Windows Vista x64?

[Stridder44]

So I my friend just had me build his computer, and it's very much top of the line. Higher-end Intel C2D, 4 GB paired ram, raptor 120GB HD, Nvidia 8800 GTS. You get the point.

Anyway, I was gonna put regular old Windows XP x86 (32 bit version) but I was starting to consider a 64 bit OS. XP x64 I've read isn't worth the bother over XP x86, but Vista x64 is a much bigger jump.

I know the difference in speed and whatnot won't be massive, and the drivers can be limited, but I mean all the drivers I looked up for his system were there. I was just wondering if anyone here has been using Vista x64, and could share their experience. I know this is a Mac thread, so the comments might be biased, but he doesn't have/nor want a Mac. And Linux is a big HAHAHAHAHA.

Anyway, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

 

[Alloye]

I was just wondering if anyone here has been using Vista x64, and could share their experience.

I'm a .Net developer by day, so I have Vista x64 installed on my 24" Al iMac to support telecommuting. If your friend can find all the drivers he needs, and those drivers are stable, then I think he'll be fine.

On the other hand, if his primary use for the PC is gaming, then I'd stick with XP x86 for now and give Microsoft more time to correct some of Vista's compatibility and performance problems.

I know this is a Mac thread, so the comments might be biased, but he doesn't have/nor want a Mac.

That's too bad. After a few hours of running Vista, booting into OS X feels like sex.

 

[Eidorian]

The 32-bit version appears to be the gamers choice for now.

 

[martychang]

And Linux is a big HAHAHAHAHA.

This, in a thread called "Windows Vista x64"...

Seriously: Linux, BSD, Mac, or get out.

Ok ok, Windows = PC games, but none of those are good anymore, haven't been for a few years. XP x86 will handle every good PC game ever made, and unless I'm mistaken there aren't even any Vista exclusives announced yet(though there are some DX10 enabled games, which obviously require Vista for the PHULL POWAR GRAFFIXXXXX).

Fun Fact: Vista's new ntoskernel.exe hides a gig of RAM in it's tummy every time you boot, to be cute.

Stick with XP x86 if he intends to game, 32-bit is going to be the standard for a while yet.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

This, in a thread called "Windows Vista x64"...

Seriously: Linux, BSD, Mac, or get out.

Ok ok, Windows = PC games, but none of those are good anymore, haven't been for a few years. XP x86 will handle every good PC game ever made, and unless I'm mistaken there aren't even any Vista exclusives announced yet(though there are some DX10 enabled games, which obviously require Vista for the PHULL POWAR GRAFFIXXXXX).

Fun Fact: Vista's new ntoskernel.exe hides a gig of RAM in it's tummy every time you boot, to be cute.

Stick with XP x86 if he intends to game, 32-bit is going to be the standard for a while yet.

You are mistaken there are several Vista exclusive games out there. Just go to your local best buy and look around you will find several that have under there requirements having Windows Vista being the only OS listed.

 

[martychang]

You are mistaken there are several Vista exclusive games out there. Just go to your local best buy and look around you will find several that have under there requirements having Windows Vista being the only OS listed.

Name some? I admit I had forgotten about Halo 2 being Vista exclusive, but honestly it's tough to take the Halo for PC/Mac series seriously when they're postponed for 2+ years after their Xbox debut, with mere scraps of content added in. I believe Microsoft Flight Simulator X was also Vista exclusive?(I have no idea). Company of Heroes 2 will be Vista exclusive... when it's released. That's it right?

I really haven't heard of any currently released games that are noteworthy and are Vista exclusive. Last I heard most(not all) currently announced important upcoming titles were still going to support DX9/XP as well. Bioshock was released quite recently, and is still on XP(and so is it's accompanying rootkit!).

That said, I really haven't been in a game store for a while, and looked at any physical game boxes.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Name some? I admit I had forgotten about Halo 2 being Vista exclusive, but honestly it's tough to take the Halo for PC/Mac series seriously when they're postponed for 2+ years after their Xbox debut, with mere scraps of content added in. I believe Microsoft Flight Simulator X was also Vista exclusive?(I have no idea). Company of Heroes 2 will be Vista exclusive... when it's released. That's it right?

I really haven't heard of any currently released games that are noteworthy and are Vista exclusive. Last I heard most(not all) currently announced important upcoming titles were still going to support DX9/XP as well. Bioshock was released quite recently, and is still on XP(and so is it's accompanying rootkit!).

That said, I really haven't been in a game store for a while, and looked at any physical game boxes.

sorry I do not remember any off the top of my head but I have seen several enough to tell you that games are starting to come out Vista only but I just do not have the time or the money to really play computer games any more so I do not really pay much attentions. Heck most of the game I play are 5+ years old now so it been a while since I got a new game.

 

[skinnylegs]

Actually....it's Halo 3.

 

[SkyBell]

I believe Microsoft Flight Simulator X was also Vista exclusive?(I have no idea). .

Nah, my dad plays it on his laptop with XP (which he bought 3 days befrore Vista came out; on purpose) Although I'd love to have it. When i had a PC, I played Flight Simulator 2004 nonstop.

And I know Halo 2 is Vista exclusive. I wonder if they'll port it. And if it'll be Leopard exclusive. (That would suck for me. )

 

[n-abounds]

Fun Fact: Vista's new ntoskernel.exe hides a gig of RAM in it's tummy every time you boot, to be cute.

Okie, I'll bite. What about RAM now?

 

[yg17]

Okie, I'll bite. What about RAM now?

Lets put it this way...


This is your RAM:


This is your RAM on Vista:

 

[Stridder44]

I'm a .Net developer by day, so I have Vista x64 installed on my 24" Al iMac to support telecommuting. If your friend can find all the drivers he needs, and those drivers are stable, then I think he'll be fine.

On the other hand, if his primary use for the PC is gaming, then I'd stick with XP x86 for now and give Microsoft more time to correct some of Vista's compatibility and performance problems.



That's too bad. After a few hours of running Vista, booting into OS X feels like sex.

I see. Thank you for your honesty. The games he plays are limited, but from what I've read they all work with Vista x64 just fine. I know though, I suggested OS X many times but he wanted to stick with building his own computer. No worries, it's his money.

And yg17, I know I've read comments like yours before. And they've been debunked. Vista uses a lot of RAM from what I understand, but isn't it because it's actually utilizing it? I mean non-used RAM is wasted RAM right? Damn it I know I've seen it explained before somewhere and it made sense. Can someone with an actual understand explain? I mean like actual research, not "wInDoW$ is teh suxzorz". From what I understood Vista has a MUCH better memory management system over XP.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

if I understand Vista memory useage correctly the OS will use what ever memory it has advaible to it. That means if software does not have it tied up for something the OS will use it until something else needs it. storing what normally would go in VM/Pagefiles just store more of it on the ram itself. Like you said unused ram is wasted ram. If you have it to spare might as well us it.
On an XP computer the OS does stuff like that as well. If you look at a computer that has 1 gig of ram in it compared to one that has 512 in it you will noticed the 1 gig computer will be using around 700megs of ram compared to maybe 300-400 on the 512 computer both running the exact same things. If it has room to spare it will use it.

 

[Stridder44]

if I understand Vista memory useage correctly the OS will use what ever memory it has advaible to it. That means if software does not have it tied up for something the OS will use it until something else needs it. storing what normally would go in VM/Pagefiles just store more of it on the ram itself. Like you said unused ram is wasted ram. If you have it to spare might as well us it.
On an XP computer the OS does stuff like that as well. If you look at a computer that has 1 gig of ram in it compared to one that has 512 in it you will noticed the 1 gig computer will be using around 700megs of ram compared to maybe 300-400 on the 512 computer both running the exact same things. If it has room to spare it will use it.

Yes! Thats what it was. I think it'll be a nice upgrade over XP.