Vista or XP ?

[Abrupto 4]

Hi,I'm going to install all my software from scratch. Will fly FSX. What OS should I choose? Vista Ultimate or XP Professional? Tanks for your help,RegardsAbrupto

[Guest JIMJAM]

I am in the same boat.I have been putting off upgrading my machine becasue the performace increase is not worth the $$$$ and there appears to be some major hardware changes around the corner."as always".Do a search here and you will get a variety of opinions.I understand the 64 version is the way to go and at first, Vista was causing alot of problems and bad perfromance.Question- What all will you be running onyour computer?In my case, I have 2 with one being a strickly FSX gaming machine.I am going to keep XP on it.Later,who know 6 months, a years, years? from now, when FS11 or most new software NEEDS Vista, I will move.But as is, if you have a current FAST machine, moving to Vista will not hurt.But if performance is your main concern, I would and do stick to XP.I have not even patched sp to sp3.If it aint broke......

[Guest cbuchner1]

I am recommending XP Professional 64 bit if your CPU is capable. No issues with driver signing requirements (unlike Vista 64 Bit).Isn't this thread in the wrong sub-forum, really?

[bobbyjack 61]

Here is my two cents.I have a 32 bit Vista machine with a core 2 duo. I upgraded that box and moved the MB,CPU,and graphics card to an XP machine. Bench marks were much the same with those parts using either OS. Can't say I love Vista, but I also can't say XP is that much better. When MS comes out with their new OS I have to believe that it is going to be more like Vista than XP. Is Vista the best thing ever? No. But XP is not going to around for ever(what am I saying? I know someone who still uses Windows 95.) Just my opinion, though.Bob

[beatle 0]

XP64 might not require signed drivers, but my experience was very few vendors made ANY XP64 drivers period (and hardly any of the new hardware being produced has XP64 drivers from what I've seen). I've not had any problems with my Vista 64 machines and drivers, I figure if someone I'm buying hardware from doesn't want to fork out the couple hundred for a VeriSign cert, then I don't want to buy their hardware - I mean, what else are they doing on the cheap :->.I've noticed that most of the new machines coming into BestBuy recently all have 6 to 8 gig of RAM now, so they must be shipping all of those with Vista 64, so I think the critical mass of folks running Vista 64 to "convince" hardware guys to make 64-bit signed drivers is either here or fast approaching :-> (They've got a Dell Q9300 based machine with 6 Gig for around 900 that I've been thinking of getting to replace a Pentium D box, just don't have the time to investigate all the pieces and build from scratch this time around :-> )

[Virtualwombat 4]

Recent tests suggest the performance differential between XP and Vista have largely disappeared as drivers have matured. I'd go for Vista64 if you want more than 4 GB RAM in your system, but don't expect to see any benefit in FSX. Otherwise XP is just fine and more easily optimized because there are more tools written for it.Cheers,Noel.

[Guest grim_marmazet]

I have to say I didnt like Vista64 at first, it was slower than XP, very few drivers, and had the annoying UAC.But as said above, with new drivers being brought out all the time, it has become just as good performance-wise.Plus DirectX 10 & 10.1 will become the standard for gaming eventually. Its better to future-proof yourself now with an OS for the future, than buying one that will slowly lose support.Cheers,Rik

[wardp 19]

I've just wacked in another 2Gb of memory to 4gb and installed Vista 64 bit version on my Core2 Duo E6850. Best thing I ever did, FSX runs with the same frame rates just seems much smoother.Can't say I'm all that bothered about Vista as it dosen't seem as responsive as XP but for FSX its a winner for me.Just my 2 cents worth.Phil

[Guest UlfB]

>I've just wacked in another 2Gb of memory to 4gb and>installed Vista 64 bit version on my Core2 Duo E6850. Best>thing I ever did, FSX runs with the same frame rates just>seems much smoother.>>Can't say I'm all that bothered about Vista as it dosen't seem>as responsive as XP but for FSX its a winner for me.>>Just my 2 cents worth.>>PhilI'm quite comfortable with my Vista 32 today. I've disabled UAC and dont run Defender and a lot of other services that I don't need such as Vista themes (areo) and stuff.I had problems with the Avast! services, but after unstalling Avast! and installing NOD32, Vista runs very well. But in a way it's more like WinXP, since I disabled all the fancy Vista features.I'd said it before and I say it again: I would be practical if Microsoft had a "Gamer/Super User" install option, where all fancy stuff where default disabled and where Explorer options where default to showing hidden files and and file extensions. Let's hope that the next OS from MS will support a Gamer install option.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

[Tabs 2,790]

Yeah that's a really good idea actually. They should implement that and then just allow you to add various components via the Programs and Features applet if you find you need them later.