Vista SP1 Outperforms XP SP3 in Gaming!

When it comes to gaming, Windows Vista has a distinct advantage over XP: DirectX 10. SP3 doesn't change that simple fact, but does it have any bearing on game performance at all? And how does a PC equipped with XP SP3 compare to a Vista box upgraded to SP1?
Vista somehow outperformed XP in PCMark05's overall score, but its important subsystem scores (CPU and Memory) were very close to the older operating system.
It's clear that driver issues in Windows Vista have been largely ironed out, as the five to 10 percent performance drop compared to Windows XP is virtually gone. Windows Vista's gaming performance conundrum has largely been solved, and it was mainly due to early graphics drivers.
Love it or hate it, Vista is performing far better than it used to. It took about a year and a half, but the Gaming performance gap between Vista and its forerunner has finally evaporated.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2303830,00.asp

 

I swear I've seen this posted before. I'd believe this test more if the drivers they used were revealed.

XP is still the better performer.

 

om glad i didnt drop vista for xp just for gaming

 

i second random1257 on this. unfortunately, one site doing a couple of tests with unclear drivers isn't enough to make me a believer in vista. i still personally had driver issues with vista64 even with sp1. some games still don't work well with vista. the games they picked for their benches weren't the games that had massive vista issues in the first place. like crysis. crysis was built for dx10 from the start. and any game that came with dx10 was obviously built with vista in mind. the games that had problems were games that were built for xp originally, and while the situation is obviously much improved, im not switching just yet. another 6 months or a year and then i'll do it.

 

I haven't tested any other games, but Prostreet runs much smoother on Vista for me than in XP.

 

Vista is the new world order baby. Masterchef, Resistance is futile!!!

 

Wait let me ahahahahahahahahah, hold one I have more ahahahahahhahaha.

I am sorry, Vista will still not out perform XP in gaming. The ONLY argument one could have is that yes Vista is DX10 compatible. Now when they come out with good games (sorry Crysis is not a good game, just pretty), that makes a huge difference between playing it in DX9, then yes Vista will be the way to go. Other then that, XP is still faster then vista. In pretty much every way.... Now Vista is getting better, much better. But why do you think Windows7 is going to be here much sooner then everyone first thought?

 

saw this topic a month ago, XP SP3 ended up winner

 

Because the version of windows that was supposed to be rleeased in 2003-04 was lost/suffured to many problem and XP took 6 years to see a replacement? It wasn't intended to last that much.

 

Just accept the fact that sooner or later Vista WILL surpass XP. This type of discussion was the same when XP first came out while people with 98/2000 are bashing it.

And no, the birth of Windows 7 is not because Vista failed.

 

Can we just accept at this stage that they are both about equal in performance. Its been shown that in tests whenever one has the lead its not even marginal its close to nil. Stick to the OS you like and that should be it. Its not like vista or xp fans will switch over for a 1-2 fps boost.

Also I don't know where you got that the article says that vista outperforms xp (i have vista), he clearly says that vista itself is alot better and the differences between vista and xp have evaporated. He never says one is better than the other. How could you misconstrue that? THe charts even show their differences in game for his tests were 2-3 fps at most, if any.

 

mm.. maybe in in single setups but in SLI , XP murders Vista big time, like double the performance.

 

First off... no... i'm normally nice, but NO, it absolutly doesnt Double.. wtf man? at least not in a D901c.... (join the sager threads to find ppl with both XP and Vista Bmarks... so.. you're wrong...)

and second, i refuse to read this thread only to say that WHO CARES... The difference is minimal. For me, i have XP on a gaming Desktop. Yet my Vista laptop i find myself playing more... COD4/crysis, etc... Plz stop comparing these two OSs... PLEASE.... im begging every1... its getting old

 

It just reminds me of Windows XP release, when everyone was comparing XP and Win98. It's pathetic

 

no? i'm not wrong. maybe SLI with 8 series is good in Vista but not for 7 series.. its 30~40FPS gears of war Vista VS 62 FPS XP..

 

All the benchmark tests in the world doesn't prove a thing or mean anything to me. I judge Vista in real world performance and when I do XP still outperforms it. So much so that Windows XP is my choice for my gaming rig. I have several current games that either run slower or run like crap on Vista. Some refuse to run at all. So for me XP is still my choice as a gaming OS and will be until Vista proves it to me where it counts in real world results.

 

the deity has spoken

 

Excuse me, BS.
XP is still faster, that`s one hell of a biased article right tere.

 

your telling me I just got up off the floor from 2 hours of laughing that someone would actually post that sp1 is better than sp3 when all they did was read between the lines.

 

Pretty much, yea

 

*Sigh*

A thread was posted about this article a month or two ago.
And the article in question is completely meaningless. It raises more questions than it answers.

How come Vista *without* SP1 suddenly performs so well? If they can't even replicate the lousy performance that Vista *used* to get, then they can't isolate what "fixed" it. They don't show enough informations about the system they test on, and they don't test more than a couple of games, and without much variation in detail level/resolution.

If this is representative of the quality of ET articles, anyone reading the site is wasting their time.

And just for the record, before the raving Vista worshippers try to strangle me, I'm not saying Vista with Sp1 doesn't perform well. I'm just saying that their article certainly doesn't show it to be the case. It shows Vista with SP1 to perform only *slightly* better than Vista without SP1.

Why should we accept that?
Microsoft and NVidia have both said that they don't expect Vista to ever catch up *completely* in DX9 games.

 

You don't have to accept, but that's what gonna happen. And Vista not catching up completely in DX9 games is 100% logical, because there is DX10 now, and there will be DX11, DX12, etc.

 

Except by the time Vista surpasses XP, W7 will (hopefully) have surpassed Vista.

 

Why cant everyone decide for them selves.

Its like we've got a religion going on here, each representative posts their thoughts and people follow blindly.

Just look at the evidence, try it your self, use whichever your happy with

 

Use whichever comes preinstalled

 

Um, aren't you contradicting yourself now?
How can Vista surpass XP if it'll never catch up 100%?
And what does DX10 and higher have to do with whether or not Vista is going to catch up in existing games?
You're not making any sense.

 

Xp still performs better, but tests by a member of this forum have shown the difference is only a couple of percent, and barely noticeable. Though no one can deny that Vista is improving.

And by the way Windows 7 doesn't mean Vista was a failure, 6 years between OS'es is a bad business model and people are unwilling to adopt as you can see. Plus XP was in development before 2000 was released, Vista was in development before Xp was released so anyone saying that because windows 7 is in development now means Vista is a failure is wrong, or thinks that windows 2000 and XP were massive failures too.

 

I actually found that sp1 decreased my laptop's performance! Anyway although I am a vista ultimate user, I am humble enough to admit that xp sp3 completely out classes vista in every single aspect, performance and gaming etc. except the eye candy In real world usage I found xp to run at least 25% faster.

 

Adding insult to injury, there are many on the flight sim forums who say Microsoft Flight Simulator X performs slightly worse in DX10 than it does in DX9. IMO DX10 has been a marketing joke from the get go. That's why I decided to keep my DX9 card and just waited for the dust to settle and it hasn't. The early adpaters found out the hard way that DX10 has offered very little both graphically and performance wise to games. Crysis might be the exception but it also looks damn good on DX9.

Word is out that all those DX10 cards will need to get replaced when MS brings out DX10.1

I'm staying put and on the sideline for the long foreseeable future cause i've been very unimpressed with how Vista handles games.

 

No, because you're expecting new technology to work better with old stuff(games). Of course the previous technology will most likely work better with the old stuff because it was design for it. Just wait for some more new games.

 

Give some proof...

some screenshots showing the performance of games..

 

we are forgetting SLI in the comparison guys.. Mostly every gaming Geek out there has SLI, and Vista DOESNT make benefit of it well. so if Vista was below XP in couple percent in Single Cards, then its over 50% on SLI rigs

 

not all geeks, only the ones with really large bank accounts

 

Stewie, you should know by now that Vista is a better system in terms of security and looks,and even maybe as reliability,but as performance,it`s slower than XP, and will pretty much be that way.Always.
It`s the present that we care about. Xp is better, period.

 

Maybe I think too much about the future... :twitcy:

 

Yes, most of the people fell for the whole Vista is better because it`s newer scheme.
In all consideration, the fastest OS is the one that works for you, or more notably, the one you use daily

 

I thought Nvidia had fixed it by now. Esp since the 9600GT befenits from 75-100% power boost in SLI compared to it alone.

 

In some cases, it`s pretty close to 100% increase,in Crysis for example, GRID and COD4.
Just look at Maxishine`s videos on youtube.