|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Get Your Own E-Mail Account @MeraWindows.com
|
 |
|
New Page 1
New Page 1
| Show your cool quotient with @merawindows.com email account |
|
Welcome to MeraWindows forums.
Thank you for being at the Microsoft Windows Community Site. You may have to register before posting in forums. It's absolutely free. After registering, you can get all the benefits available to our registered members, you can access our Downloads section, you can participate in contests, etc. You can post in forums in English as well as in Hindi, in fact we encourage you to use Hindi in your posts. If you have any problem with registration or login, please contact us.
|
 | SearchForum HomeAggregated Forum | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
 | | |
|
|
|
| Gaming Performance: Windows Vista SP1 vs. XP SP3 |
|
|
Even as Microsoft tries to shove Windows Vista down the collective and unwilling throat of computer users worldwide, the company is still perfecting the well-aged and well-loved Windows XP . The latter of the two operating systems just received its third (and evidently last) service pack.
The collection of fixes and improvements includes the vast majority of security and performance updates, patches, and other stuff released in the two plus years SP2 was released. It also includes a few new improvements. There's little in SP3 that the user will actually see; pretty much everything the service pack packs is background stuff.
Of course, with the release of a new service pack comes a huge, pressing question: How does it compare to Windows Vista and its own recent update, Service Pack 1, in the game performance department? Vista, of course, has been plagued by criticism that games run on it don't perform as well as they do in Windows XP, even though most of the problems were due to early graphics drivers and have gradually been worked out.
Come with us as we install XP SP3 and take it for a test drive, and more importantly compare it to Vista SP1 with a batch of performance tests. Though DirectX 10 is Vista-only, many a gamer has sworn not to upgrade; will XP SP3 cement their decision, or has Vista and its drivers matured enough to change a few minds?
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302495,00.asp
 |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
As stated, the alterations that Windows XP's third service pack brings to the game are background improvements. While some of them are more noticeable than others, the user won't actually see or "feel" any changes in the graphical user interface (GUI). The experience largely remains unchanged, and Vista-phobic users will probably appreciate that.
That doesn't mean SP3 is without merit, though; its improvements are useful. Besides scores of security improvements, bug fixes, and other stuff that's already been released through Windows Update in the past two and a half years or so, it also includes:
- "Black hole" router detection helps your PC detect and avoid routers that drop packets. This feature is part of Vista, but is only now being introduced to XP.
- Network Access Protection (NAP) allows you to create a customized "health" policy to scope out another computer's condition before your PC is allowed to communicate with it; you can even drop computers lacking compliance into a restricted network until they become compliant.
- Keyless installation allows you to install a copy of Windows XP without immediately entering a product key; you can punch in the key later. This is another feature of Windows Vista that XP users covet.
- A more descriptive security options user interface actually makes attempts to explain security settings things in plain language.
- A more advanced cryptographic module bumps Windows XP's compliance of the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) from the 140-1 standard to FIPS 140-2, and the modules are fully certified; more detailed information is available at TechNet.
You can find out more about the service pack at Microsoft's release notes page dedicated to it. Note that Windows Update isn't the only method of grabbing the service pack; you can download it as a file, or even grab a CD ISO to which you can use to create disc containing the pack.
Check out Paul Thurrott's tutorial on slipstreaming the new service pack into a customized Windows XP CD. Armed with this, you won't have to install SP3 after dropping a fresh Windows XP installation onto a hard drive.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
You can get Windows XP SP3 through Windows Update. The entire process of updating a fresh installation of Windows XP SP2, including downloading via a high-bandwidth cable mode, took less than 45 minutes and only required a single reboot.
Note that Microsoft has stated that you can't pop SP3 onto a pure installation of non-updated Windows XP; you'll need to install, at the very least, SP1 before you pull the trigger on the latest service pack. After installation, I didn't notice any performance improvement or increased responsiveness, but one effect it definitely had is a speedier boot time, which I clocked with a stopwatch. Pre-SP3, Windows booted from a cold PC in 56.12 seconds; after the update, it booted in 42.56 seconds.
The experience of browsing a network with Windows Vista machines scattered about on it was also improved. Shares on Vista machines showed right up on the XP SP3 testbed.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
When it comes to gaming, Windows Vista has a distinct advantage over XP: DirectX 10. SP3 doesn't change that simple fact, but does it have any bearing on game performance at all? And how does a PC equipped with XP SP3 compare to a Vista box upgraded to SP1?
I threw together a testbed, deliberately built as an average PC as opposed to the ET Killer Gaming Rig. The specs are as follows:
| Component |
Make/Model |
| |
| Processor |
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 |
| |
| Motherboard and chipset |
ASUS Blitz Formula |
| |
| Memory |
Corsair CM2X1024-9136C5D (1142MHz DDR2, 5-5-5-15) 2GB |
| |
| Hard drive |
WD6500AAKS |
| |
| Optical drive |
Generic DVD RW |
| |
| Audio |
SoundBlaster XtremeGamer |
| |
| Graphics Card |
AMD/ATI Radeon HD 3870 |
I installed Windows XP Professional onto one hard drive, and Vista Home Premium onto a second, identical one. The two operating systems never touched each other; I physically switched the cable when moving from one to the other.
I tested two synthetics and three games. Each game underwent tests under low preset details at 1024x768, and then again at high preset details plus 4X antialiasing at a res of 1920x1200.
Note that since I couldn't use DirectX 10 on XP (duh), I only ran the games in DirectX 9—and rather than using the new Vantage versions of the 3DMark and PCMark synthetic tests I used older, DX9 compliant versions.
The performance tests are:
- PCMark05—Like a good cheese, PCMark05 has aged nicely and still remains a decent, probing benchmark that puts each of a PC's subsystems through paces.
- 3DMark06—The DirectX 9 graphics benchmark extraordinaire uses gamelike environments to gauge a PC's graphics system.
- Supreme Commander—This robotic RTS beats on both the CPU, with ballistics calculations and other tough number crunching, and also, of course, tests the GPU.
- Crysis—The mother of all graphical tests, period.
- World in Conflict—A terrific and strenuous RTS with an extremely scalable engine.
I tested each OS both before and after the installation of the latest service pack: Vista in its vanilla form, and XP using SP2.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vista somehow outperformed XP in PCMark05's overall score, but its important subsystem scores (CPU and Memory) were very close to the older operating system.
The PCMark main score separated the two OSes by around 1000 points—but it's really hard to see any discrepancy in any other PC-related activities.
3DMark06 was extremely close all around, with XP edging Vista out by a hair. Continued...
|
| |
|
|
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|