[Grav!ty]

Windows XP outshines Vista in benchmarking test

[Grav!ty]

Doesn't look good at all.

Vista, both with and without SP1, performed notably slower than XP with SP3 in the test, taking over 80 seconds to complete the test, compared to the beta SP3-enhanced XP

[colsaunders2]

The tests, run on a Dell XPS M1710 test bed with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo CPU and 1GB of RAM

Does anyone else see a problem here? The results would be *drastically* different if they used 2GB, mirroring my rant on the comment page.

Fortunately, I have my own performance tests

[colsaunders2]

For the skeptics among us, the software used in this benchmark is freely available (*after* you register): http://www.xpnet.com/faq.htm

So, having run the tests myself, the report is utter BS - both XP and Vista clocked in at 58 seconds (margin of error < 1 s).

Bring on the FUD

[Nativedude]

Yeah, some people still think that having a great CPU is a substitute for low ram

[colsaunders2]

I managed to turn at least one head by posting on the <a href="http://exo-blog.blogspot.com/2007/11/update-re-testing-vista-w2gb-ram-office.html" target="_blank">developer's blog</a>. Apparently they want to take a closer look at my data
And they will, as soon as I run the test again and upload the results

[NT50]

I must say, this XP Pro 64 is FAST. This is my first post from XP64

[jaelanicu]

IMO, that's not a fair comparison.
XP (SP3) has gone three updates, while Vista (SP1) is only once.
It would be different when Vista SP3 is released, THEN compare that to XP SP3.
For a fair comparison, compare Vista SP1 with XP SP1 or Vista Gold with XP Gold.
Most major software release in terms of version number, has more bugs and instability issues rather than earlier version.

[NT50]

I am only running XP for gaming. The gaming STINKS on Vista but I do enjoy surfing and running business applications.

[imnuts]

I haven't had any issues with gaming in Vista. I had a slight slowdown when I got a bunch of fog and shadows when playing NFS: Carbon the other day, but I'm running at full detail and 1024x768. All other games that I've run, even HL2 at the same settings and rarely ever get slow frame rates. It could be that I have a pretty good setup, but I can't see why anyone would need more than 60-80FPS as your screen is only running at that refresh rate. Even 30FPS is as fast as normal video that you watch on TV in most cases. Either way, I don't understand why people say Vista sucks at gaming when many people saying this are getting well over 100FPS on XP and probably around 100FPS on Vista, if not more.