XP or VISTA On New MBP To Play Game Only?

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by ibanana, Oct 19, 2008.

?

XP or VISTA for gaming on new MBP?

  1. XP

    24 vote(s)
    53.3%
  2. Vista

    21 vote(s)
    46.7%
  1. ibanana macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Location:
    London
    #1
    I have searched the Forum but can't found the answer that will decide me to install XP or Vista...
    I have ordered a new MBP and will use it to play PC Games such as Far Cry 2, COD4 or GTAIV...

    1/ I would like to know which OS is the best to play game only + Excel from time to time? Also 32 or 64?
    2/ Is Direct X 10 a must have for recent games as FC2, GTAIV (both release v soon)


    Thanks!
     
  2. mongrol macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
  3. Zortrium macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    #3
    1. If you go Vista, I'd go 64-bit; that'll let you use more memory and 64-bit Vista is just as solid as 32-bit. Don't touch XP 64-bit with a 10 foot pole.

    2. I wouldn't worry too much about DX10 - it provides some nice visual touchups but nothing huge. That said, a new MBP is perfectly capable of showing off some of those nice effects, so my vote goes for Vista 64. Probably easier to get ahold of, too.
     
  4. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #4
    XP is faster for games, sometimes by 10 to 20 FPS faster.

    DX10... Eh... My PC's GPU supports it. The visual improvements it offers aren't big enough to push me on to Vista. So my answer to your question would be no.

    I recall Carmack talking about DX10 and saying that they won't support it for now, because the majority of users are still on DX9 and that there's really no new feature they're dying to adopt.

    Valve also is skipping on it, since most of their users are DX9.

    COD4 is DX9 BTW. ;)

    Here's a list of DX10 games;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_10_support

    I'm sticking with XP64 for a few more years. It's a fairly stable MS OS, which is a rarity. :] I'll eventually move to Vista, but probably when a friend hands me one of those mult-license installers they bought for their company. :eek:
     
  5. Zortrium macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    #5
    This was true for awhile, but not really any more and as drivers mature, the balance is only going to shift in Vista's favor.
     
  6. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #6
    XP64 works great now days. All STEAM games, all modern games, even old games like Deus Ex run great under it.

    XP64 had problems 5 years ago, when it was ne, but now days it's a great MS OS. 5 years is a long time. ;) The biggest issue with XP64 early on was driver support, but that's long gone.

    Any app works under Vista(64), works flawlessly under XP64, but faster
     
  7. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #7
    Eventually, when DX9 is no longer dominant and DX10 has taken its place.
     
  8. Infrared macrumors 68000

    Infrared

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    #8
    That's so completely untrue,
    it's hard to know where to begin...
     
  9. ibanana thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Location:
    London
    #9
    Thanks for the replies guys, I think I will install XP then and see whether the graphics rocks on the new MBP !
     
  10. sangosimo Guest

    sangosimo

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #10
    if it you are going 32bit use xp and for 64bit use vista. pretty simple imo. xp64 is a waste of time; why would you get a 64bit os that doesn't actively cache ram.
     
  11. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #11
    I put XP64 on my newer PC and have had no problems running any game that's Vista happy. I'd be interested i'm knowing why your experience differs?
     
  12. Stridder44 macrumors 68040

    Stridder44

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #12
    x2. Vista 64 is awesome (especially with 4GB of RAM). XP 64 is a joke. XP is a joke period. There is a weird development on this Mac forum where Mac users (who typically bash "Micro$oft") get a hard-on for XP. Why? They claim it takes up less resources and space. Well, so does Windows 3.1 but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to run it. And space? Yeah, because 250 GB won't be enough. :rolleyes:

    Honestly, XP was the best choice like 1 year ago. But a lot has changed. Vista SP1 has made things significantly better (and that was released in Feb.). The Vista-bashing that takes place here is no different than Windows bashing that Mac users do. It's no surprise us Mac users get a bad rep. But again, go for Vista 64. You'll be pleasantly surprised (in a good way). :)
     
  13. Aniki macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    #13
    Vista 64 is best, completely takes use of all of your RAM, DirectX10, and lately a lot of games have been requiring vista, and with windows 7 coming out later next year, you'll be 3 operating systems behind. Go with vista for now.
     
  14. el.gringo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    #14
    Here is a thread with some more info on the issue that I started yesterday. I had the same exact question: bought a new MBP, want to get the best graphics performance. I think, given what I have seen, that I will go with XP 32-bit for now and see how it goes. The framerate gain is simply more compelling than DX10 at this point. Once (if) Vista evens out with XP in terms of framerate, then you can always upgrade if you want.

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=584452
     
  15. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #15
    WOW! Nice generalized assumption. Good job. I take it you didn't read any previous posts? That would have been a bit too much to ask I suppose, but it's good to know that people will just step in on a conversation without knowing the roots and then add their own conjecture.

    It's obvious your passive aggressive insults are towards me. So let me clear something up. NEVER did I recommend to use XP64 over Vista, or over XP. The only reason I made a further comment about XP64, besides the fact it's what I use on my newer PC, is that "Zortrium's" remark about not touching XP64 with a 10-foot pull is equally as ignorant as your comment referring to it as a joke.

    XP64 is a joke... Really, and you speak from experience? I use this joke for Maxwell Render and Maya, and of course entertainment. It's not a joke for me. Unlike XP -- even on good hardware, XP64 has an excellent uptime. WOW, that certainly makes it a joke.

    From what you and some others have written, it's apparent that some of you guys have a hard-on for Vista. It's also apparent that if a thread contains XP64 and Vista 64, people like you will automatically post just to take a dump on XP64 and with comments that are quite "superficial" at best. Honestly, before this thread, I didn't even know you guys were out there waging this "Vista crusade,"

    You call "me" a MS basher, a guy that has been using PCs since the eighties. A decade longer than Macs. Any irritation I have with MS has nothing to do with Vista, but right now it has to do with some of its users, which are hypocritical MS bashers.
     
  16. nope7308 macrumors 65816

    nope7308

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #16
    Woah... it's an operating system, not your offspring, so calm down! Everyone is entitled to their opinion (even if it's a bad one), so I suggest you just sit back and enjoy your XP x64 :)
     
  17. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #17
    Why don't you just perpetuate things further...

    Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinions. It would be great to hear more of your opinions, as you enlighten us with more of the obvious.
     
  18. nope7308 macrumors 65816

    nope7308

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #18
    My Opinion: You clearly weren't loved as a child.
     
  19. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #19
    Wow, let's just go below the belt. Nice one! My opinion is that you're intentionally being a JERK. ;)

    I'm drinking my daily 3 shots of expresso right now. So I'll be back to my usual perky self, so people like you can go on with their day. It's all GOOD! :)
     
  20. solaris7 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    #20
    Ummm...could you tell me where you plan to purchase either operating system and for how much?
     
  21. nope7308 macrumors 65816

    nope7308

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    #21
    Not quite sure what that means, but sure! I don't know how you can drink 3 shots of those a day - I have one and I'm bouncing off the walls.

    P.S. I was trying to be a JERK ;)
     
  22. JackAxe macrumors 68000

    JackAxe

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    In a cup of orange juice.
    #22
    I know. We all have our moments. :)

    I make my expresso with dark roast Kenya, so there's not as much caffeine as a a light roast. It helps to control my blood sugar, by spiking it. :eek:


    solaris7,
    Here's an average price of the different OS;
    http://www2.pricewatch.com/software_oper_system/

    Here are some direct links;
    http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?coordinate_group=PI2B&product_type=

    http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.phtml?coordinate_group=PB9N&product_type=

    http://shop1.frys.com/search?cat=-43674&pType=pDisplay
     
  23. Stridder44 macrumors 68040

    Stridder44

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #23
    Jesus dude, you need a hug? Calm down. And no my post wasn't direct towards you (unless you happen to fit the description I gave, which I'm assuming it did since you got so defensive).

    So what kind of machine are you running XP on? Have you tried Vista recently on it for more than 5 minutes? What version? 32/64-bit?

    The OP has a brand new MacBook Pro. Believe it or not, new software takes advantage of new hardware. You're a Mac fan so I'm assuming you already knew this (Apple loves dropping support of old hardware; PPC ring a bell?). It's called progress. Vista is a different beast than XP. XP was a different beast than 2000. XP got the same treatment as Vista is getting now. I find it funny how people seem to forget that. Vista was made to take advantage of new hardware. Snow Leopard is doing the same thing. New software that is meant to take advantage of new hardware. You can't have OS install footprints of less than 10 GB forever. You can't be upset at Microsoft because they aren't making an OS that revolves around some P4 with 256 GB of RAM.
     
  24. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #24
    Based on what I've read- XP over Vista for performance.
     
  25. jbrenn macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    #25
    vista 32 and 64 bit are not worth the dvd they are written on. even with sp1 vista is a resource hog. i would not run it on a stock mbp it is not fast enough or have enough ram to run vista for gaming purposes
     

Share This Page