QUOTE (DonDamm @ Jun 3 2007, 04:53 AM)

I've heard that it is slower than XP from others and my impression of my test machine is that it is slower, but I have nothing to back that up.
That is like complaining about the preformance drop when switching from 95 to 98, or from 98 to 2000, or from 2000 to XP, and now from XP to Vista.
Every time you make the switch to the newest OS, there is a preformance drop untill new hardware comes out to offset the differance in preformance.
I am running an AMD 64 4000+ (Stock clocking right now), 2GB G-Skill DDR400, ATI Radeon X1900GT, and 2x160G Seagate Barracudas in Raid 0. My system clocks a 4.2 Windows Index due to the older CPU, but every other setting is 4.9+. My system is able to handle Vista effortlessly, and it's only clocked @ 2.4GHz. Sure he could use a bit more ram, and maybe a new card, but thats not to say that his current system will not run it.
If you'd like to check out how your system stacks up, check out the following link:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...adeadvisor.mspx