[Tsugaru]

I've recently updated to Vista Ultimate(About 1 month ago) and I hadn't installed any games for it. I put 3DMark05 on this machine for the heck of it as I was going to use it on an older system.

I ran it but never completed as it was so terribly slow. I was getting between 6-13 fps which is ridiculous. I thought ok..what ever. So I install Assassins Creed, not to my amazement it was so laggy, I could barely move. Even in options, the mouse took forever to get to the other side of the screen. So now I'm wondering if it's my Graphics card or Vista Ultimate.

Specs:

AMD Athlon 64x2 5200+ 2.7(OC To 3Ghz)
4Gb RAM
Nvidia 7300Gt 256mb graphics Card
Samsung SyncMaster 2032gw
Seagate 160gb SATA HD
400w psu
BioStar T7025-M2 MotherBoard

I've updated all the drivers as far as I can tell, so only thing I can think of is Graphics Card or Ultimate?

Anything I need to add?

Thanks for any help.

[JMan2613]

Sorry to burst your bubble there but Vista need twice as much power as XP to run stuff eg. a game that needs 1GB Ram on XP will need more or less 2gb Ram on Vista and pretty much same for CPU Clock Speed and Graphics cards.

*EDIT* Oooh I just say you have Vista Ultimate, thats really bad for gaming I used to have Ultimate but I downgraded to XP and now games run smoothly XD

[the_man550]

Nvidia 7300 is a quite old card (didn't even know it existed lol) so i guess it might be that, otherwize try killing all processes (except the basics, kill anti virus stuff as well though, you can as well shut the internet off while doing the test <-bad English) If that works, try killing one process at the time and if it stops lagging then you've found it.

Go to the nvidia controllpanel and set the "image settings" at "let the 3d application decide)

[wiley8425]

Originally Posted by Tsugaru

I've recently updated to Vista Ultimate(About 1 month ago) and I hadn't installed any games for it. I put 3DMark05 on this machine for the heck of it as I was going to use it on an older system.

I ran it but never completed as it was so terribly slow. I was getting between 6-13 fps which is ridiculous. I thought ok..what ever. So I install Assassins Creed, not to my amazement it was so laggy, I could barely move. Even in options, the mouse took forever to get to the other side of the screen. So now I'm wondering if it's my Graphics card or Vista Ultimate.

Specs:

AMD Athlon 64x2 5200+ 2.7(OC To 3Ghz)
4Gb RAM
Nvidia 7300Gt 256mb graphics Card
Samsung SyncMaster 2032gw
Seagate 160gb SATA HD
400w psu
BioStar T7025-M2 MotherBoard

I've updated all the drivers as far as I can tell, so only thing I can think of is Graphics Card or Ultimate?

Anything I need to add?

Thanks for any help.

Vista blows. Dual boot or get rid of it entirely.

[jessecannon]

I would recommend downgrading to XP if your a gamer.

[Tsugaru]

Hi guys, thanks for the info! I just decided to go out and buy a new graphics card. I got the 9600gt. All games and aps running like a charm. I'm also thinking about downgrading to XP though.

[the_man550]

"All games and aps running like a charm."
Then, what's the reason to downgrade to xp?

Make a dual boot or stay with vista.
I notice a slight difference in performance, but it's not big. And almost everything except for gaming is as fast/faster in vista then xp. Internet explorer opens up in less then a second in vista, in xp that's 2 secs.

My recommendation is to stay with vista

If you even so choose to jump over to xp, hurry up...

[kev269]

XP is > than Vista

[JMan2613]

I to be honest XP is way better than Vista only reason why vista is bad is thats its way to resouurce hungry I mean I went to a customers house once they had a 2.2ghz Quad Core CPU on the simplest of games it lagged like using a dial up connection for a game that requires 2mbps or more

[the_man550]

That can't be.

Just as an example, I get 260FPS in the Counter strike source stress test while using XP, with vista and the same settings (highest+a little tweaking) I get 240, that's not even 10%. Note that I have Vista ultimate 64-bit, and it uses 1.3Gb of RAM (which I've lowered to 900mb, but when I did the test it was 1.3gb), 32-bit uses about 700mb if I'm not missinformed. Some games feel smother in vista even though the fps is lower.

Yes, xp is a bit better for gaming, there's no escaping from that, but I'd still not recommend it, for how long is xp going to be updated? and also, you've bought a dx10 vidcard, don't you want a dx10 OS?

[wiley8425]

Originally Posted by the_man550

That can't be.

Just as an example, I get 260FPS in the Counter strike source stress test while using XP, with vista and the same settings (highest+a little tweaking) I get 240, that's not even 10%. Note that I have Vista ultimate 64-bit, and it uses 1.3Gb of RAM (which I've lowered to 900mb, but when I did the test it was 1.3gb), 32-bit uses about 700mb if I'm not missinformed. Some games feel smother in vista even though the fps is lower.

Yes, xp is a bit better for gaming, there's no escaping from that, but I'd still not recommend it, for how long is xp going to be updated? and also, you've bought a dx10 vidcard, don't you want a dx10 OS?

What difference does that make? So far, there aren't any games (aside from maybe Crysis) that even use DX10. There are still a lot of things in Vista that are too broken to make it a viable alternative, IMO.

[tom6049]

So far, there aren't any games (aside from maybe Crysis) that even use DX10.

There's already a lot of games using DirectX 10..
Unreal Tournament 3, Gears of War, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Hellgate London, Lost Planet......with lots more to come.

[Gulo Luseus]

Firstly, yes, a lot of games have DX10. Pretty much any released in the last year or so do, but also run under DX9, just not as pretty.
As far as XP being better for gaming, with all due respect, thats an untruth. I run on Vista no probs, and if I go back to XP theres no real difference, unless yo ucount the fact that vists looks a bit more shiny under DX10. Most of the people slagging Vista as "Oh, stick with XP, vista is rubbish" banners havent even used Vista. Given that upgrading is such a waste of time, why are these people on XP? Why noy win 98- which, when seperceded by XP, brought exactly the same complaints we have now. So no, theres nothing wrong with Visa as a games platform.

[shadowkie]

agreed with gulo
my vista works fine and im playing assassins creed all on medium because of my rubbish CPU but otherwise vista is a perfect gaming platform. and also if people would remember correctly XP was rly bad when it first started.

[JMan2613]

Hang on, I built my PC on Vista it was worse than XP when it came out in my opinion XP is way better but thats my opinion you believe what you believe