Windows Vista Beta 2 Public: Yes, Super-7 users can run it...

[chucky2]

Well, installed Windows Vista Beta 2 on teh following:

Tyan S1598C2 1.06e BIOS
AMD K6-3+ 450 oc'd to 600MHz (6x100)
512MB (2x256MB) Mushkin PC100 CAS2
Seagate 7200.7 160GB SATA
Radeon 9500 128MB
Syba PCI 2 port SATA (SI 3112A RAID)
SIIG USB 2.0/FIREWIRE 10/100 ETHERNET RJ45 COMBO PCI CARD
Soundblaster 16 PCI
LG GSA-4163BI DVD DL w/ a bunch of speeds I don't remember

The Good:

After turning on ACPI, Vista installed right up with no drama. Mind you, it installed SLOW, but, install it did.

Vista detected everything except the SB 16 - go figure, that should be like a no brainer detection give the amount of those out there - and the Radeon 9500.

Hitting Windows Update took care of the SB 16, except for the gameport. For whatever reason, Vista Beta 2 could not get the gameport working.


The Bad:

Windows Update couldn't get the Radeon 9500 installed...it had a 23 error or something like that. Resolution options were limited, and it wouldn't let me pick a monitor (My monitor is a Syntax Olevia 32" LCD TV).

Next I hit up ATI's site and downloaded the beta Vista drivers. Radeon 9500 is the oldest card supported by the drivers, so I just squeaked by on that one. The installer worked fine, and upon reboot it changed the Device Manager entry from something descriptive to Radeon 9500.

Still had an error, but this time it was like a 43 error instead. No matter what I did, I couldn't get Vista to fully recognize the Radeon 9500. This means the resolution options I had were limited, the fonts didn't look near as sharp as they should, and I seriously wonder how much hardware accelleration I was enjoying. Which leads me to The Worse...


The Worse:

Microsoft Vista Beta 2 Public is SLOW. There, that about says it all. I'm sure on the minimum that M$ recommends it's not too bad, as in somewhat passable. But on my system, performance was not exactly earth shattering...unless you count the earthquake I was praying for here in the Chicagoland area so my PC could be swallowed to the depths of h3ll and I could get a nice new notebook with 802.11n when they finally come out.

Now, I don't want to totally slam the performance...once I let it finish booting up, I could open an IE 7 window or 3 and surf the 'Net in somewhat comfort. But still, this is definitely slower than Windows XP Pro w/ SP2 that I've been running. And this is a fresh install...don't want to think about loading up all the other normal basic apps and then 8 months down the road when the system begins its eventual Windows slowdown.

Maybe if I could have got the Radeon 9500 fully working, and if that was really the cause of the slowness I was experiencing, I would have a better report, but as of right now, I'm sorry to say that unless running Vista is absolutely required over any type of remotely enjoyable speed, Windows XP w/ SP2 is the end of the line for us Super-7 owners. 🙁

Seriously hope others have better luck than I...

Chuck

 

[Tarrant64]

Well your system isn't exactly the best to run Vista on, so performance won't be all that great. Considering what is 'recommended' for Vista...

A lot of your problems seem similar to mine. I posted a little bit of stuff on my blog about it. Even after installing ATI drivers it recognized my cards, but no chipset information, memory or anything like that. It works though(to some extent).

It is pretty slow though. Almost painfully slow. My soundcard(creative audigy 2) still doesn't work either.

I think the luck will vary from person to person. Those with top end systems might have something to say that differs from others perspective of performance.

 

[aceofskies05]

your proccessor doesnt meet the 800mhz minimum

 

[stash]

A: It's a beta, and most of the perf things haven't been worked on.
B: Your system is underpowered.

 

[spyordie007]

I wouldnt expect much for performance running XP on your system...

 

[chucky2]

All:

I definitely wasn't expecting anything...this is a late 2006/early 2007 OS and we're talking a PC that's six and a half years older than it...at least the motherboard. I was honestly surprised Vista even installed, let alone was marginally usable.

I installed Vista on my brothers PC (A8N-SLI Deluxe, 3000+, 1GB RAM, 6600GT, 7200.7 120GB SATA) and it was very workable, enough so that if I had that rig, I'd have no problem running Vista just for a change of scenery.

So since my XP install was FUBAR'd (by my own doing) and I already had Vista burned, I figured why not, it can't hurt anything. Plus, I was just curious if it'd even work, given the 800MHz minimum on the CPU requirement.

My post wasn't to bag on Vista at all - that wouldn't be fair running it on my PC and doing that - it was just really an informational for people thinking about Vista with older rigs like mine that it is possible, however probably not very enjoyable.

Chuck