine you might as well go all the way and go for SLI or crossfire setups as well. Make sure if you do ya get 1000 watts of power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Make sure if you do ya get 1000 watts of power. Please tell me your kidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shikigami Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 yes vista is a disaster. im beginning to wonder what the breaking point will be for game developers to start writing for linux and other OSes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 yes vista is a disaster.im beginning to wonder what the breaking point will be for game developers to start writing for linux and other OSes. its not a disaster, but it's certainly not the best thing since sliced bread either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion5182 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Please tell me your kidding. For running an SLI or Crossfire config no i am not graphics cards take up a serious amount of power. A 1000 watt power supply gives you a nice cushion for expansion allows access to some overclocking features in certain configurations and overall is a smart choice if running a dual videocard configuration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shikigami Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 For running an SLI or Crossfire config no i am not graphics cards take up a serious amount of power. A 1000 watt power supply gives you a nice cushion for expansion allows access to some overclocking features in certain configurations and overall is a smart choice if running a dual videocard configuration. the type of videocard you have is more of an influence on that than wattage. 500w is pushing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion5182 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 the type of videocard you have is more of an influence on that than wattage.500w is pushing it. 500 per card? yeah that is. But its not just the card you are powering with that thing. Its the ram its the processor its the fans its anything else you might have in there. 500 watts on an SLI or Crossfire configuration? I DARE you to try that and see what the end result is. Trust me you wont like it an 800 watt supply is the absolute min if you run two cards if you want to run the rest of your system without overclocking. 1000 Watts brings you a cushion that you will need later. Go to the geek squad if you dont believe me. Trust me you will want that extra power in a twin video card configuration. Check out the latest gaming PC's they arent offering less than 1000 watts of power for a reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shikigami Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 dude i run my sli on a 450w power supply. i cant overclock my cards more than about 75core/110mem without artifacts, so power isnt really an issue. if i were able to overclock more, im sure my supply would do fine. and no, i meant a 500w power source is pushing it. and geek squad is affiliated with best buy, therefore im going to believe the geek squad tells you this to buy more shit you dont need from best buy. now that i think about it i dont think overclocking makes you use more power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 500 per card? yeah that is. an 8800 Ultra only uses 175 watts at max power But its not just the card you are powering with that thing. Its the ram its the processor its the fans its anything else you might have in there with a core 2 quad and 4 gigs of ram you are looking at like 175 watts maximum fans use so little they don't even matter 500 watts on an SLI or Crossfire configuration? I DARE you to try that and see what the end result is. Trust me you wont like it an 800 watt supply is the absolute min if you run two cards if you want to run the rest of your system without overclocking. I build gaming pcs for people, and I have done this several times guess what if you use a quality power supply, it works quite well 1000 Watts brings you a cushion that you will need later. SPOILERS: only people who run 8800 ultras in quad crossfire with 17 hard drives , a server mobo and dual core 2 quads even come close to needing 1000 watts Go to the geek squad if you dont believe me. hahahahaha Trust me you will want that extra power in a twin video card configuration. Check out the latest gaming PC's they aren't offering less than 1000 watts of power for a reason. they are offering 1000 watt power supplies because people like you who don't know any better think OMG HUGER NUMBERS IS BETTER and pay out the ass for them Go and read up on how amperage plays into power supplies and how they are used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrion Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 It has, in certain circles. Vista x64 with 4+ gigs of memory is win. Vista x86 with 1-2 gigs of memory is lose. Yes, Vista is a "ram hog," you can mitigate that to an extent by turning off SuperFetch but the interface plus all of the services it has to run will take up about 700MB-1.2GB of memory on boot. That's on x64, so it's probably less on x86. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrion Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 You had problems with Far Cry? Maybe it was just the demo? Cuz I ran Far Fry x64 on my rig and it ran awesome. Very High everything and 130+ fps outdoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrion Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 Wattage means jack squat. You ideally want to look at how many amps the +12V rails do. Higher is better, but you want at least 18A per rail (some power supplies have multiple +12V rails). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitty Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 I bought an HP laptop with 2gb ram and an AMD Turion x2 1.8 ghz processor with Vista and it ran fine with some tweaking. I turned off the side bar and the transparency in the window bars along with some services and it ran fine. I eventually wiped the drive and went to XP, but as I started up XP I realized that I kinda missed Vista even though I didn't want to admit it. The things I liked about Vista much more than XP are the better power options, the networking (to me) seemed better and much more user friendly, and I missed the pretty cards in Solitaire and FreeCell. Personally, I think I'm going to go back to Vista in the next few months when HP gets their webcam drivers working properly on it because I had no problems other than that with Vista. tl;dr I find both OS's have their strengths and weaknesses and it's up to you which strengths you value over others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwaltzvald Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Go to the geek squad if you dont believe me The funniest thing I've ever read. Just like the time some one told me I "absolutely" needed an Ageia's PhysX card to play games like FEAR, Quake Wars, and any other game that's will come out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbob42 Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I've run into very few problems with Vista, and none that I couldn't resolve with a few minutes of research. I enjoy it, it's got plenty of eye-candy and doesn't try to be too new like so many people want it to be. C'mon people, if they changed too much it'd be broken to the point of no return. This is Microsoft we're talking about. Let them stick to what (mostly) works and not try to stray too far from the path they set. Let Nintendo work on the revolutionary part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I've run into very few problems with Vista, and none that I couldn't resolve with a few minutes of research. I enjoy it, it's got plenty of eye-candy and doesn't try to be too new like so many people want it to be. C'mon people, if they changed too much it'd be broken to the point of no return. This is Microsoft we're talking about. Let them stick to what (mostly) works and not try to stray too far from the path they set.Let Nintendo work on the revolutionary part. Thats the problem. People bitch for change and then bitch when they get it. I can't entirely blame Microsoft for taking the safe route. They could have left out the asinine security measures though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbob42 Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I disable Windows Defender/Firewall but left on the confirmation alerts whenever something starts up. It might just be a placebo effect or it might be legit, but I feel a sense of security when everything I open has to be manually confirmed. I know that might come off as seeming a bit sarcastic, but it's not. You can disable the feature quite easily if you like as well. I haven't run into one bit of adware or spyware so far, aside from what came with Daemon Tools, and that's a simple matter of uninstalling it. (Plus you have to confirm it's installation, I still hate the Daemon team for selling out to something so lame, but eh, at least it can be legitely uninstalled.) I'm actually quite satisfied, XP was becoming a playground for spyware and adware- at least on the machines in my house. It drove me mad. (I don't run any firewalls because in my opinion they're as bad as a virus in many ways. I'd swear Symantec releases their own spyware just to say they stopped it! Heh. So I guess it's partially my fault.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effef Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I disable Windows Defender/Firewall but left on the confirmation alerts whenever something starts up. It might just be a placebo effect or it might be legit, but I feel a sense of security when everything I open has to be manually confirmed. I know that might come off as seeming a bit sarcastic, but it's not. You can disable the feature quite easily if you like as well. Ive already disabled it, one of the first tings I did when I got this laptop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chillironchef Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 Heres what you do.. Buy a Mac lol. no that would be bad right?? well i have to pcs and whats funny is the more expensive one didnt last as long as the p.o.s celeron that still works. the sad thing is though, is that it has vista sighs i dont know:sleepdepriv: vista your not my friend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_muteKi Posted November 28, 2007 Share Posted November 28, 2007 I've got a ThinkPad Z61 with Vista, and honestly I don't think that any other OS would work as well. I even have Ubuntu to dual boot, but the drivers for the graphics card are incomplete with it so some things don't work right, like OpenOffice.org and MATLAB, so I don't think I'd use it for too much other than a safety net in the event that somehow I get infected with a serious virus. And if I can't use the few pieces of software with a Linux distro that I actually NEED, I'm sticking with Vista. The only problem that I have an issue with is Sonic R, and even that might just be due to the fact that the integrated graphics is just iffy overall for that sort of thing, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.