Going back to XP still faster than Win7 lol

[u2konline]

My specs: Q6600+550ti+xp 64 pro+4gb ddr2 memory.

Was using win7 , and vista over the years/months. Went back to XP game performance is still like 20%-40% faster over win7 haha. I can only guess because of the less resources XP has, 20-25 at times. PF usage is always like 260mb or 800mb or something.
Another interesting thing, when uploading videos to youtube before on win7 i can hardly browse the net, but on XP i can browse the net with little slowdown. less bandwidth?

Just some game examples which i tested:

NFS HP 2010 1920X1080, MAX = 45-60. On win7 i can't even run this game at 1920x1080 or 1600x900 without the frame rate stuck between 19-30.

Hellgate london = 60 all the time lol at 1920 max with full AA

007 Bloodstone = 1920x1080, max, full aax8 = 47-60.

Can never play those games like that on win7 or vista. Also another trick i found , may work on win7 , i notice recording to be about 30% smoother using Fraps 2.7.4. Not going to post a link , you have to find it on your own, but recording is much better using a old version of fraps. Bottom line, less resources, faster gameplay it seems. Only flaw with XP, GUI isn't as good, and well can't run dx11 or dx10 games, not really a big deal atm. I am building my AMD build soon( secondary computer ), going with a 8 core , 12gb of ram, 7850 2gb computer with win7. I will post up some videos later, going to be testing for a while and trying out games.

[Jetster]

W7 is not for every pc

[Jack1n]

It could be because XP runs those games at DX9 as opposed to DX10,11 on win7.

[LDNL]

All those games are DX10,11 titles so no wonder they perform better on XP when they're forced to run at DX9. Also a 550Ti isn't exactly something I'd use to play at 1920x1080 resolution.
E: And cmon its over a 10 year old OS so no wonder you can run it better on an older system and something new runs W7 better.

[u2konline]

Originally Posted by Jetster

W7 is not for every pc

I agree

Originally Posted by Jack1n

It could be because XP runs those games at DX9 as opposed to DX10,11 on win7.

True.

Originally Posted by LDNL

All those games are DX10,11 titles so no wonder they perform better on XP when they're forced to run at DX9. Also a 550Ti isn't exactly something I'd use to play at 1920x1080 resolution.

Games i have tested so far, seems like i have to play at 1920x1080 or 1680x1050 because any other resolution and the aspect ratio is all screwed up, not to mention performance.
But yea dx9 faster, all good with me.

[FreedomEclipse]

Personally, Ive run Windows Vista and Windows 7 on much much much older hardware then yours and Ive still managed to get a decent enough gaming experience out of it. even though it was all DX9 titles.

Old back up rig specs

board: Msi K8N Neo 2 Platinum (Skt 939)
CPU: AMD64 FX-55 or overclocked AMD64 3000+@2.8Ghz
RAM: 4GB DDR-PC3200
GPU: ATi X850XT PE AGP
HDD: Sata I Samsung spinpoint

[theoneandonlymrk]

Originally Posted by u2konline

I agree


True.


Games i have tested so far, seems like i have to play at 1920x1080 or 1680x1050 because any other resolution and the aspect ratio is all screwed up, not to mention performance.
But yea dx9 faster, all good with me.

It would be a fair comparison if you had tried the games on 7 with them switched to a dx9 codepath but its all relative , xp would not work out better for me running crysis 3 for example or other recent games but if your happy then fair enough.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by u2konline

My specs: Q6600+550ti+xp 64 pro+4gb ddr2 memory.

Was using win7 , and vista over the years/months. Went back to XP game performance is still like 20%-40% faster over win7 haha. I can only guess because of the less resources XP has, 20-25 at times. PF usage is always like 260mb or 800mb or something.
Another interesting thing, when uploading videos to youtube before on win7 i can hardly browse the net, but on XP i can browse the net with little slowdown. less bandwidth?

Just some game examples which i tested:

NFS HP 2010 1920X1080, MAX = 45-60. On win7 i can't even run this game at 1920x1080 or 1600x900 without the frame rate stuck between 19-30.

Hellgate london = 60 all the time lol at 1920 max with full AA

007 Bloodstone = 1920x1080, max, full aax8 = 47-60.

Can never play those games like that on win7 or vista. Also another trick i found , may work on win7 , i notice recording to be about 30% smoother using Fraps 2.7.4. Not going to post a link , you have to find it on your own, but recording is much better using a old version of fraps. Bottom line, less resources, faster gameplay it seems. Only flaw with XP, GUI isn't as good, and well can't run dx11 or dx10 games, not really a big deal atm. I am building my AMD build soon( secondary computer ), going with a 8 core , 12gb of ram, 7850 2gb computer with win7. I will post up some videos later, going to be testing for a while and trying out games.

Faster perforamcne is due to no DX10 or DX11, and no rendering for GPU to draw desktop. Win7 is actually faster for disk accesses, from my testing, and Win8 is a step above that. XP also doesn't support TRIM properly, but SSD garbage collection on new drives is good enough to not matter.


Frankly, I got more computer than I need for desktop use, and gaming, it's all about GPUs because I run multi monitors, so I don't care that my current OS need more grunt than one form nearly 20 years ago.


That said, I got a few games that don't work in Vista, 7, or 8, so I still have an XP OS installed on one box.