I have a Intel Core 2 Duo 2.1 GHZ
1 Gb DDR Ram
256 DDR Graphic Card
160 GB HD
How will vista run?
Should i upgrade from XP?
Printable View
I have a Intel Core 2 Duo 2.1 GHZ
1 Gb DDR Ram
256 DDR Graphic Card
160 GB HD
How will vista run?
Should i upgrade from XP?
I refused to listen to people when they told me Vista sucks, until I tried it for myself. With the amount of RAM you have, it's most likely gonna run like crap.
Seriously, there's absolutely no reason for you to upgrade. Maybe when a Service Pack 1 comes out.
any1 else..?? plz tell... i thought tht was good enough to run...?? plz some1 else answer... Gonna try myself later!
I support and agree with Mark30001, besides DX10 support (which isn't even necessary yet), Vista offers nothing, and is only a lot slower than XP, with a lot less application compatibility. You should have at least 2 GB RAM for Vista to run optimally. Stick to XP. :)
well i have vista with this system works like a charm:
intel core2quad 2.4ghz
2gb ddr 800 ram
ati x1950 xtx
250gb HD
Well, 1GB RAM and 2GB RAM is a big difference. I take back the "running like crap" part, but might run okay on 1GB RAM. Maybe if you had 2GB, but there's really no reason to upgrade. I could see if it was from Windows 2000 to XP, but like blackrave said, it offers nothing and is incompatible with a lot of software/drivers that could work properly on XP.
No one is stopping you though; feel free to upgrade if you wish.
Vista works fine on my PC, and my PC was built for WinXP.
What are the specs?
Thnx Guys.... you helped alot! im Going to try it out any ways, as im very anxious to see! heeh! thnx ALOT!
Ok here: I've got both Vista and XP (I installed them on different partitions. Can you say two computers in one? :D) These are my PC Specs that runs Vista Nicely (except my graphics card)
4 CPU 3.00GHZ Processor
2.5 GB of RAM
ATI X300 Graphics card (BLEH!)
Let me tell you Vista in incompatible with EVERY PC GAME IN MY LIBRARY. Anything from 2005 down most likely WILL NOT RUN ON VISTA.
i dont think its gonna work so great with that ram.
why not just run them in compatability modeQuote:
Originally Posted by Shadowblind
All my games run fine on vista, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about :confused:
I tried that. It didn't work, which forced me to have to reformat my comp in order to make another partition to run them.
I don't even know why they include compat mode, it DOES NOT WORK. It never has on Vista, i doubt it ever will.
Doom doesnt even work. My internet card is incompatible with Vista, for goodness sake. Fable, FFVII, Serious Sam... nothing.
bad luck i guess. compataility mode works great for me. and ive never had any problems with anythign vistaQuote:
Originally Posted by Shadowblind
Aw man.....is it possible that there was an update for Vista that caused these changes? Because I can't get updates seeing as my internet card in incompatible... :(
Some times I think the question is not "how well will my computer run vista?" but rather "how well will vista run?"
It isnt unusual for microsofts new OS's to suck for a couple of months after release. XP was unusable garbage to many until service pack releases and a lot of updates.
Dangit... I have a NETGEAR WG311T card that supposedly has a Vista compatible Driver 5.0. I Installed it, but when I click to configure it, the computer does nothing at all. WTF is wrong with Vista?!
PS: Thx Buddypoint I got a Vista compat update, but it had no effect on my graphics card. My games on the other hand run "well"
Personally, i won't even consider touching Vista until SP1 comes out. Windows XP serves all of my needs perfectly right now.
My comp works great with 1 gig on vista, combined with a good video card and your good. If you thik you need more ram after instaling vista then buy some. Other then that it will work great. Also Vista has ready boost so speed could be managed.
With vista I doubt my pc would ever run as fast as it does with xp right now tweaked with TuneXP plus I don't like the compatibility issues I am hearing about vista. So id say stick with xp especially since you have 1gb ram, im sure its enough but then again it might be a bit heavy on ur system while handling apps. give it a try though and see how it is and if its to ur liking then keep it.
Thnx guys.... ill try it in a few days.. as soon as i can get my hands on the cds! thnx ALOT!
The most ignorant thing I have ever heard is when people say they'll upgrade to vista when sp1 is out. its not gonna make it run faster or anything.
new computers require new hardware. why dont all you haters go back to windows 95
My old computer with 64mb Ram runs XP fine yet my newish sony vaio won't run vista well at all, and anyway i don't want bill gates checking my sites out.
Bill Gates wouldn't give a shit dude XD
I used Vista on my PC for 8 months with on gig of DDR Ram, now it runs better with 2 DDR2, but it was still mainly fine with 1.
Its not going to be terrible, theres just no advantage whatsoever to upgrading to vista and quite a few disadvantages.
The whole DX10 thing is just pathetic on MS's behalf, they couldn't create an OS that was actually worth upgrading to, so they are going to slowly force windows gamers onto it.
If you're one of the people that love jumping in head first without checking the waters then thats great for all those who aren't, as early adopters are the ones who get to enjoy a far greater deal of the bugs/issues before they are resolved.Quote:
Originally Posted by scarph
With the whole 'playing music slows network performance' vista-exclusive issue, I would say SP1 might actually make the OS perform better (faster) in some ways. Fixing bugs does sometimes increase speed, on top of just reducing hassles for the user.
A new computer is new hardware, did you mean requires new software? There are XP drivers for all modern hardware I could think of wanting to use, what advantage does vista have in this regard?
OpenGL only through a Direct3d wrapper, go go Microsoft arrogance.
Im not waiting for SP1 for speed reasons, I am waiting for there to be less bugs. My current computer can easily handle Vista.Quote:
Originally Posted by scarph
Im waiting to get a key myself, I borrowed a trial from my friend to see if it was for me or not, and I loved it. So I gotta go out and buy the disc now, I hate running in reduced funcunality, but if you know computers you can access 75% of your system like that.
I bought XP the month of release. I suppose it was just a coincidence that things quit crashing after I downloaded service pack 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by scarph
Come to think of it, What was service pack 1 for anyway? It couldnt be full of... you know... BUG FIXES AND IMPROVED HARDWARE/SOFTWARE SUPPORT! Improved memory handling and better hardware support could certainly make Vista run faster. I dont know what SP1 will contain for vista, but if it is anything like XP's service pack it will improve things quite a bit.
But wth am I talking about?... I dont even have windows installed on this machine. :p
Quote:
Originally Posted by bah
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cap'n 1time
I intalled vista, im typing this from windows vista, i love the new look, but i agree ther is no rush to uprade as there is not much new! but it runs with ram very well!
Good news to hear, welcome to the cult-
I mean family :)
Which of the 300 versions, each slightly more crippled than the last, are you using?
Do you at least get the full aero UI?
I use Windows Vista Business.. if that is what u are asking!
After a quick google i found this site wich compares the different versions of vista and explains whats what.Quote:
Originally Posted by nomi
It appears to do the full non crippled Aero wm. The missing media center and inability to run unix based stuff (by the commercial applictaion) might be a bit annoying, but you can live without both and 3rd party options might already exist(cygwin for unix stuff).Quote:
# No games, not even Solitaire *
# No Media Center or Xbox 360 functionality
# No BitLocker hard drive encryption software
# No Ultimate "extras", which could include games and special utilities
# Inability to install new languages for use in Windows
# No Movie Maker or DVD Maker
# No Parental Controls
# Inability to run UNIX-based applications (through SUA)
what i mean is, if you want a new computer, and you get faster hardware, you get the os that needs better hardware. xp was not meant to run with dual core computers. with the advent of dual cores we can sacrifice a little of their awesome power for a more sightly interface. so far with regular windows update and disk defrags i haven't had any issues with vista. uac is a hassle, but everyone turns it off.
This I would agree with. You probably arnt going to get great results with a 1.5 ghz x86 processor, 256 megs of pc133 ram, and a geforce 4 video card. I dont know this for sure, but i assume its true. This set up would have been ideal for windows xp on release.Quote:
Originally Posted by scarph
You certainly arnt going to get good results on a 500 mhz 486, 64 megs of pc100 ram, and a 16 megabyte non hardware accelerated graphics card. This setup was probably Ideal on windows 98's release, but i dont exactly remember since it was 10 years ago and I was very young.
Even so older (but not ancient) hardware will probably be better supported after sp1, thus making it run smoother and faster... in theory. :)