Overclock.net banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 114 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,324 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sorry but if i where to be honest i thought this would be a fact and perhaps it may be :

Quote:
MICROSOFT is telling its selected gaming industry chaps that gaming under Vista will be ten to fifteen per cent slower than XP. It is because you have to load the 3D desktop all the time. It is ironic, as the same company tells the developers that the same API can do certain things up to four times faster.
We are preparing to check this claim but the really pesky thing is that you won’t be able to run DirectX 10 games on Windows XP at all. So even a game like Crysis - the first DirectX 10 title - won’t be that much of a DX 10. We are still far away from DirectX 10 only games but don’t be surprised as there is no single DirectX 10 card the market. This should change in the next few weeks, but we are still far away from mainstream and low end DirectX 10 cards.

So if you play Battlefield 2 or FEAR or any other popular game you are likely to get lower frame rates with Vista. That is certainly not a good buying argument but don’t think you and I have much choice as it looks like a take it or leave it deal. I like Vista as the 3D desktop looks sexy but that is probably its key feature. µ

Here :http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34915
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,324 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Well i would think that after Vista has been out for a while there will be issues sorted and should then be ok. Lets face it when XP was first released it was a mess and that can go for most OS's when 1st released.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,439 Posts
I reckon in 6 months it will be sorted with SP1. Also why not just get Vista and XP, have vista as your Primary OS and XP as your gaming OS on a partition?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
593 Posts
Hmm, guess that I'll have to wait with XP for a while then; which I was going to do anyway. Getting Vista and a good DX10 GPU will most likely cost a fair bit of money :\\
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,769 Posts
I will wait and believe this when I see it from another source......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,769 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by ENTERPRISE1701
Well even though its from this source it has to be said im not surprised if it where slower at all.
O believe me, I tried Vista RC1 and I feel like it was most definetly slower. I would not be surprised by this at all. I would almost be surprised if it isn't slower.

But I like to see stories like this that have reference to an original source. For all I know they could have just typed up that story.

Blackeagle
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,324 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Quote:

Originally Posted by blackeagle
O believe me, I tried Vista RC1 and I feel like it was most definetly slower. I would not be surprised by this at all. I would almost be surprised if it isn't slower.

But I like to see stories like this that have reference to an original source. For all I know they could have just typed up that story.

Blackeagle
Well its good to see some feedback from a user. I have used it a little and thought it was slower but thought it was just me. Well perhaps there will be another News source on this elsewhere also to set your mind at rest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
at least BF2142 isnt dx10...

i wont be upgrading lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
certainly I wouldn't jump to conclusions yet but I am of the opinion that microsoft and the rest of the technology groups are driving these transition elements I.e VISTA DX10 etc. purely as a business tactic. They are effectively trying to panic us by developing technology that will render much of our equipment redundant. I can't remember such radical transitions in the past but what I do know is that almost all western consumers already have pc's. If pc's were my business I would be wondering how can I get them to dump these pc's I have already sold them and buy new ones.

my point is are these new technologies needed ? I have a basic pc and it runs everything I throw at it to perfection. Why would I upgrade ? because the likes of microsoft have given me no other option.

From what I have gleamed from this site there are many with reservations about Vista, DX10, Quad core, xfire etc. Hell if I thought for a minute that these would take us to the next level then ok i'll dig deep and get the bucks together but IMHO, for what they are there seriously little gain in return to our investment, they are trying to do us over a barrel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,411 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by ENTERPRISE1701
oh dear have i made a bad name for Microsofts latest product...Owel lol

well vista is not something i want to lay down $300 dollars for anyway,

cuz then id want a DX10 GPU and stuff and thats like another $250,

when i could just stick with my current rig, and put that money towards some HD's, cooling, and a case....

EDIT: what i mean is, the hardware industry is getting way ahead of the software industry. i have a decent gaming rig finally, now i want something to play, but i dont want to spend another $600.
 

·
Overclockiit
Joined
·
3,418 Posts
Well my Question is, if games are going to take a hit, Im wondering how this is going to affect benchmarking aswell!
 
1 - 20 of 114 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top