Vista vs. XP in Performace Test
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 22.5.2007
Our user thepodest on
his blog compare performance tests of Windows Vista and Windows XP on his computer. Here are the results.
Windows XP Results (Click on the image to enlarge)
Windows Vista Results (Click on the image to enlarge)
As you can see, my computer perform better in Windows XP. Right now I’m dual booting Windows XP and Vista.
If you really need your PC to finish huge encoding, transcoding or rendering workloads within a defined time frame, yes, it is. Don't do it; stay with XP.
But as long as you don't need to finish workloads in record time, we believe it makes sense to consider these three bullet points:
* Vista runs considerably more services and thus has to spend somewhat more resources on itself. Indexing, connectivity and usability don't come for free.
* There is a lot of CPU performance available today! We've got really fast dual core processors, and even faster quad cores will hit the market by the middle of the year. Even though you will lose application performance by upgrading to Vista, today's hardware is much faster than yesterday's, and tomorrow's processors will clearly leap even further ahead.
* No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor.
Although application performance has had this drawback, the new Windows Vista performance features SuperFetch and ReadyDrive help to make Vista feel faster and smoother than Windows XP.
source:
thepodest.blogs.keznews.com
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
XP SP3: The test-build parade continues || Microsoft delivers yet another updated XP SP3 RC 2 test build || Want to test Vista SP1? Anyone can, starting next week || New Vista SP1 test build public || Free Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 Test Drive
Comments(21)
i also run dual boot. xp seems a little bit faster when it comes to open windows. maybe
because my grafic card is nvidia geforce 7600 (no fan) and is just super fast with non
aero glass in xp. in vista with aero glass the 7600 works just fine but if i turn of aero
glass everything gets a boost. aero glass takes that little more time because the window
has to fade in when opened and fade out when you close it. that's just the way it is.
you're supposed to see this animation otherwise the experience with aero glass is lost
and you can turn it off.
where to test your pc like that?
yes i did purchase it already. it cost me p21,000.00, 1 month salary here in the
philippines for a junior programmer.
if you're using more than 4gb of ram then stick with just windows x64 edition 'cause of
its stable architecture and mechanism against its predecessors and competitors as well.
keep in mind that it is very important to note the driver versions and so on. i have a
very similar configuration as yours but i only get your results prior to installing the
hardware drivers. nvidia 7600 go actually performs better in vista so long as i install
certain 100 series drivers. i get about 1-2% performance boost. the processor functions
do very a bit depending on my system configurations, from better than xp to worse by
running all the latest features. for gamers, that video card performance is key...and
only on the 100 series nvidia drivers do i see nice improvements...and of course ati beats
nvidia by 4-8% performance boost with vista.
why on earth would you waste a months salary on windows vista. it is sooo not worth it!!
if you really felt you needed it that badly why not just download a copy and use one
of the many cracks found on this site!
you tell 'im nila!
test is gargage without a few facts......like what machine the tests were run on? i'm
willing to bet a p3-533 runs win98 faster than xp. do i want to run 98? no.
without
specs, yer test is silly, and useless.
hey bosse,
can u tell what is the configuration of ur pc
bcoz i m thinking of
buying 1 laptop.
so i will buy with some more configuration than urs..so that i can
run aero
hey, the poon tamer:
-- the real reason we don't use windows 98 because
1)
windows 98 drove all of us mad as hell every day when it crashed too often with blue
screen of deaths.
2) win-xp is very stable with many usefull advanced features over
win98.
-- vista is more pretty than win-xp but vista doesn't have any real
usefull features over win-xp.
-- vista/games/apps executions are much slower than
xp/games/apps excutions on the same dual boots pc.
-- you don't need to know
his spec. dual boot vista/xp on your pc and do the comparations for yourself.
what happens if unneccessary services, aero, this that etc is disabled in vista. how does
that compare to a xp that have unnecesary stuff disabled as well?
skyptical, i wasn't expecting it to make the keznews front page. i was just playing
around. ;) next time will definitely be better, thx for the advise.
anyway for
those who want to see the specs , it's updated on my blog :)
some of the guy's writing is stolen from a professional article i read. but the results
he posted are not the same figures -- so he did his own tests and just plagarized the
bullet points. still he got basically the same figures they computer magazine writers
got. and there's plenty more benchmark tests out there that say the same thing. on
identical hardware, xp will always run faster than vista. get used to it.
you may still want vista, and that's fine. but the best way to make a new computer run
faster is to strip off vistas and load on a copy of xp. :)
very unscientific comparisions
by skeptical on 23.05.2007 - 21:05
everyones
knows mercedes is not vegas. we need more information sytemwises i.e cpu type, memory,
graphics, configurations,...... , and many other factors that's not even mention
contributes to the test
nice try but at a pretty low level
============
the guy stole his writing but he posted accurate results. i could
give you links to 6 articles that say the same thing. no matter what computer is running
vista, xp will run faster on it. xp takes less ram, xp has less services running. xp
doesn't have areoglass. it's not rocket science. now if you have a duo core processor,
vista may seem fast. but the same computer loaded with xp will run faster benchmarks.
funny,i did this test(and post it on kez forum) almost a week ago.are u guys stalking
me??
lol
mattchazz,
the bullet points are never posted on my blog, i only had the 2 images
of results on my blog. keznews took the results and added the bullet points.
thepodest,
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/page11.html
go to that page and scroll to the bottom
i said the bullets are never posted on my blog. read my last comment dude.
chill hottie! are u really 15 yrs old and did it with a male?? ruff! i want some! :d
wow never knew you was gay, i'm going to tell the forum members about this you fag!
----------------
vive le quebec libre!
i'm keeping my hacked xp....the experience windows xp dvd if u know what i mean
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Vista vs. Xp
By Bosse on 23.05.2007 - 01:05