Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Vista vs. Windows 7

Tags:
  • Windows Vista
  • Windows 7
Last response: in Windows 7
Share
September 16, 2009 9:10:24 AM

So, I am building a new rig sometime in December, Christmas present to myself and my first build. And I have my hardware mostly picked out and some of it will probably change as things become available. What I need to know is if I should buy Vista Ultimate x64 and maybe later upgrade to Windows 7 Ultimate x64 once more drivers, compatability, and so on are issued. That is my main concern is compatability with my games and hardware, as well as if Win7 would be faster out of the gate than Vista would be after its been out for a few years. Just so you can look over it all, I wil post what my current rig is (I am still searching for an audio card)

Processor: Intel i7 920
Motherboard: ASUS P6T Deluxe V2
Ram: G.SKILL Trident 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 4890 1GB (Getting two)
Hard Drive1: Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB 10,000 RPM
Hard Drive2: Samsung 1TB 7600 RPM
Power Supply: CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX 850W
Headphones: Roccat Kave Solid 5.1 Surround Sound Gaming Headset

More about : vista windows

a b $ Windows 7
September 16, 2009 9:27:23 AM

none of your newegg links work. Even If they did, it would be much easier to have product names.

What games are you planning on running? I haven't had any problems with any steam games when I ran b2 but didn't install anything else. Hardware compatibility is very unlikely to cause you problems.
m
0
l
September 16, 2009 9:38:22 AM

The main game I play is Counter Strike: Source, Then probably Crysis (I like the game and it pushes my computer) I play the Half-Life games from time-to-time, and games such as Sims 3, World of Warcraft, Aion, And games such as that. Editing my links a bit now.

Edit: Fix'd.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 16, 2009 11:13:43 AM

There is no reason to buy either Vista or Win 7 Ultimate editions. They are way overpriced for very little additional value. You mostly get extra features that you as a home user will never be interested in.

If you have a legal Windows XP, you qualify for the Windows 7 Upgrade editions. Buy yourself Win7 Home Premium Upgrade and forget about Vista.
m
0
l
September 16, 2009 11:31:52 AM

Fair enough, Thank you mi1ez and Herr_Koos. Currently I am running 64-bit Vista Home Premium, But this computer is getting handed down when I get my new one which is why I was asking about the OS. I will go ahead and just skip to a 64-bit Windows 7 Home Premium.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 16, 2009 1:47:21 PM

dantrona said:
The main game I play is Counter Strike: Source, Then probably Crysis (I like the game and it pushes my computer) I play the Half-Life games from time-to-time, and games such as Sims 3, World of Warcraft, Aion, And games such as that. Editing my links a bit now.


According to some reviews there's not much difference between Windows 7 and Vista in gaming performance, with an exception here and there. Read more here http://www.guru3d.com/article/windows-7-vs-vista-vga-ga...

You would still want go for Windows 7, because is faster over all, it has faster boot time, generally faster file transfer, better User Account Control (less irritating alerts & messages), better power management, better troubleshooting etc. Read more here http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2352179,00.a...




m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 19, 2009 3:29:20 AM

dantrona said:
So, I am building a new rig sometime in December, Christmas present to myself and my first build. And I have my hardware mostly picked out and some of it will probably change as things become available. What I need to know is if I should buy Vista Ultimate x64 and maybe later upgrade to Windows 7 Ultimate x64 once more drivers, compatability, and so on are issued. That is my main concern is compatability with my games and hardware, as well as if Win7 would be faster out of the gate than Vista would be after its been out for a few years. Just so you can look over it all, I wil post what my current rig is (I am still searching for an audio card)


Windows 7, to me, is what Vista should have been. Drivers really aren't expected to be a major issue as with previous OS's as Win7 is essentially Vista "fixed".

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-vista-upgrad...

Be careful of "you don't need Pro / Ultimate" advice if you have more than 5 PC's around. All Windows Home versions limit the number of network connections to 5 or less. We have 6 laptops, 5 desktops and an NAS. Luckily, we have as yet never had that 11th simultaneous connection as Pro tops out at 10. If ya a student, you can grab the Pro Version for $19.

Also, keep in mind that if you are worried about compatibility issues, the Ultimate, Pro and Enterprise versions come with XPM .... essentially "XP Built in" so that you don't need to buya copy of XP to dual boot or even be bothered dual booting.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-xp-v...

"Indeed, Windows 7 comes with "compatibility mode" but XPM isn't the same. XPM is actually built on the same platform as Microsoft's Virtual PC 7 product. This isn't the same as running an XP environment through a hypervisor. It was previously believed that XPM would be a Hyper-V client for Windows 7, but it is not."
m
0
l
a c 209 $ Windows 7
September 19, 2009 6:44:49 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
Also, keep in mind that if you are worried about compatibility issues, the Ultimate, Pro and Enterprise versions come with CPM .... essentially "XP Built in" ... XPM is actually built on the same platform as Microsoft's Virtual PC 7 product.
...was that first "CPM" a typo and should have been "XPM"? If not, can you tell me what it stands for?
m
0
l
September 19, 2009 3:37:22 PM

people actually pay for software?
m
0
l
September 19, 2009 5:21:04 PM

Yeah, because that's the only right way to do it. If you aren't buying your OS software, you should not be using it. Unless you are running Linux or something open source that is legitimately free.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 12:54:44 AM

sminlal said:
...was that first "CPM" a typo and should have been "XPM"? If not, can you tell me what it stands for?


Looking at my keyboard I see that my typing was one key off to the left.


Q-W-E-R-T-Y
A-S-D-F-G-H
Z-X-C-V-B-N

OOPS :)  ....now fixed.

m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 12:56:30 AM

xaira said:
people actually pay for software?


For open source and freeware, no. But when people expect to get paid for their labors, yes, most of us are uncomfortable stealing from others.
m
0
l
September 20, 2009 1:58:19 AM

steal is such a hefty word, i prefer to call it testing before purchase, and since it will be an investment, substantial testing is required, and usually, by the time testing is completed, the next big thing is being released, so its the creators own fault, im not gonna spend money on something i havent tested.
m
0
l
a c 209 $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 5:09:26 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
Looking at my keyboard I see that my typing was one key off to the left.
No prob - I just thought there might have been something there that was new to me... :) 
m
0
l
a c 209 $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 5:11:30 AM

xaira said:
steal is such a hefty word, i prefer to call it testing before purchase.
You can rationalize it as much as you want, but if you know you're never going to pay for it and yet you continue to use it, then it's stealing.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 6:40:06 AM

That's what Release Candidates and Betas are for... a legal way to "test" the software without purchasing it. You can also download Windows 7 legally and test it for 30 days (at least I believe you can) before it requires activation. If you activate the product illegally, then you are stealing... no matter how you rationalize it.
m
0
l
September 20, 2009 12:36:50 PM

xaira said:
steal is such a hefty word

So is "murder" but that's what you use when a person kills someone on purpose.

(That was relevant!)
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 2:01:25 PM

xaira said:
steal is such a hefty word, i prefer to call it testing before purchase, and since it will be an investment, substantial testing is required, and usually, by the time testing is completed, the next big thing is being released, so its the creators own fault, im not gonna spend money on something i havent tested.

You could have been testing the beta and RC for >6 months (in fact, over a year if you wanted, since the RC doesn't expire until next spring). If that's not enough for you, it's pretty pathetic.

Seriously, if you're going to use a piece of software that thousands of people worked on for several years, you should really pay for it.
m
0
l
September 20, 2009 2:17:07 PM

Agreed. Everyone else has to work and shell out the cash for it.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 4:17:08 PM

Zoron said:
That's what Release Candidates and Betas are for... a legal way to "test" the software without purchasing it. You can also download Windows 7 legally and test it for 30 days (at least I believe you can) before it requires activation. If you activate the product illegally, then you are stealing... no matter how you rationalize it.


90 days - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/cc442495....
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 20, 2009 4:18:21 PM

Students can get it for like $29 BTW
m
0
l
September 20, 2009 11:20:52 PM

You can also rearm the other versions of Win 7 so they don't need activation for 120 days.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 21, 2009 1:30:53 AM

Basically... MS gives you all the time you should need to evaluate it before you decide whether or not to buy it. So there's absolutely no excuse to download it illegally.
m
0
l
September 21, 2009 7:39:38 AM

@ OP: I highly recommend Windows 7 over Vista any day of the week, because it is a much, much better OS than anything that preceded it (not that Vista was pants, mind you, but lots of people seem to think so). Whatever driver compatibility issues and program issues you fear, you can take it on my word and Microsoft's that there won't be another Vista fiasco at launch. 7 is built on the same basic kernel design as Vista, so anything that works in Vista will work in 7.

Also, I have a problem with your plan for dual HD4890s. Ditch that, and rather get yourself an HD5870 2GB model with your build. You'll get equal or better performance to a GTX295, and you'll be paying much less for it. And by the way, what monitor are you buying? If its anything less than a 23", then your powerful rig goes to waste.
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 21, 2009 2:18:59 PM

xaira said:
steal is such a hefty word, i prefer to call it testing before purchase, and since it will be an investment, substantial testing is required, and usually, by the time testing is completed, the next big thing is being released, so its the creators own fault, im not gonna spend money on something i havent tested.


you get plenty of time to test it out (30 days normally, 120 days with re-arm)
like above, if you are a student you can get win (i think professional) for $29 and i think ultimate for $60

as a CS student i take offense to not buying software (i support open source, all of my projects are) when it isn't open source / freeware

you can always use linux + wine (does have speed issues with DX games, works good for opengl though)
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 22, 2009 2:23:31 AM

Snow_Patrol said:
Also, I have a problem with your plan for dual HD4890s. Ditch that, and rather get yourself an HD5870 2GB model with your build. You'll get equal or better performance to a GTX295, and you'll be paying much less for it. And by the way, what monitor are you buying? If its anything less than a 23", then your powerful rig goes to waste.


23" doesn't mean anything. I think you mean 1920 x 1080 or 1920 x 1200 resolution. You can have 1920 x 1200 on a 15.4 screen...or 1920 x somethin on a 17", 21.5, 22, 23, 23.6, 24, 24.6, 25.5 or 27. Personally best 1920 x 1200 image I have viewed on a monitor < $500 was on the Lenovo L220x, a 22" screen. But 1920 x 1200 looks damn fine on the 17" laptop I'm typing on now.....and it looks perty darn poor on a 27" monitor cause at 1920 x 1200 pixelation with pixels per inch in the low 80's is obvious.




m
0
l
September 22, 2009 12:15:47 PM

I actually have a post with specifics for a new LCD monitor on the LCD Monitor section of the forums, But for the hell of it, I'll post a quote of it here.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/55395-3-looking-monit... Is a link to it.

Quote:
Hey there masters of the hardware! I am in the market for a new LCD monitor, I will mostly be using it for competitive gaming and would love to have a fast, big monitor to view on. Here are my requirements:

1: my range for monitors is 22-24". Wide-Screen is fine
2: my requirements for native resolution is 1920x1080 or larger
3: If at all possible, have a HDMI port so I can play with it with a game system or a cable box in the future.
4: I would like it to have a response time of 2-3ms
5: It must be at least have a refresh rate of 75Hz or higher at native resolution. 60Hz just won't do.
6: The Constrast Ratio should be at least 20000:1

LG W2453V-PF

I was looking at this monitor, it fits all my criteria of the above, I just can't find for the life of me the refresh rate for it. LG dosn't have it on their website, Newegg dosn't have it on theirs, nobody has it! And I have noticed this with a lot of LG's monitors lacking vital information.

As for budget, I think no more than the original price of the W2453V would be a good place to sit, About $350, but if you see something thats a bit more feel free to post it and I will have a look.

Thank you! :) 


Yes.. I'm picky.. :sweat: 

Quote:
Also, I have a problem with your plan for dual HD4890s. Ditch that, and rather get yourself an HD5870 2GB model with your build. You'll get equal or better performance to a GTX295, and you'll be paying much less for it


Yeah, That build is by no reasons finished, That is simply my draw up of what I could get now if I were to buy everything now. As new things come out (like all the vid cards at the end of the month) I will be looking at them, prices, performance, and will make my selection that way. Hell, I might just bite the $50 extra and get a GTX 300 when it comes out, from what I hear its a beast of a card.
m
0
l
September 25, 2009 5:33:10 AM

I prefer win7 than vista. Vista has many irritating things
m
0
l
a b $ Windows 7
September 27, 2009 11:25:12 PM

dantrona said:
I actually have a post with specifics for a new LCD monitor on the LCD Monitor section of the forums, But for the hell of it, I'll post a quote of it here.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/55395-3-looking-monit... Is a link to it.

Yes.. I'm picky.. :sweat: 



Well, again, picky would eliminate any TN panel. Cheapest S-PVA panels which do a decent job with both color accuracy and response time start at about $435. The Dell 2408 WFP and the Lenovo L220x are the two best known in that category.

Also be careful of specs as many manufacturers are a bit loose with their specs. Response time for example.....white to black or gray to gray makes a big difference.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/250608-33-response-ti...
m
0
l
!