Windows vista vs. xp?

[suislade]

Hello,

This might be a stupid question, but I really would like to know how well the game will run on Windows Vista if compared to Windows xp.

I have dx10 compatible 3d card and I use latest drivers, but still I experience some lag most of the games have.

I assume you have thought of us Vista users, because the game was delayed...

[ktr]

The game should run equally the same on both xp and vista. The major reason of lag is un-optimized drivers from the video vendor...ie nvidia, ati...etc.

[suislade]

Yeah, hope it will :)

[mortis]

The Vista drivers as they are now, are basically crap IMO. And normally I'm a a very open-minded person. Linux is looking more attractive every day.

[PointlesS]

vista is fully supported...how it runs is largely dependent on driver support...both ati's and nvidia's vista drivers aren't up to speed as xp...with ati's being a bit more ahead and developed...nvidia just released a new set of drivers which probably help a bit...regardless gaming on vista varies between just as good or slightly better...or significantly slower

by the time etqw comes out I'd imagine the drivers and os will mature into a much better experience because right now it's kind of a give and take situation

[Martijn]

For now the differnce between xp and vista is around 10%. But vista is a new platform...

[KlosterKatten]

Dosent depend as much on the OS as it does with the drivers for it.

[plodicus29of9]

Well there is a profile all ready for ETQW in the Nvidia drivers :D

As regards to vista? Not so sure...

Doom3 and Quake4 are OpenGL games and as ETQW uses a modified D3 engine I assume it's coded using OpenGL, but it's only an assumption.

If this is the case, current Vista drivers are totally crap at OpenGL games so if ETQW is going to be part of the Games for Windows trademark ATI and Nvidia need to pull their socks up and get some stable drivers that perform ;)

[fusen]

I was faced with the option of either installing vista or xp when I bought new hardware recently and all I've heard are horror stories when it comes to gaming on vista...

[Tejstar]

fusen - It's the same for me. I'm thinking of buying a new PC and can't decide between Vista and XP. It's looking more and more like XP as I just can't be hassled with messing around with drivers right now!

[KlosterKatten]

fusen - It's the same for me. I'm thinking of buying a new PC and can't decide between Vista and XP. It's looking more and more like XP as I just can't be hassled with messing around with drivers right now!

I would go for XP, Vista won't be that stable until maybe the end of the year, not worth it imo.

[Wiman]

I was faced with the option of either installing vista or xp when I bought new hardware recently and all I've heard are horror stories when it comes to gaming on vista...

Then I can tell you that I can play all the games I could before on my XP installation now on my Vista Business installation. Though I've been very lucky with drivers etc in the sence that everything has worked flawlessly. My buddies that have installed in simultaniously hasn't had the same luck. With some programs that work for me that doesn't work for them, and that on rather similar hardware. So my recomendation is Vista if you feel lucky, if not then XP and wait a bit :)

[Tejstar]

I would go for XP, Vista won't be that stable until maybe the end of the year, not worth it imo.
That's what I'm thinking too. Decisions, decisions...

[exoteror]

I woulden't like to touch vista till the end of the year myself, but it's a shame it has some big advantages

support for more than 3gb ram, direct x 10 being the main things i reckon.

[fusen]

Then I can tell you that I can play all the games I could before on my XP installation now on my Vista Business installation. Though I've been very lucky with drivers etc in the sence that everything has worked flawlessly. My buddies that have installed in simultaniously hasn't had the same luck. With some programs that work for me that doesn't work for them, and that on rather similar hardware. So my recomendation is Vista if you feel lucky, if not then XP and wait a bit :)


it wasn't the fact that games wouldn't install / run

it was that benchmarks using the same hardware but vista and xp as the operating systems would always come out in favour of xp

with vista it just seemed that FPS was being eaten up by the OS itself.

[Kmarion]

I woulden't like to touch vista till the end of the year myself, but it's a shame it has some big advantages

support for more than 3gb ram, direct x 10 being the main things i reckon.

Ram support is dependent on 32/64 bit platform. Obviously with 64 bit you have more address space. I havent seen any bugs in my Vista OS. Every once in awhile you might have a problem finding a driver for older hardware but thats about it. (For me at least)

[Fitzsimmons]

Fortunately thanks to the way OpenGL works, you'll be able to use those fancy "DirectX 10" features on your videocard without actually needing to run Vista. This is mostly me assuming things here, but I remember that splashdamage was working with nvidia to enable the features available to the 8800 series of cards in ETQW. Presumably these extensions are available in the OpenGL implementation provided with their drivers no matter what OS you use. And thus lack of vendor lock-in wins the day again!

(The downside? The features probably haven't been standardized since the OpenGL ARB can take a while to agree on things. That means that your fancy extensions are likely nvidia specifc right now. If you've got or are planning to get a DX10 compatible card from ATI, it probably won't be able to do anything above and beyond the features available to DX9. I could be wrong on this though; I haven't been following the news too closely so it is certainly possible that either SD has worked with ATI as well, or the extensions are beginning to be standardized.)

[johnrock2]

HI johnrock2 here I running vista on my computer no problems running quake 4 so bring on quake wars.


johnrock2 out:D

[Jeebs]

hmm just remeber how crap xp was i wouldent touch vista for a year or so
i tested it for a week or so across a few games some ran great some dident
its my understanding that XP will support DX10 so ill stick with XP

[Wiman]

it wasn't the fact that games wouldn't install / run

it was that benchmarks using the same hardware but vista and xp as the operating systems would always come out in favour of xp

with vista it just seemed that FPS was being eaten up by the OS itself.

Actually there are some games with certain settings that perform better in Vista than XP, that thanks to the better and smarter memory management. And I haven't felt that Vista is giving me much worse performance, otherwise I wouldn't still be using it :)

[johnrock2]

hmm just remeber how crap xp was i wouldent touch vista for a year or so
i tested it for a week or so across a few games some ran great some dident
its my understanding that XP will support DX10 so ill stick with XP

That will not happen for a long time dx10 support so keep dreaming.::p


johnrock2 out:cool:

[Wiman]

hmm just remeber how crap xp was i wouldent touch vista for a year or so
i tested it for a week or so across a few games some ran great some dident
its my understanding that XP will support DX10 so ill stick with XP

Diffrence is, XP was based on prior systems. Vista is fully rebuilt from top to bottom. And as said, DX10 will not be coming to XP because of it not being able to cope with some of the features (according to microsoft).

[johnrock2]

Diffrence is, XP was based on prior systems. Vista is fully rebuilt from top to bottom. And as said, DX10 will not be coming to XP because of it not being able to cope with some of the features (according to microsoft).

Your the man you take the words right out of my mouth:D


johnrock2 out:cool:

[Fitzsimmons]

Diffrence is, XP was based on prior systems. Vista is fully rebuilt from top to bottom. And as said, DX10 will not be coming to XP because of it not being able to cope with some of the features (according to microsoft).

Hah, right. That's a load of crap. Microsoft wants to just to create a virtual demand for Vista that wouldn't otherwise be there. I wish something like this would prompt more developers to consider OpenGL, but unfortunately I don't see that happening any time soon. :mad: Instead, it seems like a lot of developers are choosing to write DX9 and DX10 renderpaths into their engine

[johnrock2]

Hah, right. That's a load of crap. Microsoft wants to just to create a virtual demand for Vista that wouldn't otherwise be there. I wish something like this would prompt more developers to consider OpenGL, but unfortunately I don't see that happening any time soon. :mad: Instead, it seems like a lot of developers are choosing to write DX9 and DX10 renderpaths into their engine

bud go stick your back in the sand and the world is not flat ok:eek:


johnrock2 out:cool:

[fusen]

I swear I read a recent article about porting dx10 to xp...let me see if I can find a link


http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39095


bingo

[johnrock2]

I swear I read a recent article about porting dx10 to xp...let me see if I can find a link

ok show me the money were is it:rolleyes:

johnrock2 out:cool:

[Jeebs]

i was reading an article about XP supporting DX10
oh look google is realy your friend http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35110

[johnrock2]

i was reading an article about XP supporting DX10
oh look google is realy your friend http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35110

You never know but a good read thanks:D


johnrock2 out:cool:

[Jeebs]

Your welcome.

[plodicus29of9]

Aren't The Inquirer notorious for spreading unfounded rumours though??

[b0rok]

xp is bedder

[bFunk]

nice kick to an almost year old thread.

[Thomas45]

But hes still right :D

[hannes]

dont see much diffrence. maybe 10 fps or so. runs pretty good imo

[Sniper47]

Hi there,
anybody tried the nvidia 174.74 BETA drivers on XP?I am still waiting for WHQL.But now I ve read some articles about them,it seems that on VISTA are theese drivers crap,but nobody mentioned how they work on XP.:rolleyes:

[Nikko]

Sweet! I just found a thread from one year ago and made a really meaningful comment in it that will change everyone's lives forever!!

[Pure]

Hi there,
anybody tried the nvidia 174.74 BETA drivers on XP?I am still waiting for WHQL.But now I ve read some articles about them,it seems that on VISTA are theese drivers crap,but nobody mentioned how they work on XP.:rolleyes:

I am sure you can find a tread about those drivers (and any other drivers) on the guru3d.com forums.

[ncc386]

Umm... its a fact that Vista has significantly more overhead than XP. The drivers aren't crippled for the x86 distro of Vista. Some games run a little better on Vista. Some run a little better on XP. It's not because one OS is better than the other or that one has drivers that are teh l0se. Vista requires a little more CPU overhead and a lot more RAM. Vista also caches a lot more stuff than XP to try to help mitigate the additional processing/memory requirements.

Yes, DirectX10 is a marketing ploy by Microsoft. There is nothing incredibly special about Vista. If DirectX10 was modified, it could be released for XP but it won't happen because Microsoft doesn't make as much money if everyone is happily using their previous operating system. If there isn't a legitimate reason to spend hundreds of dollars to buy Vista, then Microsoft will be happy to invent reasons. Dropping techincal support for XP, creating DirectX10, and releasing games that require Vista to install (but not play) is one tactic that is being employed. Ironically, the few Vista-only games out there have already been hacked so XP owners can buy and play them just fine.

I like Vista and XP just fine. But there's no intelligent reason to go out and buy Vista unless you just like the interface. (and who doesn't?)

Microsoft plans to release a new Windows platform every 2 or 3 years, if I remember the statement correctly. By the time good driver support appears for Vista, Microsoft will already be trying to tell you how antiquated Vista is and how you need to go out and spend another couple hundred bucks so you can install whatever the next OS they're peddling is... and you'll have to upgrade your hardware just to make sure you can run it well enough so that it doesn't interfere with the performance of your games, just like we had to do with Vista and mid-grade (or worse) PC hardware right now.

[somedude]

Umm... its a fact that Vista has significantly more overhead than XP. The drivers aren't crippled for the x86 distro of Vista. Some games run a little better on Vista. Some run a little better on XP. It's not because one OS is better than the other or that one has drivers that are teh l0se. Vista requires a little more CPU overhead and a lot more RAM. Vista also caches a lot more stuff than XP to try to help mitigate the additional processing/memory requirements.

Yes, DirectX10 is a marketing ploy by Microsoft. There is nothing incredibly special about Vista. If DirectX10 was modified, it could be released for XP but it won't happen because Microsoft doesn't make as much money if everyone is happily using their previous operating system. If there isn't a legitimate reason to spend hundreds of dollars to buy Vista, then Microsoft will be happy to invent reasons. Dropping techincal support for XP, creating DirectX10, and releasing games that require Vista to install (but not play) is one tactic that is being employed. Ironically, the few Vista-only games out there have already been hacked so XP owners can buy and play them just fine.

I like Vista and XP just fine. But there's no intelligent reason to go out and buy Vista unless you just like the interface. (and who doesn't?)

Microsoft plans to release a new Windows platform every 2 or 3 years, if I remember the statement correctly. By the time good driver support appears for Vista, Microsoft will already be trying to tell you how antiquated Vista is and how you need to go out and spend another couple hundred bucks so you can install whatever the next OS they're peddling is... and you'll have to upgrade your hardware just to make sure you can run it well enough so that it doesn't interfere with the performance of your games, just like we had to do with Vista and mid-grade (or worse) PC hardware right now.

Actually I expect as backwards compatability becomes less of an issue, you'll probably find the "Windows of the Future" getting to be more like Linux in it's approach. They are basically trying to phase out the old formats already with Vista.

[sion47]

I got a quick question: How can you change the color of windows to black from the default light blue in vista?

(couldnt find a better topic for it all of a sudden :p)

[Dr.Quake]

Vista is a beta for windows 7 next year... for me i assume i never need vista, and will get the full version (win7) next year. :D

[Legganaragim]

I got a quick question: How can you change the color of windows to black from the default light blue in vista?

(couldnt find a better topic for it all of a sudden :p)

Right-click desktop>Personalization>Window Colour and Appearance

[panickin]

well if you haven't tried vista don't knock it, it's a better os than xp really, oh it's a hog, it eats 200mb more ram than xp does, lol, but i reckon for that matters any crap from microsoft sucks compared to a linux distro as windows eats up double the ram with half the features

[GorkerMorker]

Got Vista and I'm really loving it. My files are much less of a mess then in xp.

[kickback999]

Vista is crap bloat ware, the game will run slightly slower than xp because of the poorly coded "eye candy" and excess rubbish included in Vista. DX10 will almost certainly be available on XP look at Microsoft bullsh*t about some certain XP/Vista programs that "aren't compatible" with 2000.
But a simple modification or trick can remedy that (ETQW and Windows Defender being PRIME examples)
Still the game runs best on Linux as Microsoft can not purposely try to throttle OpenGL performance in Linux as they have apparently been doing in Windows (which I would believe because games always seem to run noticeably faster in Linux)
Im not trying to talk bollocks or rubbish microsoft just for the sake of it (really I would love to be able to call a microsoft product good), just telling the truth.

[ArR0tTa]

vista is craaap. it has too many problems and the only upgrade i would be getting is directx 10

you have to click as twice as much than you do in xp, it acts as if it has a built in anti-hack...

double click executable, click again, allow run, click, click, click!!! Thats vista

vista isnt simple like xp is, ill stay with xp

[Geraldus]

I love xp, but now i use vista. If you have a good rig you won´t notice or care about performance differences

[cHiOs]

Vista should be ok in a year or two.
One might as well switch to linux (if possible) to enjoy some OS freedom, and get the hands dirty.

[Brandmon]

vista is craaap. it has too many problems and the only upgrade i would be getting is directx 10

you have to click as twice as much than you do in xp, it acts as if it has a built in anti-hack...

double click executable, click again, allow run, click, click, click!!! Thats vista

vista isnt simple like xp is, ill stay with xp

I don't know why people say that really, must be the Basic Version of Vista maybe because Vista imo is great. As I am using it now, it is not any more complicated then XP (I have used XP for about 3 years) and any problems you encounter in Vista can be easily fixed with some effort.

Is Vista worth getting if you are planning to build a new Rig? Yes!
Is Vista worth upgrading from XP? Nope. Wait till Vista gets its next Service apck and it will be damn worth getting.

[Grr.]

Vista is giant resource hog, and runs games and visually intensive apps slower than they should be run.

There's absolutely no reason to get this over priced piece of crap until you're forced to by an app that no longer supports xp.

[kickback999]

How is vista great?
It costs between £155 for the cheapest basic i can find to £370 for the ultimate!!!
'So' you think, 'obviously this program contains something unique and very good that isn't available in any other operating system. Otherwise the price would just be ridiculous!'
And what a surprise... No it doesn't.
Sure you get aero, with its fancy "3d" switcher and transparency.
But my Linux leaves it in the shade in every respect. And uses less resources while managing to be more secure, less intrusive and more functional.
Who could market a product thats inferior to all the competition in every respect and still have people saying things like "Vista imo is great"
You have clearly never tried anything else other than Micro$hite.

Even your "only upgrade" directx10 is full of excess code long since rendered useless. It is a bloated, inefficient mess and has been constantly out shined by OpenGL since its release.

[YayoX]

Don't forget, you can still run Vista in Classic mode, so you don't have to worry about the 'bloatware' aspect. Personally, on my system Aero is a LOT faster than Luna (XP's Candy Theme system). I liked Vista, but it didnt support a few things i wanted to do. And keep in mind, some benchmarks show that games under Aero are up to 30% slower than on XP Luna... So if you *DO* use vista, use the Classic Style when ya play ;)

And if you're curious, i'm pretty sure theres some way you can try vista for 30 days before puttin in a key, but i'm not sure. I just "buy" the OEMs anyway ;)

[Brandmon]

How is vista great?
It costs between £155 for the cheapest basic i can find to £370 for the ultimate!!!
'So' you think, 'obviously this program contains something unique and very good that isn't available in any other operating system. Otherwise the price would just be ridiculous!'
And what a surprise... No it doesn't.
Sure you get aero, with its fancy "3d" switcher and transparency.
But my Linux leaves it in the shade in every respect. And uses less resources while managing to be more secure, less intrusive and more functional.
Who could market a product thats inferior to all the competition in every respect and still have people saying things like "Vista imo is great"
You have clearly never tried anything else other than Micro$hite.

For your information, I had tried Linux before, when I was with Windows XP. I found it confusing at first, and needed some time getting used to it, but I didn't switch to Linux, since I don't see any reason to, Windows XP was all good for me.

Then, I got a whole new computer and has Windows Vista with it. I tried it out and liked it. Its pretty much the same as XP and not 'inferior' as you are trying to imply but the plus from Windows XP is the fact that its much more attractive and also more orginised. Plus it is able to use DirectX 10, which gets my 8600 to good use ;)

Now, am I trying to imply that Windows Vista kicks the shit out of Windows XP? No. Windows Vista is not a huge step from Windows XP, except for the Visual Appearance which is far superior. But do I have any reason to switch back to Windows XP? No.
Oh and do please follow your own words. It clearly looks like you yourself (from your flaming) didn't even try Vista, yet accuse me of trying nothing but Microsoft which is clearly, false.

[YayoX]

I just thought about something about vista that upsets me.

If you use the Full version, and Upgrade from XP, then the product key becomes Upgrade Only... meaning if you try to do a full install with the full version, it'll tell you Invalid Key. So you're basically SOL for a clean install.

Kinda lame, Microsoft.

[kickback999]

I have tried Vista. I tried it for the month trial period that YayoX was quite right about. To tell you the truth, at first I quite liked it, dont get me wrong it actually looked quite slick. But unfortunately the constant asking for confirmation got on my nerves, it slowed down to snail pace very quickly and I couldent even run doom3 on the highest settings.
So I went back to Fedora Linux, which offers me better security, less intrusion, better speed and performance in games while have a UI that kick the 10 tons of sh*t through Vista (even if its a bit of a silly gimmick it still looks pretty cool).
Bearing mind this was on an AthlonXP3200 with 2gb ram and a 128mb 6600gt and I can still run ETQW on high settings at 1280x1024 in Linux.
Vista simply offers much less [features] for much more [money].
But each to his own! I just really hate Microsofts policies as well.
ps. OpenGL3.0 will put that 8600 to much better use ;)

[Brandmon]

ps. OpenGL3.0 will put that 8600 to much better use ;)

Lol true that. Too bad not alot of games use OpenGL :(

[panickin]

I have tried Vista. I tried it for the month trial period that YayoX was quite right about. To tell you the truth, at first I quite liked it, dont get me wrong it actually looked quite slick. But unfortunately the constant asking for confirmation got on my nerves, it slowed down to snail pace very quickly and I couldent even run doom3 on the highest settings.
So I went back to Fedora Linux, which offers me better security, less intrusion, better speed and performance in games while have a UI that kick the 10 tons of sh*t through Vista (even if its a bit of a silly gimmick it still looks pretty cool).
Bearing mind this was on an AthlonXP3200 with 2gb ram and a 128mb 6600gt and I can still run ETQW on high settings at 1280x1024 in Linux.
Vista simply offers much less [features] for much more [money].
But each to his own! I just really hate Microsofts policies as well.
ps. OpenGL3.0 will put that 8600 to much better use ;)

wrong, vista offers many more features for about the same money (go to wally world and price them, licenses are the same $), your problem was you didn't tweak it at all UAC is the first thing to go on any install of vista i do, then the hard drive tweaks and turning off all the stuff that happens automatically, good stuff for newbies or the not quite so involved but for a power user such as myself they are a tad much and do eat too much performance, my performance is right on par with an xp system, and probably better in the vid department as ATI's drivers are better for vista than xp

[panickin]

y'know just by reading the people that say they hate vista's posts i'd be willing to wager that 8/10 of them used vista for 1 week or less (1 week may be pushing it cuz it only took 2 days to have my vista rig running just as well as any xp rig with similar hardware)

[YayoX]

And remember: Vista gets faster as you use it, plus it has that IP Connection Compression Speedup thingy (I forgot the MS name of it)... get 10% faster speeds.. dunno if it works on latency though.. doubt it.

I still use XP anyway though.. lol

[engrpiman]

I run vista and my performance is the same as it was on XP. I have no problems with OpenGL games but DX 9 games have issues (which is solved by AA). My rule is that if you have 2GB+ ram then go with vista , if not stay with XP.

[kickback999]

wrong, vista offers many more features for about the same money (go to wally world and price them, licenses are the same $), your problem was you didn't tweak it at all UAC is the first thing to go on any install of vista i do, then the hard drive tweaks and turning off all the stuff that happens automatically, good stuff for newbies or the not quite so involved but for a power user such as myself they are a tad much and do eat too much performance, my performance is right on par with an xp system, and probably better in the vid department as ATI's drivers are better for vista than xp

What so vista is free?
and has more features than Linux?
I think not.
I just think that yes, maybe vista is just about acceptable as an OS, quite polished, fairly stable and the most secure Windows yet.
So for a Windows, its actually gonna pretty good (when its really ready)
But not when the free, or cheaper, alternatives beat it (what happened to the saying "you get what you payed for")
But its only really "big" because the big companies support it.
That (and ignorance) is the only thing that keeps microsoft afloat.
Now more and more programs are being developed for mac and linux too microsofts popularity is waning.

[panickin]

What so vista is free?
and has more features than Linux?
I think not.
I just think that yes, maybe vista is just about acceptable as an OS, quite polished, fairly stable and the most secure Windows yet.
So for a Windows, its actually gonna pretty good (when its really ready)
But not when the free, or cheaper, alternatives beat it (what happened to the saying "you get what you payed for")
But its only really "big" because the big companies support it.
That (and ignorance) is the only thing that keeps microsoft afloat.
Now more and more programs are being developed for mac and linux too microsofts popularity is waning.

no i meant as far as an xp vs vista license goes they're the same price (which i find messed up), if you read what i write on these forums about OS'es you'd find that i'm constantly talking about how much better linux is than anything MS has to offer, unfortunately linux isn't for the masses, sure you and i may know how to get it running and customize it how we want but the fact is the masses aren't willing to make the same sacrifices as you or i to learn how to use a linux distro to it's fullest, maybe with the newer ubuntu distros being so user friendly we'll see a change (personally i don't care much for ubuntu, lol), but until then, billy's got himself a goldmine, sell a beta let the masses test it, then fix what's messed up, kind of a twisted business model, but it seems to be working for him :rolleyes:

edit: and btw xp/vista does have something linux doesn't, codecs, there is no linux codec for the mainstream media files that even come remotely close to windows performance or quality

[Dr_Driller]

i tried etqw on xp_sp2 and vista_sp0, i had exactly the same performance on both system..

[53j0]

edit: and btw xp/vista does have something linux doesn't, codecs, there is no linux codec for the mainstream media files that even come remotely close to windows performance or quality

Probably stupidest thing I ever read on this forum. :D

BTW my mother is 57 years old and happy user of Ubuntu. If you ask her which one is better linux or windows she'll say linux because it was her first OS (I gave her a laptop with linux on it). She find things much easier in gnome than in windows , but I realy hate gnome. Right now I use Windows xp sp2 and I'm happy with it. I had vista in couple of months and it's ok OS but nonthing more. I have reason to perfere windows over linux but my mother doesn't.

[GENETX]

Easy math:

Vista x64:
max 60FPS on LOW

Linux, OpenSUSE 10.3 x64:
100> FPS High

Specs:
AMD Athlon 5600+
4GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon HD3870 512MB

[panickin]

Probably stupidest thing I ever read on this forum. :D

BTW my mother is 57 years old and happy user of Ubuntu. If you ask her which one is better linux or windows she'll say linux because it was her first OS (I gave her a laptop with linux on it). She find things much easier in gnome than in windows , but I realy hate gnome. Right now I use Windows xp sp2 and I'm happy with it. I had vista in couple of months and it's ok OS but nonthing more. I have reason to perfere windows over linux but my mother doesn't.

lol, show me mPlayer play a wmv file with anywhere near the quality or performance of windows, any of them VLC, what have you they just can't do it. Whether or not you like ubuntu is truly irrelevant to me, i don't, gimme SuSE, it's what i know and what i like for linux ;)

personally i have no reason to prefer windows over linux other than the fact that i have a crossfire rig so i have to take a vid card out to use linux (not linux's fault ati's) linux beats windows for me any day of the week :), i can deal with lousy codecs even, lol

^just noticed the SuSE user above me, look at the qw performance :D

edit 2: genetx your vista performance isn't right man, you should be able to do high with aa and af and hold 60, do you have ai on, you should leave catalyst ai off for qw, and r_usethreadedrenderer 2, you'll see a world of difference ;)

[kaya]

For now the differnce between xp and vista is around 10%. But vista is a new platform...

How many years is a platform new?

I wouldn't install vista if i got it for free.

[Gamehostingreviews.com]

As with most games I've tested, I get about 10% better framerates on XP than Vista. Vista just isn't there for gaming as of yet.

[Brandmon]

Easy math:

Vista x64:
max 60FPS on LOW

Linux, OpenSUSE 10.3 x64:
100> FPS High

Specs:
AMD Athlon 5600+
4GB DDR2-800
ATI Radeon HD3870 512MB

Why didn't you test them both on High? Or did you just make them up? ;)