Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

[DeadCRAP_]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

I have an 8800 GTS....

I won't be getting Vista for a long while.

i have a 8800 gts to, soon getting 2x 8800 GTX

[solofowaffles]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Nvidia better get their crap together. If this poor driver support continues, I am dropping my 680i mobo and 8800GTX like a hotcake when the 2900XTX comes out.

wanna give it to me

[Cold Fussion]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Drivers may have something to do with it, but a while back I read an article that was posted on thehotfix.net. It seems that with the Desktop Window Manager running (I believe it is the process that makes things 3D) it slows down your vid card, and on top of that the coding is changed that was for gaming in XP, so its not built as much for gaming, even though it has DX10. and because of this in some of the earlier tests during the RC1-RTM gaming tests, Vista ran games about 15% slower than XP did...can you tell I tested Vista since the beta 2 stage? lol

You do realise that areo turns itself off when a game is launched right? In fact, areo make absolutely no difference to your in game performance.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_aero_glass_performance/

And the performance is crap because nvidias drivers are a pice of ****. The ati cards have no performance hit in vista. With the exception of F.E.A.R and opengl applications.

[Lamri35UK]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Hmm, are we quite sure that Ea haven't poked around with Vista at all?
That would explain the problems :)

[Mace]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

this february update of directx might help
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

[samarlian]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

I am playing BF2 on Vista Utimate 64bit it plays awsome. My 8800gtx benchmarked 3dmark06 at 12128 on xp 2x7900gtx benchmarked at 12594.

The only thing i found is Vista is very hungery for ram.Running BF2 with 2gb my ram was running at 89%-92% so i am adding another 2gb will let you know what happens.

[squizz]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/page4.html#3d_games

XP vs. Vista

I was hyped for vista...but it looks like i'll be getting it after the bugs are ironed out. it's not just graphics where vista loses to xp.

Overall, applications performed as expected, or executed slightly slower than under Windows XP. The synthetic benchmarks such as Everest, PCMark05 or Sandra 2007 show that differences are non-existent on a component level. We also found some programs that refused to work, and others that seem to cause problems at first but eventually ran properly. In any case, we recommend watching for Vista-related software upgrades from your software vendors.

There are some programs that showed deeply disappointing performance. Unreal Tournament 2004 and the professional graphics benchmarking suite SPECviewperf 9.03 suffered heavily from the lack of support for the OpenGL graphics library under Windows Vista. This is something we expected, and we clearly advise against replacing Windows XP with Windows Vista if you need to run professional graphics applications. Both ATI and Nvidia will offer OpenGL support in upcoming driver releases, but it remains to be seen if and how other graphics vendors or Microsoft may offer it.

We are disappointed that CPU-intensive applications such as video transcoding with XviD (DVD to XviD MPEG4) or the MainConcept H.264 Encoder performed 18% to nearly 24% slower in our standard benchmark scenarios. Both benchmarks finished much quicker under Windows XP. There aren't newer versions available, and we don't see immediate solutions to this issue.

There is good news as well: we did not find evidence that Windows Vista's new and fancy AeroGlass interface consumes more energy than Windows XP's 2D desktop. Although our measurements indicate a 1 W increase in power draw at the plug, this is too little of a difference to draw any conclusions. Obviously, the requirements for displaying all elements in 3D, rotating and moving them aren't enough to heat up graphics processors. This might also be a result of Windows Vista's more advanced implementation of ACPI 2.0 (and parts of 3.0), which allows the control of power of system components separately.

Our hopes that Vista might be able to speed up applications are gone. First tests with 64-bit editions result in numbers similar to our 32-bit results, and we believe it's safe to say that users looking for more raw performance will be disappointed with Vista. Vista is the better Windows, because it behaves better, because it looks better and because it feels better. But it cannot perform better than Windows XP. Is this a K.O. for Windows Vista in the enthusiast space?

If you really need your PC to finish huge encoding, transcoding or rendering workloads within a defined time frame, yes, it is. Don't do it; stay with XP. But as long as you don't need to finish workloads in record time, we believe it makes sense to consider these three bullet points:

* Vista runs considerably more services and thus has to spend somewhat more resources on itself. Indexing, connectivity and usability don't come for free.
* There is a lot of CPU performance available today! We've got really fast dual core processors, and even faster quad cores will hit the market by the middle of the year. Even though you will lose application performance by upgrading to Vista, today's hardware is much faster than yesterday's, and tomorrow's processors will clearly leap even further ahead.
* No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor.

Although application performance has had this drawback, the new Windows Vista performance features SuperFetch and ReadyDrive help to make Vista feel faster and smoother than Windows XP. Our next article will tell you how they work.

[Rad]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

OK, now let's see how the BF2 editor performs under Vista

heh

(it dosn't)

:laugh:

[imported_Acidrain]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Its been reported on many platforms that Vista is wreaking havoc on multiple platforms of different games.

[Scout-R]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

I've heard that too. Now what about us SLI people. I was told that my 2x 7950gt's are hampered under DX9, and that DX10 is better, but does Vista slow down more than the benefit of DX10 to SLI?

[WDA_Endless954]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Very unfortunate...

[imported_Acidrain]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Very unfortunate...

Yes, though what should we expect from MS!

I've heard that too. Now what about us SLI people. I was told that my 2x 7950gt's are hampered under DX9, and that DX10 is better, but does Vista slow down more than the benefit of DX10 to SLI?

Iam not sure about people using SLI, though i know a friend of mine that uses that he had a complete Vista failure in part to the game and Vista.

All i know about Vista is that they require alot to run them.

[samarlian]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

I have had vista a few weeks now and i have played about with it and tweaked it to perform like xp. Ready boost is great i can now load BF2 and be in the game within 20 seconds. I have had no probs with BF2 what so ever i have not run it in sli mode yet so i cant comment on that will get a second 8800gtx once nvidia sort the drivers out.

[imported_AdenFlorian]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

i had vista and bf2 was so slow. but i finally got my hands on xp agin and it runs so fast.

i have a modded version of xp tho, and it could still go faster with the original but my cd is scratched up and none of my neighboors have it

[ALANMAN]

Re: Battlefield 2 Windows Vista Performance

Ready boost is great i can now load BF2 and be in the game within 20 seconds.

I believe you are talking about SuperFetch, Ready boost is the usb add-on thing that vista does.