Gaming in XP/Vista/32/64

[bandieramonte]

In the gamers' point of view, I would like to briefly know the main differences between

XP 32 ; XP 64 ; Vista 32 ; Vista 64

on this aspects:

1)Maximum RAM memory usage
2)Compatibility with the ultimate games
3)DirectX10 availability
4)Performance in games

Thanks.

[Apoptosis]

well DirectX 10 is vista only... if you want the ultimate in graphics you have to have DirectX 10... Having Vista and graphics intensive games means you need 2GB-4GB of system memory. Since you might be getting 4GB of memory you need a 64-bit OS to utilize it all properly.... Therefore you have one choice if you are a gamer... Vista 64-Bit

This of course doesn't take into consideration one thing... a budget

[bandieramonte]

well DirectX 10 is vista only... if you want the ultimate in graphics you have to have DirectX 10... Having Vista and graphics intensive games means you need 2GB-4GB of system memory. Since you might be getting 4GB of memory you need a 64-bit OS to utilize it all properly.... Therefore you have one choice if you are a gamer... Vista 64-Bit

And what about the performance? If I have directX10 capable cards and 4GB of RAM memory, then would my system perform better playing on directX9 mode on XP 64, or in Vista 64 playing on DirectX10 mode?

[Apoptosis]

really depends on the game to be honest... Do you want DirectX 10 or DirectX 9 graphics?

[Zertz]

really depends on the game to be honest... Do you want DirectX 10 or DirectX 9 graphics?

There's nearly no difference currently between 9 & 10

DX9 Crysis @ Very High = DX10. No difference in Hellgate London.

From what I saw, beside the performance hit, DX10 has nothing over DX9 in all the current games. DX9 in Vista is very slightly slower, if you're getting a new OS, I don't see the point in getting XP though.

[dkarko]

Crysis is hardly dx10. You can enable the very high settings in XP too! You just need to mess with a conf file.
It just uses a small part of dx10 and the difference between very high @ vista and very high @XP is not not easily visible (at least thats what i have read around)

But i agree, if you are getting a new os, and especially if you can run crysis @ very high then i dont see the point using XP either

[martini161]

get vista home premium 64bit oem system builders pack. $110 at newegg.

[bandieramonte]

If I install Vista 64 on a system with 8800GT SLI, then I would have serious limitations on the number of games that I can play, because I would only be able to play those games on which SLI works well, and also must be Vista 64 compatible. These both limitations seem to reduce my list of available games. Is there actually a pretty small list of nice games that can be played under this both limitations?

[ibleet]

A smaller list than you realize actually.

[bandieramonte]

Then what can you recommend me? I am buying 8800GT SLI because they are chepaer than a single 8800 ultra and at the same time perform better than the later (On SLI enabled games of course). I have 4GB so I need a 64 bit platform. I can't play on directX10 mode on XP, then I need Vista. So combining, I need Vista 64... How well does this OS perform in gaming?

Also, if I was to acquire the Vista 64, I don't know which one to choose between:
Home Basic
Home Premium
Business
Ultimate

My main goal is to achieve the best gaming performance on the MAX graphic configuration on DirectX10 on the ultimate games, using a High-End system.

[bandieramonte]

Can anybody help me with this please?

[ibleet]

I have no practical experience with Vista at all. I won't even bother with it until the bugs are worked out and SP1 is released.

Sadly support for XP x64 and Vista x64 has been mediocre at best. Some of the major hardware players have outright refused to produce drivers for it. Others have produced cut-down software that functions, but misses important features when compared to the 32-bit version. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

I also have no experience with SLI configurations, but from what I've read, most games and applications do not utilize it to its maximum potential. In fact, very few if any can utilize it completely. I think on average you can expect maybe a 20-30% increase from SLI...not 100% as it would appear.

I would not worry about being able to access the full 4GB. With your usage, when would your system require all 4GB at once? With a 32bit OS, your system will recognize close to 3.5GB and that is more than enough for most applications for the average user. I recommend 3GB ram...Every motherboard I'm aware of will happily accept 2 x 1 GB and 2 x 512 MB DIMMs.

If I were choosing Vista, I would definitely avoid basic and go with Premium. I hear that Vista performs well for gaming and with your configuration, I would actually recommend 32bit Vista premium to utilize DX10.

Sorry I wasn't more help, but I'm hoping that my post here will encourage some of our more savvy Vista or SLI members to offer their advice.

Good Luck

[bandieramonte]

Well, your information was useful indeed. I could learn that my system could perform better on 32bit. I was almost going to buy the vista 64. I decided to buy vista 32 premium.

And about the SLI, well the average 20-30% increase should be powerful because in many cases the 8800GT SLI beat the 8800 Ultra (by little FPS, well). I have seen it in reviews from other forums. But I really hope that the developers of Vista and SLI will be upgrading their drivers, and this will improve the initial 20-30%. Who knows, maybe in 1 year the drivers will have evolved in a way that the increase could be 100%.... kicking 8800 Ultra's ass hardly enough. But I don't know which are the developers' plans, if one of their goals is to maximize the SLI potential. To what extent will NVidia and Microsoft improve SLI and Vista for gaming?

Are the SLI drivers performing better on XP 32 than on vista 32?

[Zelig]

I have no practical experience with Vista at all. I won't even bother with it until the bugs are worked out and SP1 is released.

Sadly support for XP x64 and Vista x64 has been mediocre at best. Some of the major hardware players have outright refused to produce drivers for it. Others have produced cut-down software that functions, but misses important features when compared to the 32-bit version. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

It shows that you have no practical experience with Vista 64-bit. Support for XP x64 and Vista 64-bit isn't even comparable. Anything released in the past year works fine in Vista 64-bit, and the vast majority of popular hardware works as well.

[ibleet]

Good, do you feel better now?

I would think that your time would be better spent helping the OP instead of pointing out something that I already stated as a fact.

[DL126]

Well .. I can tell you a little bit about Crysis in Vista 64.

It installs 2 versions of itself .... both 32 & 64 bit.
The resulting shortcut on the start menu points to the 64.
Right clicking on that shortcut gives you the option to play DX9 or DX10 in the 64 bit version.
You won't be able to play the 64 bit version online using Punkbuster.
PB doesn't support 64.

Then you can browse to the EA install directory and you'll find a Bin32 folder.
Contained therein is the 32 bit version of the game.
Make a shortcut to the Crysis.exe file inside. There you go.
Both versions in one install.
Ahhhh but wait ... now you have a shortcut for the 32 bit ... but it will play DX10 by default.
Not many DX10 servers out there yet.
Go to the properties of that shortcut you just made and enter the command line argument of -DX9.
Done ... play online and have fun!

Now to your orginal question of comparison ....
I'm playing Halo 1 on Vista 64.
No difference between it and Vista 32 or XP Pro 32.

With Crysis, trying different combinations of 64, 32, DX9, & DX10.
The one that runs the best for me is 32 bit version of the game using forced DX9.
When doing so, it runs the exact same as it did for me on Vista 32 & XP Pro 32.

This is all done using the setup in my sig.
As mentioned in another thread, I am in the process of gearing up for CrossFire.
Apop has sold me on that with his recent review.

Edit = The ATI card in my sig runs Crysis a tad bit better than a higher priced 8800 GTS 320 that I recently pulled outta there.
It runs Halo 1 quite a bit better. (No I don't have any benchmark screenshots. Just my old, worn out eyes to tell the difference. )

[bandieramonte]

Wait, you have all put it hard for me to decide.
I just want the OS and its bit version who on average performs the best with directX10 games. If is Vista, please indicate me which version of vista.

I have been investigating all over the web and many people tell very different things of all different OS versions. I'm a bit confused here. I will end up installing Windows VistaXP 3264 bit version.

[stopthekilling77]

i vote 64 bit vista ultimate. ive installed my 32-bit games and i havent had any trouble with any of them.

[bandieramonte]

i vote 64 bit vista ultimate. ive installed my 32-bit games and i havent had any trouble with any of them.

And have you experienced any performance degradation in relation to XP?

[stopthekilling77]

with my video card i'm not seeing much of a drop in performance seeing how its a 7800GT, i don't play anything on high settings at all