overclockers.com's take on Vista

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: apoppin

it's called SOUR GRAPES

when *you* decide to upgade THEN will be "worth it" ?
-until then the rest of us should live with you in the Stone Age in a "fool's DX9 paradise"?


i think not

it is only "minor" to you because you don't have it and you are minimizing it because you didn't upgrade for any reason

it's called justification and we all do it

and quit giving me that 2nd hand crap about DX10 - HW has caught up
-you are stuck in the past
:thumbsdown:

Hold on there tiger. I am not sour about anything and I am not ignorant of what hardware is available and what it is capable of. DX9 is hardly the stone age, since all current games are mainly based on it. (Some have DX10 patched on but this is just half assed anyhow.)

Just because most of us prefer to wait a little longer for DX10 to become more mainstream does not mean we are happy living in the stone age.

Yes the differences are minor, and yes I have seen them in person on other peoples rigs that are frankly quite a bit better spec'd than what you have. Quit feeding those of us who know what the hell we are talking about that the hardware has caught up, because frankly it has not. Neither has the software since it is almost all based on DX9 with some halfassed DX10 patched on to give marketing something to sell for those that just can't wait for DX10 to become the main development API.

 

[apoppin]

believe what you want to ... i have proof in my rig



i will not waste time arguing with what someone cannot see - or refuse to appreciate - what they don't have
--but i DO understand why you are putting it down

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: apoppin
believe what you want to ... i have proof in my rig



i will not waste time arguing with what someone cannot see - or refuse to appreciate - what they don't have
--but i DO understand why you are putting it down

LOL, I am not putting it down at all. I am just saying that real DX10 is not fully here yet and that until it is there is no sense in getting all worked up and spending a fortune just to be able to enjoy the few "crumbs" developers are throwing at us.

BTW, if I wanted a rig like yours or better, I would have it. What I have is still serving me well for my needs and I am not ready to spend the money to upgrade yet. My current system is no slouch at all.

 

[Canterwood]

Originally posted by: soonerproud
BTW, if I wanted a rig like yours or better, I would have it. What I have is still serving me well for my needs and I am not ready to spend the money to upgrade yet. My current system is no slouch at all.

You're talking to the guy who used to run a P4 2.8 and x850xt on Win2K and went to great lengths to argue that he didn't need XP and it was enough for his needs when A64's and C2D's first were around.

Now he's 'Mr latest and greatest' and telling us that we're all just jealous of him and his uber DX10 playing, 32bit loving behemoth system, lol.

 

[flexy]

its an opinion, but the MS website gave me some laughs, nevertheless:

People, this is seriously a reply straight on the quoted MS site:
>>
Sometimes changing your computing behavior can have a big impact on your PC's performance. If you?re the type of computer user who likes to keep eight programs and a dozen browser windows open at once?all while instant messaging your friends?don?t be surprised if your PC bogs down. Keeping a lot of e-mail messages open can also use up memory.

If you find your PC slowing down, ask yourself if you really need to keep all your programs and windows open at once. Find a better way to remind yourself to reply to e-mail messages than to keep all of them open.
>>

Darn !!!

Now..look people. It's really easy: We have 2008 now and Vista is the OS per choice.

So, people:

1) Do NOT open a bunch of emails at the same time, this is bad, bad, bad!!
2) Keep an eye on your open windows! If you have more than 8 browser windows open, please reboot!
3) Don't move the mouse too fast! On a high-end PC the IRQ cycles caused by the mouse movement in Vista have a SERIOUS impact on performance. It's a good habit to reboot each time the mouse has moved approx. 150ft/50m on the screen.
4) Keep screen resolutions low. We all were used to play at high resolutions like 1600x or even higher using XP. In Vista, it is advised to have a MAX resolution of 800x600, otherwise it might cause serious performance problems. Needles to say a reboot is always good once the screen resolution has changed. This is to free allocated resources which Vista might need.

:/

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Most people do not need more than 2 Gigs of RAM. Unless you are a gamer, heavy multitasker or you use memory intensive programs, 2 Gigs is more than enough and will be for at least the next year or two.

i wanted to flame...but actually you are right. You're saying "dont need MORE than 2gb" <-- which actually right.

Anyway i wouldnt even touch a machine BELOW 2GB running Vista..2GB really a bare minimum if you do only halfway "normal" things.
4GB very nice to have, for serious stuff "a must" <-- IMHO
8GB questionable

(whereas the two last ones of course imply 64 bit OS....and 8GB right now are actually reasonable since mem is so darn cheap right now...talking hardcore-stuff like heavy video-editing and similar.)

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Canterwood

You're talking to the guy who used to run a P4 2.8 and x850xt on Win2K and went to great lengths to argue that he didn't need XP and it was enough for his needs when A64's and C2D's first were around.

Now he's 'Mr latest and greatest' and telling us that we're all just jealous of him and his uber DX10 playing, 32bit loving behemoth system, lol.

His system is not much better than the current one I have except for the video card. At stock speeds our systems perform about the same except video. His can overclock better, but I prefer to just run at stock speeds anymore.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: flexy
Darn !!!

Now..look people. It's really easy: We have 2008 now and Vista is the OS per choice.

So, people:

1) Do NOT open a bunch of emails at the same time, this is bad, bad, bad!!
2) Keep an eye on your open windows! If you have more than 8 browser windows open, please reboot!
3) Don't move the mouse too fast! On a high-end PC the IRQ cycles caused by the mouse movement in Vista have a SERIOUS impact on performance. It's a good habit to reboot each time the mouse has moved approx. 150ft/50m on the screen.
4) Keep screen resolutions low. We all were used to play at high resolutions like 1600x or even higher using XP. In Vista, it is advised to have a MAX resolution of 800x600, otherwise it might cause serious performance problems. Needles to say a reboot is always good once the screen resolution has changed. This is to free allocated resources which Vista might need.

:/

The problem is both you on the guy that wrote the rant are misinterpreting what MS said here in the first place. This advice was not intended for someone with plenty of memory and horsepower. It was intended for people who are trying to use a less equipped system like it was a high end system.

This advice is per-batem what enthusiast have been recommending people do for years if their systems lack the horsepower to multitask at that level.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Canterwood

Originally posted by: soonerproud
BTW, if I wanted a rig like yours or better, I would have it. What I have is still serving me well for my needs and I am not ready to spend the money to upgrade yet. My current system is no slouch at all.

You're talking to the guy who used to run a P4 2.8 and x850xt on Win2K and went to great lengths to argue that he didn't need XP and it was enough for his needs when A64's and C2D's first were around.

Now he's 'Mr latest and greatest' and telling us that we're all just jealous of him and his uber DX10 playing, 32bit loving behemoth system, lol.

i never did need XP .. straight to Vista

before my X850xt, i even had a GeforceSDR and before that a Rage Fury 32 and Win98SE ...
Do you HAVE a point?


or are you just telling us that you are NOW using my old argument ... the same one you used to laugh at?
:roll:

OK, imitation IS pretty flattering ... but i did not suffer ANY loss of Visuals because i was EVER a generation behind in DX or because i ran Win2K instead of XP. i wasn't restricted to DX8 while you ran DX9 ... and when SM3.0 titles became available, i got a 6800GS-OC then a 1950p/512M and 2900xt for DX10. When DX10 titles became playable at good details, i simply upgraded again to Crossfire.

But you stopped. Which is fine with me ... but don't tell me you have the "same thing" graphically ... IF you really believe that you are in denial and beyond help or reason.