LucoTF :
I haven't had windows 8 for very long, but every game I've tried on it has worked no problem (including Farcry 3, Crysis 1&2, metro 2033, portal 2...)
These are Far Cry 3 benchmarks running at 1920x1200 at Ultra Quality with 4x MSAA on Windows 7. The CPU is an i7-3970X. The drivers are Nvidia Forceware 310.70 and AMD Catalyst 12.11 (Beta 11 CAP 2).
These are Far Cry 3 benchmarks running at 1920x1080 at Ultra Quality with 4x MSAA on Windows 8. The CPU is an i7-3970X. Catalyst 12.11 beta 11, Nvidia 310.70 beta, thus the exact same drivers as used in the Windows 7 benchmark. There are notably fewer pixels rendered here at 1080p than there are at 1200p, thus it
should be easier on the GPU so there
should be better frames...except that isn't the case due to Windows 8.
If you look at benchmarks for the same GPU between both charts, you can see that in fact the Windows 7 chart has the greater advantage. Other factors such as differing RAM kits or motherboards might have had a role, but nothing as great as as 8 fps (Radeon HD 7950 Boost). Also take into account that the Windows 7 benchmark was playing at a
higher resolution, and we can predict that if they were playing at the same resolution there'd be at least another 1-2 fps added to the gap. While obviously these frame rates are well over playable on the Windows 8 version, this is just one example of the divide created between Windows 7 and 8 for gaming. Even if they're compatible, there are and will continue to be games which perform drastically differently from one another as can be seen in the Far Cry 3 benchmarks. Another thing to take into account is that Far Cry 3 was built with both Windows 7 and Windows 8 in mind, so there was some level of cross compatibility thought of during game development. But I'm willing to bet that for certain slightly older games which were only designed with Windows 7 in mind, there's probably a much larger gap in performance.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram