Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

32bit vs 64bit vs xp performance

Tags:
  • Performance
  • Games
  • Windows XP
  • Windows 7
Last response: in Windows 7
Share
November 4, 2009 9:25:17 AM

does anyone have any numbers on the performance of win7 32 bit and 64bit in comparison to win xp 32bit in regard to frames per second in games (which are 99% 32bit)?

32bit XP always beat 64bit xp by quite a bit on 32bit games (due to WoW layer or whatever its called). i assume this will be the same for windows7?

and how does the performance of 32bit win7 compare to 32bit winxp?

no assumptions please, i need numbers :D 

More about : 32bit 64bit performance

November 4, 2009 9:49:53 AM

On stock. Meaning unmodified WinXP VS unmodified Win7 the Windows XP is faster on boot times, and could also be faster if you have less than 2GB RAM. But on general gaming, like benchmarks, Win7 is faster.

If you have 4GB of RAM and can use vLite to lessen the system resources, Win7 is a lot faster and better overall.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 4, 2009 9:00:34 PM

thanks for the link, but it does look a bit suspicious. that the fps only differ by so little despite different drivers and all seems a bit strange. plus i compared vista64 myself to xp, i think it was crysis, and it did have lower fps.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
November 4, 2009 11:38:36 PM

Suspicious?

Why? The numbers are close because the performance is dictated by the HARDWARE. The drivers are there just to make the hardware talk to each other but in the end the EXACT same program or game is sitting in you RAM and then being processed by your CPU and Graphics cards.

Differences in performance are slight and mainly due to other functions consuming the hardware's resources as well.
m
0
l
November 5, 2009 9:43:52 AM

i used to do a lot of benchmarking, timenetdemos and stuff, and already different driver versions can have a rather big impact on fps. so i find it rather surprising that despite having different drivers for each OS the fps are so similar. i guess i will have to install and see for myself :) 
m
0
l
November 5, 2009 2:45:15 PM

I think installing yourself and testing would be the best way to figure this out. There have been numerous other reviews of XP vs Win7 and they all come to same conclusion as above, there isn't much difference but the extra benefits of Win7 make it worth the upgrade. Remember that XP is stuck with DX9 and while yes most games play the fastest in DX9, newer games also support DX10 and there are DX11 games in the pipe which will perform faster using that route than their DX9 path (so its Win XP counterpart will indeed see slower frames).

But really if you are concerned about frames, look more to your hardware than the OS, maybe you need an upgrade. The OS isn't supposed to buy you a high percentage improvement, that is not its purpose.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b $ Windows 7
November 5, 2009 3:07:14 PM

santox said:
i used to do a lot of benchmarking, timenetdemos and stuff, and already different driver versions can have a rather big impact on fps. so i find it rather surprising that despite having different drivers for each OS the fps are so similar. i guess i will have to install and see for myself :) 



Early drops/differences in performance between Vista and XP were mostly due to driver issues - your understanding is correct. Perhaps something you haven't taken into account, though, is that the driver model between Vista and Windows 7 has not changed significantly, and GPU makers have had 3 years to figure out how to write efficiently/effectively. (More or less, anyhow) In the release candidate, 7 had the addition of DX11 while Vista was still 10/10.1. So there may have been some reliably detectable differences in prior versions, depending on hardware/software configs, etc. But as of a week or two ago, Vista has also been updated to DX11 (if you haven't, it's available through Windows Update).

Since the Driver model hasn't changed, and the DX version is now the same, there's not a whole lot of potential for a reliably measurable change. I would opine that it's therefore logical the results are what we're seeing: i.e. not a whole lot of difference.

Given that, and the fact that Win 7 is (1) a little more efficient at multithreading (as a hedge against software writers taking better advantage, as well as giving a noticable improvement in multi GPU setups), and (2) Win 7 is MSFT's "Official Way Forward" then:

(1) For a new Build, just go to 7 and be done with it
(2) For an older build - You may or may not wish to upgrade, depending on your whims and preferences there isnt' a whole lot in it from a pure performance POV. Except in the situation where you have a multi~GPU setup on XP, in which case, you'd gain some performance by making the move.
Share
November 16, 2009 9:31:10 AM

gl toms sends email notification or i would have missed the last bit as i (thought i) was done with the thread ;) 

thanks for the info, i think i will try win7 x64 (as the numbers seem to state that running 32bit apps on 64bit systems doesnt cause a 15% loss in performance anymore as it used to due to use of the WoW layer).

my system isnt new but not bad either, e8400@3.8ghz, 4gig ram, gtx295 and asus xonar dx soundcard (best soundcard ever for sub 100€ btw). so lets hope dx11 does offer some advantages unlike dx10 :) 
m
0
l
!