What OS? - New Mid-range system

I have not lined up all the specs yet, as I will propbably purchase the parts in ~1month and I anticipate things to change some. However, I would imagine the specs would be similar to those outlined in TH's Mid-ranges systems.

My question is... What operating systemt shoudl I use. I always assumed I would just stay with Windows XP as its what I'm used to and I've hear of entirely too many problems with VISTA but if there a reason I should go with VISTA I want to do that. Otherwise, I'll probably hang with XP until Windows 7 comes out.

Let me know... What's the consensus among all you exper computer builders. What OS are you using. I mostly do Office type work and of COURSE, as much gaming as possible. (WOW, Waiting for SC2 and D3 as well)

Thanks
8 answers Last reply
More about what range system
  1. I believe the consensus as of now is to go with Vista. It has become vastly more stable with the service pack and the 64-bit version allows you to take advantage of all of the RAM that most of today's home builds contain. The 32-bit only supports 3gb.

    IMO, go with vista...you can get a 64-bit OEM version from newegg for $99.99.
  2. Is there a lot of improvement with the 64bit over the 32bit versions? Last time I built a computer I actually got one of the first 64bit processors but no one supported it. :-(

    It looks like pretty much all newer processors support 64bit now?
  3. er...slightly confused...the 64-bit refers to the operating system. I didn't know that it was processor dependent, but my knowledge on the subject is limited.

    To answer your question, yes, all of today's processors support the 64-bit OS and it is only $10 more than the 32-bit as far as I know.
  4. Stick with XP . Its faster and you already have it .

    If you must have 4 gig of RAM then you need a 64 bit OS .... but even then it will still be slower than XP with 2 gig .... so IMHO 4 gig of RAM is just for bragging rights even in Vista 64 .
    http://www.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/128551,does-faster-ram-really-make-a-difference.aspx


    The only downside of XP is lack of support for DirectX 10 which usually means no option to run games on "ultra high" settings .
    Not something i care about since it makes a tiny difference and drops frame rates drastically
  5. Oh man, now I've got one vote for each one. That site you sent me to also had an XP vs Vista and Vista won their to, albeit by a very slim margin.
  6. I see something else now. I went back and looked at the OS they'e using on TH for their sytem tests and it looke like they're using Vista 32mb. Any ideas why? Maybe I should start looking more at Vista. If I do that how do I know wether or not the 32mb or the 62mb will perform better with my system?
  7. If you're going to spend the money on Vista, get the 64-bit version for sure. There's no reason to go with a 32-bit OS on a new build. 64-bit Vista works great with both 32-bit software and 64-bit software. It's also already been mentioned, but a 32-bit OS can't even fully use 4GB of RAM and completely cuts off the possibility of adding more than 4GB in the future. I run 64-bit Vista and have been very happy with it. There's certainly nothing slow about it, and I haven't run into any compatibility or stability issues at all.
  8. Good to hear thanks for the replies. I'm definently leaning towards the Vista 64 at this point. Thanks yo utax return. :-)
Ask a new question

Read More

Homebuilt Windows Vista Windows XP Systems