Will Vista be as fast as XP?

[ps24eva]

what you guys think?

[Aegis]

Vista will be faster than XP, due to new technology such as "fast-boot", and better memory management.

[army20]

Well actually the beta1 is not very fast

[Biohead]

I'm finding Beta 1 to be almost as fast as my dual-boot XP. I think it depends on what your running on, and it's not neccesarily the more expensive things that it works more efficently on. I'm using a 4 year old Win2K laptop. After initially having sound probs it's now enough for me to run it as a primary OS.

[Zxian]

I just gave Vista Beta 1 a try on my laptop. I was happily surprised that it reckognized my video card and audio card right away.

There are still a couple of things that are annoying (such as the lack of touchpad support), but I'm sure that I'll be able to work things out in the end.

[XPero]

Slower for sure iin same machine. In Vista, we will have big icons, more detailed info abou items, etc..it will slow the computer for sure.

[ps24eva]

yeah but all that stuff is offloaded to the video card.

why would it slow the pc down?

[DigeratiPrime]

^ More Memory/Page File Usage. Also could from additional services running. Windows One Care etc.

Im skeptical though, I think the interface should run better, i notice that clicking/resizing/draggin things in xp causes alot of cpu usage.

[XPero]

yeah but all that stuff is offloaded to the video card. 

why would it slow the pc down?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Navigating through folders and extracting info from files in real time to display their properties as you browse them will not be a GPU task Vista shows many details about your files (even an stupid star rank system), so I pressume it will slow down the normal use of the computer in same hardware.

Edited August 23, 2005 by XPero

[Gouki]

Navigating through folders and extracting info from files in real time to display their properties as you browse them will not be a GPU task Vista shows many details about your files (even an stupid star rank system), so I pressume it will slow down the normal use of the computer in same hardware.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly!

[Zxian]

@DigeratiPrime - Yup... much higher by default. On my laptop, it used ~300MB of RAM by default (XP with all drivers is ~250MB incl ATI drivers) and 38 processes! A full XP install has something like 20-ish by default.

Although I will definatly say that the layout of the GUI is much better. You can disable the extra information bar at the bottom from showing up, but the fact that you can navigate to any subfolder (not just the parent of the current folder) is a big plus. It definately makes things a lot faster. The new start menu is also much better as well (no more pop-out menus for "All Programs").

Even with my laptop, I didn't notice any lag whatsoever when browsing through files (and generating thumbnails for pictures and videos). My guess is that the threads to take care of those extras run at a lower priority so as not to interfere with normal usage. It's a beta1 OS and I don't even have all the drivers installed properly (just the default drivers for video and audio) and the system still runs quite quickly. Startup is a bit slow, but no optimizations have been made as of yet in that department.

Generally speaking, it's a nice improvement over XP. At the moment however, it seems to suffer from "identity crisis" (hehe, prathapml). There are some dialogs that say Vista, and some that say Longhorn.

[Martin Zugec]

Well, I think Vista will be faster...

a.) better memory management + background defragmentation + prefetching

b.) GUI handled by GPU

c.) and one of the most important thing is Vista will be designed for HDDs with 1GB Flash Cache

[boooggy]

the whole ideea is if u buy vista u buy a new machine build specially for vista.....is the way that companies make money.....

[Zxian]

@boooggy - I don't think so... Microsoft hasn't signed any deals with hardware manufacturers so that they can all "grab our money". I've read about a guy who ran vista on a system with PIII 800MHz, 256MB RAM, 20GB HD, and a 16MB Geforce video card, and the system worked fine. Sure, the glass effect wasn't there, but that's eye candy. The big changes, like Martin Zugec pointed out, are under the hood. Even without the aero glass, offloading the GUI to the GPU will improve performance termendously over the current standard.

And I already pointed out... the beta 1 was working fine on my laptop (1.5 years old). It will only get better from here.

[Biohead]

@boooggy - I don't think so... Microsoft hasn't signed any deals with hardware manufacturers so that they can all "grab our money". I've read about a guy who ran vista on a system with PIII 800MHz, 256MB RAM, 20GB HD, and a 16MB Geforce video card, and the system worked fine. Sure, the glass effect wasn't there, but that's eye candy.

I'm running a P3 600MHz, 320 RAM 12GB partition and it runs fine. Still no glass but from what I've heard it isn't that eye candy what we were promised yet.