Twitter ● MyAnimeList ● lastFM ● Blog ● deviantART

Windows 7.  Pretty much better in everything.

---

(23/08/2010 02:36 AM)SkyDX Wrote:  And as a slight addon to my post, I don't know why all the Vista bashing happens again, ever after the Virtual Memory Addressing patch, my Vista used to run better then XP.

How the Vista bashing started was mainly because Vista takes a whole lot more system resources to run for very little benefit (EDIT: Oh, also UAC, that pissed people off no end too).

Right now you must be thinking... anyone who has a PC that isn't an ancient piece of poo poo should be able to run Vista no problems...  But think back to when Vista was just released (2006)... pretty much EVERYONE had a PC which was an "ancient piece of poo poo".

Nowadays, I'm on an overclocked quad CPU with 4GB of RAM.  I can run Windows 7 (or any other OS for that matter) no problems.  However, I remember back then a few years ago, I was sitting on a 1.6Ghz laptop with 500MB of RAM (later upgraded to 1GB).  It came with Vista, and that JUST DIDN'T WORK, had to sacrifice my legitimately paid for Vista so I can install pirated non-geniune XP.

So yeah, Vista ran shit back then, and people raged.  As for now, Windows 7 uses less resources, and is better at the same time, so still no reason to use Vista.

(23/08/2010 02:36 AM)SkyDX Wrote:  Just to avoid confusion, ever since Vista, the more RAM a OS uses the better! most people don't know or believe this^^

You know, I was also one of the people who thought, OS uses less RAM = better, but after someone at AeroXP carefully explained it to me, I came to the logic assumption that empty RAM = wasted RAM, the more RAM a OS can use, the better it will run.

Games and memory demanding apps are no problem because Vista and 7 can unload memory very fast thus creating no bottleneck^^

"The higher GPU requirements a game needs, the better"?

Depends on your hardware position.  Any computer enthusiast would say yes, with very similar reason as yours.  But what if you didn't have a high end GPU?  Welcome to a world of lag.

(This post was last modified: 23/08/2010 05:50 AM by Assassinator.)

Twitter ● MyAnimeList ● lastFM ● Blog ● deviantART

(This post was last modified: 23/08/2010 12:10 PM by Cirehpsa.)

(23/08/2010 02:36 AM)SkyDX Wrote:  You know, I was also one of the people who thought, OS uses less RAM = better, but after someone at AeroXP carefully explained it to me, I came to the logic assumption that empty RAM = wasted RAM, the more RAM a OS can use, the better it will run.

Games and memory demanding apps are no problem because Vista and 7 can unload memory very fast thus creating no bottleneck^^

That's what most people who seem to have limited understanding of things think.

The reality is, even without Vista's cache, it's still a massive RAM hog (disable Superfetch, and perform forced deallocations and see for yourself).
Yes, RAM perhaps sits there idle doing nothing, however, Vista's caching strategy is pretty horrible.  One thing I really hated was that when I quit a memory hogging application (like a game), Vista's Superfetch would immediately kick in and thrash the HDD for a few minutes.  In fact, Vista seemed to thrash the HDD every now and then regardless of what I was doing, really annoying.
Unloading memory is fast, but reading from HDD isn't, and it also suffers the problem that such I/O requests cannot be done in parallel with anything else (try performing two IO operations on the same HDD at once, it'll be more than twice as slow).