legolash2o, on Nov 18 2007, 12:22 PM, said:
Sure, Vista may have gotten more compatibility fixes for software, but your forgetting the main reason.
Tests will never and I mean never show what the OS is made of. For example, why do/did they make tests of 32 bit built games? Of course no 64 bit built games are out on the market
yet and most XP users have the x86 version (in my opinion). So your comparing a high end OS with a low end (still good though) that does it's work on the 32 bit architecture and vista with it's 64-bit one.
Sure Vista
does handle 32 bit apps
fine but not as good as XP. So why even bother comparing? Just wait untill the gamemakers comes out with their 64-bit built games, when the CPU can really do it's job (I'm talking aboout 2-8 cores here). XP does not support 4+ cores as far as I know.
Oh and your still forgetting one thing. Although this goes for both OSs the games you often play on high end PCs are often such games that you play
online. You can have a
high end PC, but latency will still beat ya there. So if you have a s***ty connection then you don't have so much to argue about.
I had a battle with some friends of mine and we played Q4 and FEAR. Two of them have "high end" specced PCs. But they both have a really slow connection, so that didn't really help much with their "imba" FPS (frames..).
So stop comparing 32 built games. and you know just how "good" the x64 XP is
This post has been edited by Chrno: 20 November 2007 - 04:44 PM