PDA

View Full Version : Vista to XP? Hard Disc Copying Complications?



ytareh
01-14-2008, 01:07 PM
Ive been running Vista now for a few months and Im really tired of the inherent performance hit (as I and many others see it-ok so some say it only runs the cr8p when youre not running games etc ...but what about that 30-60 second 'hijack' of your pc everytime it starts???!!!.I dont think its an exagerration to say that its using up at least 150-225Mb of RAM(compared with XP ) (and maybe the performance equivalent of 0.1-0.3GHz of processor power -Id spend weeks trying to surpass a previous max overclock by that amount)
Has anyone done the switch back?What kind of fps (re)gain is there?
Most importantly I think I read that while you can connect two hard drives and transfer your skins etc when going form XP to Vista you can NOT do it going from Vista to XP....Is this correct?
Finally is XP Home as good/fast as Pro for general online gaming /surfing use?Thanks

Capt.LoneRanger
01-14-2008, 01:56 PM
I have not yet tried to replace XP over Vista but both systems use the same fileformats, so there should be no problem. The second drive is a handy thing though, as you probably have to format your system drive. As a great portion of computer-users think that they can store more data when they have just a single partition, this can be a problem, cause when formating C as your only partition you delete everything on the disk, Vista and important data.


In any case if you have the chance to backup to another disk DO SO!

The difference between XP Home and Pro is the advanced networking capabilities of the Pro-Version. This is basically all the administration stuff you need for a company where many people access the same files on a single server, etc. Additionally there are a few more options when trying to repair an XP Pro installation. (Honestly it is not the installation - Windows asks for the Pro-CD during repair-installations and won't accept Home, even though the searched files are on the Home-Version, too)

As a normal user you won't notice any difference between the Home- and Pro-Version of XP.

DuxCorvan
01-14-2008, 02:12 PM
No, no, Captain. Beware!

XP Home has no multiprocessor capabilities. This is, if you have a Core Duo, Dual Core or similar, you'll use only one of the two processors, and won't benefit from hyperthreading, either.

I learnt that too late. If I only could find a cheap XP Pro... My rig works OK, but I'm losing gas when many tasks are open and running.

If you run Il-2 alone, then you wont not notice much difference, since Il-2 doesn't appear to use multiprocessors very effectively, and relies on one.

Capt.LoneRanger
01-14-2008, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
No, no, Captain. Beware!

XP Home has no multiprocessor capabilities. This is, if you have a Core Duo, Dual Core or similar, you'll use only one of the two processors, and won't benefit from hyperthreading, either.

I learnt that too late. If I only could find a cheap XP Pro... My rig works OK, but I'm losing gas when many tasks are open and running.

If you run Il-2 alone, then you wont not notice much difference, since Il-2 doesn't appear to use multiprocessors very effectively, and relies on one.

I honestly though I was only giving tips for the replacement, not for performance.

You are correct, though. Vista can utilize multi-core processors much better than XP. But beware to think that this means XP only runs on one core!
Open your taskmanager and check out the system-performance-tab. If you use a multiprocessor core, you will see diagrams for each core. You can easily see that both are working - well at least I can see that on my XP.

There is also an upgrade available to boost performance for applications that fully support multi-processor-configurations.

And last not least: Vista may support multicores better - but it sucks up so much performance for itself that probably won't notice.


(Forgot about Hyperthreading: Hyperthreading is of course available in XP, too. If your mainboard and processor allows it and you installed XP with activated HT, your Xp can very well use that.)

ytareh
01-14-2008, 03:35 PM
Wow i never knew there was so much uncertainty around XP (especially Home) support for Dual Core cpus.It seems very hard to get a definitive answer.Ive searched for ages .

Some say Only works on one core
Works fine on both cores
Works on 2 cores but not as well as Vista

Anyone care to add their 2 cents (euro or usa or any other curency you care to mention accepted!)

DuxCorvan
01-14-2008, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
Open your taskmanager and check out the system-performance-tab. If you use a multiprocessor core, you will see diagrams for each core. You can easily see that both are working - well at least I can see that on my XP.


That's because you use XP Professional. I have only one (1) diagram there. XP Home can't use multi-core, at least on Intel 'D' dual-core processors.

Korolov1986
01-14-2008, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
That's because you use XP Professional. I have only one (1) diagram there. XP Home can't use multi-core, at least on Intel 'D' dual-core processors.

I have XP Home 32 bit and have dual-core capabilities with my Core 2 E6550.

Capt.LoneRanger
01-15-2008, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
Open your taskmanager and check out the system-performance-tab. If you use a multiprocessor core, you will see diagrams for each core. You can easily see that both are working - well at least I can see that on my XP.


That's because you use XP Professional. I have only one (1) diagram there. XP Home can't use multi-core, at least on Intel 'D' dual-core processors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pro and Home use the same Kernel. There should be no difference. If it is, there is either a problem with your board, your chipset-drivers or your installation.
From your posts I draw the conclusion that you confirmed 2 cores were working on Vista, so I guess this leaves only the two later options.