Member Avatar for Gaming wiz

Hello everyone

A qestion came to me tht day , logically XP is much better then vista when it comes to gamers cuaz vista needs more ram and a little more of the procecsor and Gfx , unless you have a C2D Quad ,4 Gigs of 1066mhz ram and a high end GFx u wont notice the diffrence , i kinda pushed it didnt i with a quad a 4 gigs lol thats 2 much , but u get the picture like ive got :-

C2D e4500 2.2 /800/2mb cache
dq31pr
1 GIG of 512x2 corsair ram /667 mhz dual
saegate baracuda
ati x1550

well with a mid range system like this i know i will feel the diffrence especially coz ive only got a gig of ram i know that vista dosent take more the 348 or 443 mb of ram but 1 gig isnt enough , too bad my mobo has only 2 slots , Getting 2 the point so is XP or Vista better mainly when it comes 2 gaming. thx

  • 16 Contributors
  • 17 Replies
  • 195 Views
  • 1 Year Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by mcsgadgets

Dani AI

Generated

Short summary for later readers: for the mid‑range rig described by (Core2 Duo E4500, 1 GB RAM, ATI X1550) Windows XP 32‑bit was the pragmatic gaming choice in 2008 — lower RAM/driver overhead and wider game compatibility. Vista added new graphics/drivers and security but expected faster hardware. Both OSes are now out of support (XP: April 8, 2014; Vista: April 11, 2017), which matters for security and modern game/platform compatibility. (learn.microsoft.com)

Technical clarification (answering and the DirectX thread): Vista shipped with Direct3D/DirectX 10 and the new WDDM driver model. DirectX 11 was introduced with Windows 7 (and later delivered to Vista via platform updates), so the simple “Vista = DirectX11” line is incorrect. DX10/11 features need DX10/11‑capable hardware; older DX9‑era cards won’t gain those features simply by changing OS. (learn.microsoft.com)

Real‑world behavior and fixes: early Vista drivers caused noticeable slowdowns in some titles, but drivers and service packs closed much of the gap over time. Many modern/late‑era games also listed higher Vista memory/CPU needs (Crysis, for example, cited higher RAM on Vista than on XP), so systems with ~1GB would still struggle. For legacy titles that refuse to run under Vista (as noted), common workarounds were compatibility mode / “run as administrator,” vendor patches, or running XP inside a virtual machine / Windows‑7 XP Mode — the VM route preserves compatibility but offers limited 3D performance. (anandtech.com)

Bottom line: the community consensus in this thread (see , ) was correct for that hardware: XP gave the better gaming experience then. For long‑term safety and access to modern games/platforms (Steam dropped XP/Vista support in 2019), neither is a good choice today — upgrading OS and adding RAM/GPU is the more future‑proof path. (partner.steamgames.com)

Recommended Answers

All 17 Replies

Member Avatar for DimaYasny

the only thing vista has that xp doesn't is directX11, and some games do require that.

Member Avatar for BillBrown

I've found XP to be far less annoying than Vista and I've never actually used Vista. I've only watched others use it (and that's enough for me).

Member Avatar for The Dude

XP or lower is recommended!

Member Avatar for sittas87

my common sense tells me XPXXPXPXPXPXP:)
I just love it

Member Avatar for Doctor Inferno

I'd recommend XP for that amount of RAM.

Member Avatar for snikey24

I would have to agree on that fact, for a computer with those specs, XP would definitely be the way to go.

You would probably find that if you wish to continue palying recently released games you would want to update the amount of ram that you have in your computer (I have a Q6600 w/ 4Gb RAM:)). Also the way technology is dropping in price, it is ridiculously cheap to buy more ram.

(XP has less issues with drivers as well)

Member Avatar for Doctor Inferno

But then again, I'd recommend vista if you have better specs.

Member Avatar for sittas87

Ill say xp cos youll find after a while that vista is a pain in the bud due to several reasons. I think microsoft realised it cos why is the next OS coming out so soon after the vista release. lets just hope that windows 7 will give us something thats worth calling an upgrade.

Member Avatar for rockhauler

Vista is ok now. When it first came out there were problems.

It always happens like that. It will always be like that. It has always been like that.

Nothing changes.

Member Avatar for Khaltzane

xp 4 life

Member Avatar for Mashka

I use XP

Member Avatar for Ancient Dragon

I'm using 64-bit Vista, but wish I was using XP so that I could play my favorite game Diablo LOD. It won't play on Vista. I have a copy of 64-bit XP but had to uninstall it because of lack of device drivers at the time. I also have a copy of 32-bit XP but using it on a different computer. Vista Home was preinstalled on the HP computer I'm using now.

Member Avatar for sknake

Vista is ok now. When it first came out there were problems.

It always happens like that. It will always be like that. It has always been like that.

Nothing changes.

While that is true it does vary on how many problems there are and what type of problems. With the UAC security controls added, the UI for the OS completely overhauled, program virtualization (stop writing in C:\Program Files\App\blah.ini, rewrites to C:\Users\<Username>\App\blah.ini), and a more touchy firewall Vista manage to break a lot of applications and cause very quirky behavior. Too much change for a single release and broke too much existing software.

XP is the better choice in my opinion but not for much longer. We will have to move to a newer version of windows soon but I am holding out for Windows 7.

Member Avatar for sloan31

I have a Q8200 with 6gigs ram and couldn't get one of my favorite games (Act of War) to play on 64bit Vista. I ended up wiping vista out and installing Ubuntu....now I can play my games using wine.

Bottom line, if I can play games using wine but not in Vista...that really shows you how much vista sucks.

Member Avatar for josmcc

If you're into gaming stay with XP, unless you can fork out the money for a decent DX10 videocard. Yeah, you'll probably need to get a little more RAM also.

Member Avatar for serkan sendur

i think vista sucks because part of it is written with c# and uses clr instead of native code, which probably makes it slow.

Member Avatar for mcsgadgets

I have just bought an Vista Laptop, but it has to be said, I think XP is better,

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.