Which one do you think came out on top?
Enjoy.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/rev...ndows_7_review
Enjoy.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/rev...ndows_7_review
Windows 7 Review: XP vs Vista vs 7 in 80+ Benchmarks
- Thread starter Qubit
- Start date
Rastalovich
New member
Always be very weary of these benchmark comparisons of OSes.
Do they install the OS once and bench from that ?
Do they allow the OS time to settle down b4 running the tests ?
Remember what 10% overall in gaming experience actually means - if u got 25 fps playing Crysis, u "should" expect 27.5 fps as an increase - woohoo. 100 fps -> 110fps etc. If u already have over 100 fps in a game, u will find it harder to appreciate the jump. If u struggle at the lower fps, the change is small anyway.
They use one vendor for the components - this is very dependant of how well this vendors hardware firstly works and how far forward they may be in driversets.
Best test for me would be to have 4 pcs on a bench, with conflicting hardware in each of them, and run those tests.
Will say this tho, with the OS not being mature in hardly any fashion, it does look good. Critics already praise the layout of it.
Do they install the OS once and bench from that ?
Do they allow the OS time to settle down b4 running the tests ?
Remember what 10% overall in gaming experience actually means - if u got 25 fps playing Crysis, u "should" expect 27.5 fps as an increase - woohoo. 100 fps -> 110fps etc. If u already have over 100 fps in a game, u will find it harder to appreciate the jump. If u struggle at the lower fps, the change is small anyway.
They use one vendor for the components - this is very dependant of how well this vendors hardware firstly works and how far forward they may be in driversets.
Best test for me would be to have 4 pcs on a bench, with conflicting hardware in each of them, and run those tests.
Will say this tho, with the OS not being mature in hardly any fashion, it does look good. Critics already praise the layout of it.
+1 Rastalovich
Will say this tho, with the OS not being mature in hardly any fashion, it does look good. Critics already praise the layout of it.
Well my favourite bit, is that the Windows Explorer bug that was present in the RC is remains reassuringly present in the RTM version.
Just occasionally, Explorer will crash when doing simply things such as pressing F2 to rename a drive etc. It restarts easily enough though. Otherwise it's really solid.
I'm using the RTM version off a TechNet sub.
Will say this tho, with the OS not being mature in hardly any fashion, it does look good. Critics already praise the layout of it.
Well my favourite bit, is that the Windows Explorer bug that was present in the RC is remains reassuringly present in the RTM version.
Just occasionally, Explorer will crash when doing simply things such as pressing F2 to rename a drive etc. It restarts easily enough though. Otherwise it's really solid.I'm using the RTM version off a TechNet sub.
Rastalovich
New member
Wonder if it still has the "leaving an empty folder behind whilst moving it".
Vista still does.
Vista still does.
I stayed XP for ages, even when I upgraded to 1gb GPU's and REALLY needed a 64bit OS. When 7RC came out I thought I might aswell give it a crack. Its deffo what Vista should have been, Ive got no massive gripes at all. Ive 2 laptops and my main machine at home, all are on 7 - 64bit Ultimate RTM and the shed rig/server is on Server 2008 R2 RTM (based on 7 kernal) and Im very happy.
Once you switch to 7 there is no need to look back
Once you switch to 7 there is no need to look back
name='tinytomlogan' said:I stayed XP for ages, even when I upgraded to 1gb GPU's and REALLY needed a 64bit OS. When 7RC came out I thought I might aswell give it a crack. Its deffo what Vista should have been, Ive got no massive gripes at all. Ive 2 laptops and my main machine at home, all are on 7 - 64bit Ultimate RTM and the shed rig/server is on Server 2008 R2 RTM (based on 7 kernal) and Im very happy.
Once you switch to 7 there is no need to look back
whats 2008 r2 like? thinking of upgrading my 2008. i want some of the new virtualization stuff.
FleX.overclock3d
New member
name='tinytomlogan' said:I stayed XP for ages, even when I upgraded to 1gb GPU's and REALLY needed a 64bit OS. When 7RC came out I thought I might aswell give it a crack. Its deffo what Vista should have been, Ive got no massive gripes at all. Ive 2 laptops and my main machine at home, all are on 7 - 64bit Ultimate RTM and the shed rig/server is on Server 2008 R2 RTM (based on 7 kernal) and Im very happy.
Once you switch to 7 there is no need to look back
very true man, but if you really want the best OS go OSX lol
----------------
Now playing: Busta Rhymes - Pop Champagne (Remix)
via FoxyTunes
name='nathan' said:
Let me state one thing. The reason why OC3D is suddenly faster, and stable is 2008 R2.....
For my basic needs at home its mass overkill, Ive set it up like a workstation with the aero on, audio ect ect and its just like win 7 64bit with extra options. might aswell call me a fanboy atm :worship:
Rastalovich
New member
name='nathan' said:
Nah, I keep thumbnails/cached icons off and show all files - this is when it has to ask u for a decision cos theirs an existing file by the same name, or if ur sure u want to move it or similar.
If it asks u to confirm something, the older folder stays behind empty. Infact if it's a file within a tree-list, it'll leave all the folders within the folder there too. All empty ofc.
It's been a bug in Vista since release, still exists now.
