open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked Windows 7 Vs Windows Xp
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Starfellow Hawke
Posted - 2011.08.10 14:48:00 - [1]
 

Has anyone noticed a marked improvement in performance of EVE when upgrading from XP to 7?

I am slowly upgrading my system and the first thing I think I should do is upgrade the OS.

Thanks!

Caleidascope
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.10 14:52:00 - [2]
 

Depends how old the hardware is.

Anybody know which hardware 7 was optimized for? I sort of assume it was not optimized for P4, PD.

Starfellow Hawke
Posted - 2011.08.10 14:55:00 - [3]
 

Good Point.

My current system is an Athlon 64 with 3Gb RAM and an nVidia 240 GT 512mb card.

Blacksquirrel
Posted - 2011.08.10 15:07:00 - [4]
 

LOL duh?

One 7 is optimized for 64 bit. And that wonky 64 bit xp version doesnt count. Also the kernels are better optimized as well, and less overhead from other tasks as well. Meaning 7 will prioritize other crap less when playing a game or other hardware intensive software.
7 also better handles multiple CPU, and threading a bit better as well.

The only problem is that AERO can take up a ton of ram. So turn it off if you dont have more than 4gbs or quit being cheap and get more ram.


Caleidascope
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.10 15:08:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Starfellow Hawke
Good Point.

My current system is an Athlon 64 with 3Gb RAM and an nVidia 240 GT 512mb card.

I would say that IF you replaced the video card recently, then that is why your system is running EVE better.

Starfellow Hawke
Posted - 2011.08.10 15:09:00 - [6]
 

It's not just adding RAM... I'll be getting new MB, Processor as well as a Power supply and video card eventually... just have to do it in stages.

Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2011.08.10 15:24:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Taedrin on 10/08/2011 15:26:39
Originally by: Caleidascope
Depends how old the hardware is.

Anybody know which hardware 7 was optimized for? I sort of assume it was not optimized for P4, PD.


Windows 7 takes advantage of many of the newer instruction sets, so the newer your processor is, the more "optimized" windows 7 will be for it. This is, of course, presuming:

1) Windows 7 uses these newer instruction sets with a high enough frequency to impact performance (see: RISC vs. CISC debate)
2) The microcode implementations are more optimized than their higher level, compiled analogues
3) You actually use the sections of windows 7 which utilize the newer instruction sets.

Originally by: Starfellow Hawke
It's not just adding RAM... I'll be getting new MB, Processor as well as a Power supply and video card eventually... just have to do it in stages.


I would advise against that. Doing it in stages like that is a waste of time and money, IMO. It's best to just save your money, and then buy the entire system at once.

At the very least replace the mobo and the CPU at the same time - replacing either one of these essentially requires you to complete disassemble and reassemble your system, which can be a pain. Best to do both at once, so that you don't have to dismount/remount the mobo so many times.

Wilhelm Riley
Posted - 2011.08.10 15:40:00 - [8]
 

Does Vista not get a mention?

Blacksquirrel
Posted - 2011.08.10 16:36:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Wilhelm Riley
Does Vista not get a mention?


7 is better than vista. And im one of the few that didnt really have a grudge against vista. No point in installing/using Vista when 7 is out.

Hell 8 is coming along now. Though the details are sketch as whether it's been primarily developed for a pc/desktop environment or mobile.

All I can say is if it is for desktop I hope they dont go too overboard with IOS type design many of the Linux OS's went that way it's ****ing horrible to navigate now! Have to use the KDE or other lite versions. YOU HEAR ME FEDORA AND UBUNTU! HORRIBLE! Mint is the way to go now. Bit of a rant sorry

Barakkus
Posted - 2011.08.10 16:53:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Blacksquirrel
Originally by: Wilhelm Riley
Does Vista not get a mention?


7 is better than vista. And im one of the few that didnt really have a grudge against vista. No point in installing/using Vista when 7 is out.

Hell 8 is coming along now. Though the details are sketch as whether it's been primarily developed for a pc/desktop environment or mobile.

All I can say is if it is for desktop I hope they dont go too overboard with IOS type design many of the Linux OS's went that way it's ****ing horrible to navigate now! Have to use the KDE or other lite versions. YOU HEAR ME FEDORA AND UBUNTU! HORRIBLE! Mint is the way to go now. Bit of a rant sorry



8 is primarily geared towards touch screens I believe.

Caleidascope
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.10 17:04:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Wilhelm Riley
Does Vista not get a mention?

NO!
Very Happy

AlleyKat
Gallente
The Unwanted.
Posted - 2011.08.10 17:32:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Wilhelm Riley
Does Vista not get a mention?


No, we're just professional and try to forget it ever happened.

OT:

Win7 performance is roughly 11% gain over XP is memory serves me correctly.

Alex Sinai
Mining And Probing Specialists
Posted - 2011.08.10 19:43:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: AlleyKat
Originally by: Wilhelm Riley
Does Vista not get a mention?


No, we're just professional and try to forget it ever happened.
.


Agree 100%

On new hardware Windows 7 64-bit runs better then XP. Performance gain can vary depending on configuration.
I would suggest to upgrade the hardware first (starting with motherboard) and when upgrade complete install OS W7 64-bit.
Best choice is Professional/Ultimate since it have XP emulation if need be but it's price tag way too high for regular user and if no XP emulation needed then any of your choice apart from Starter. I don't have a clue who's for that version was made and probably don't want to know.

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2011.08.10 20:34:00 - [14]
 

XP still is used by about 48% of all PC's. I have Windows 7 64 bit on my games PC and XP on an old Pentium M single core 1.5ghz IBM laptop. XP is very good for this type of older hardware that has 512-1GB of RAM. Also I have removed Windows Vista of my dads Intel dual core 1GB RAM laptop and put Windows XP on. He is much happier with XP.


'Windows XP mode' in Windows 7 is a crap cut down virtual machine. It is better to use VMware or http://www.virtualbox.org/ which is free.

Blacksquirrel
Posted - 2011.08.10 20:42:00 - [15]
 

Using a VM can tax the hell out of a system. If you want a lite OS to extend older hardware just Linux. Unless you're Nativity running another OS i dont see a reason to VM Xp.

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2011.08.10 21:37:00 - [16]
 

VM's are resource intensive. But if you are a geek using VM's on a quad core CPU can provide a lot of flexibility. Especially if you are a web developer. I downloaded a shrink wrapped Linux Joomla VM to mess about with Joomla in EVE. Unfortunately I am a twit and would rather endlessly mess about with PC hardware than concentrate on learning web development. My concentration levels are bad at the moment Sad

Blacksquirrel
Posted - 2011.08.11 06:38:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Vogue
VM's are resource intensive. But if you are a geek using VM's on a quad core CPU can provide a lot of flexibility. Especially if you are a web developer. I downloaded a shrink wrapped Linux Joomla VM to mess about with Joomla in EVE. Unfortunately I am a twit and would rather endlessly mess about with PC hardware than concentrate on learning web development. My concentration levels are bad at the moment Sad


Done web dev too I cant honestly see why you need another OS as things that go wonky are mostly code error or browser specific error, and dont have much to do with the OS.

Aside from that software wise I prefer expression and it runs on 7 just fine, Other stuff like photoshop, or dreamweaver also work fine on 7. I know a few people that dont even use those kits and just use straight text pad or the like. I suppose there could be certain software on macs that would be nice, but most people who need those just have a mac already as it's rather difficult to run a mac os vm wise.

To each their own though.

Robert Hakoke
Posted - 2011.08.30 00:40:00 - [18]
 

Anyone know if windows 7 out of the box will run eve with a GMA X3100 chipset?

Caleidascope
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.30 01:06:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Caleidascope on 30/08/2011 01:07:04

Originally by: Robert Hakoke
Anyone know if windows 7 out of the box will run eve with a GMA X3100 chipset?

All you need to run EVE is Shader Model 3 and GMA X3100 has Shader Model 4. You should be fine.

Robert Hakoke
Posted - 2011.08.30 01:09:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Robert Hakoke on 30/08/2011 01:09:16
No driver updates required for a windows 7 out of the box then?

Caleidascope
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.30 01:15:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Robert Hakoke
Edited by: Robert Hakoke on 30/08/2011 01:09:16
No driver updates required for a windows 7 out of the box then?

Good question. Theoretically you should be ok with windows generic driver, but the reality... might be something different. intel has good support site, check it if you need it.

Robert Hakoke
Posted - 2011.08.30 01:18:00 - [22]
 

Only reason I'm asking is because i'd be partitioning a mac hard drive and don't want to go out and spend $140 on something that doesn't have drivers to support SM3.0 (Which is the whole reason I would buy it in the first place.) So, anybody know wether or not a "out of the box new" Window's 7 supports SM3.0 on a GMA X3100 chipset?


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only