My awful computer needs an update. Bad.

[Pidesco]

That example build that mkreku put up is really nice, I just don't see what's the point of shelling out the money required for Vista at this point. I'm guessing you have a working copy of XP somewhere so use that instead. It saves you 100$ right now, and you can always get Vista later if, at some point, there's a good enough reason for you to want it.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

I'm afraid XP came with the pre-built PC, so I don't have installation discs... I think.

[Pidesco]

oh, bummer. How much does XP cost, these days?

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

130$CA at futureshop.

 

I think I'll just stick to Vista. I won't have to make the switch later when it becomes the major OS.

[Spider]

The chance of Vista becoming the major OS to such a degree that XP will be obsolete is almost insignificant. I currently have it installed on my home computer and apart from DX10 there is not a single feature I have use for compared to XP.

 

MS know they dropped the ball on this one, so Windows 7 will be released before XP becomes obsolete, that I'm sure of.

 

But if you need to buy an OS, it matters little which you get.

[mkreku]

The reason I included Vista in the calculation was that it's always included in pre-built computers and I wanted to match the one Will posted earlier as close as possible. Also, the Vista I linked is the 64 bit version, which is needed to take advantage of the 4GB of RAM I also linked.

[Lare Kikkeli]

The reason I included Vista in the calculation was that it's always included in pre-built computers and I wanted to match the one Will posted earlier as close as possible. Also, the Vista I linked is the 64 bit version, which is needed to take advantage of the 4GB of RAM I also linked.

 

AFAIK 32bit XP can utilize something like 3.75 gb of ram. I don't think the missing 0.25 is worth Vista.

[samm]

32bit is enough to address a whole 4GB. Some of 4GB RAM isn't available to user processes, because the same addresses are used for memory mapped IO and probably other stuff I currently don't think of. If the usable rest is 3.75GB or 3.25, 3.5, 3.1415926 depends on things like amount of memory on the graphics card etc.

IIrc, since a certain update, Vista always says there are 4GB, even if it's the 32bit version. Lacking a copy of it, I'm not sure however

Edited August 28, 2008 by samm

[Gorgon]

XP pro 64 bit also recognizes 4 gigs. Still, it's not a major factor unless you opt for 8 gigs. DX10 is nice I guess, but unless someone throws a copy of vista my way I'm not going to bother.

Edited August 28, 2008 by Gorgon

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Okay you lost me.

 

Isn't 4Gigs more than enough for... pretty much anything?

[Lare Kikkeli]

Okay you lost me.

 

Isn't 4Gigs more than enough for... pretty much anything?

 

Right now 2 gigs is enough for gaming. You only need more if you do video editing, Photoshop or just like to have a lot of programs open at the same time. 4 gigs is more than enough for a home computer.

[Gorgon]

Or if you run Vista, it's like a big hungry baby sucking every ounce of juice out of your system to spend on itself, but hey, you get a bump in the vista experience scale, show that to your friends and watch their jealous expressions.

[Bokishi]

More ram the better

[Gorgon]

Not always true. Applications don't allocate ram automatically, common misconception. With older software too much allocation space could even slow you down. In the long run of course the more the better.

Edited August 29, 2008 by Gorgon

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Eventually the actual amount of RAM exceeds the needed amount... What games actually demand 4GB anyways? XD

[samm]

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/07/0...memory-better/5

Crysis (--> min frames). Surprise...

But I think other games can benefit, too, not least MMORPGs, or coming stuff.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Ah.

 

MMOs make sense, but Crysis? Anyways, that game sure is demanding...