Worth moving to vista and DX10?

[bgyuk]

Hi i currently run XP 64bit, 3 gig ram, 4.4 gig athlon, 8800 gtx.

Has anyone with similar specs upgraded to vista and did you notice any difference with DX10?

Thanks for any advice.

[ThePilot_Ace]

NO DEFINATELY NOT (well if you do be prepared for a life of crash to desktops, incompatibilities.. oh the list goes on..)

you will definately not get any performance benefits, I can assure you of that!

[Brett_Henderson]

Pilot Ace..

[ThePilot_Ace]

[quote]Pilot Ace..

[EchoLdrWolf]

 :P Every program, driver, and game i had on my XP machine works fine on my VISTA laptop  8-) No crashing  ;)

[Brett_Henderson]

NO DEFINATELY NOT (well if you do be prepared for a life of crash to desktops, incompatibilities.. oh the list goes on..)

you will definately not get any performance benefits, I can assure you of that!

That is utterly erroneous and false advice.

[AMDDDA]

FS9 + vista = nono, because you really don't need better multicore for an application that doesn't use it.


FSX + Vista = a less stuttery experience, but I lose like 1-2 frames.

I could never get AA to work in Vista DX10 mode.


I'm gonna wait till windows 7 or if a lot of DX11 games come out, then I might do vista.

[ThePilot_Ace]

It's a bit obvious DX10 GPUs and Multicore CPUs will give a performance benefit. However, Vista does not and I would like to see some solid evidence that it does.

http://ops.precisionmanuals.com/wiki/74 ... erformance

Also, I've seen loads of posts in Avsim complaining about DX10 problems and texture issues.

[Brett_Henderson]

I could research and post links supporting either side of this debate, but I'll only go by personal experience. Mine (nor any of the Vista machines I've built forFSX) have any O/S realted problems.

Also note that I did advise against switching to Vista, and would only reccomend it for new builds (becaus of future DX support).

Now granted.. I'm running 64-bit Vista with 4GB of RAM, so OOM is not an issue.. and would assume that any simmer thinking of Vista would have already come to the conclusion that not going 64 bit is silly, for the RAM support alone.

I have no experience with 32bit Vista, so I'll bow to those with 32 bit experience... as silly as it would be to have 32bit Vista on a gaming computer.

Summary: Adequate hardware and ample RAM with Vista 64-bit is a perfectly stable FSX platform. And even 32-bit Vista (with 3GB of RAM) is OK until you start running complex add-ons.

[ShaneG_old]

following that link will make you not want vista! :-/
what is OOM?

[Brett_Henderson]

following that link will make you not want vista! :-/
what is OOM?

OOM = "out of memory"

And yes..  I'd advise not switching to Vista 32, but would advise, if you ARE going to switch, go Vista64.. And if you're building new, I'd advise 64-bit Vista also..

[reider]

I`m 100% with Brett on that.

[tcco94]

VISTAA  :D

[ThePilot_Ace]

This is how I look at.. if you're using a computer mainly for FS it makes no sense to waste time and money and buy Vista. Even if you are buying a new computer there probably is no need to get Vista because when FS11 comes out you'll probably have to buy a new computer anyway if it's like FSX in terms of performance. However if you are planning to buy a new computer and keep it for the next 5 years then yes, it does make sense to buy Vista (64bit edition as Brett said).

Short/probably medium term= no need to get Vista

long term= yes get vista since everyone will be using it in the future, as they are or were with XP in it's later days.

[reider]

So lets get this right, if I get higher frames and better FS flying experience with Vista 32 bit now then maybe others would also.