Ok, I Have to Admit (Vista)...

danielkh · 05-16-2008, 06:58 PM

Got my hybrid readydrive in and loaded XP. Not a lot of speed improvements (as expected). Out of S3 suspend, about 10 seconds to actually be able to do anything.

Then I loaded Vista Ultimate. Took awhile to go into standby, no biggy. But out of S3 standby? 2 SECONDS! And I haven't even tried Readyboost yet. I have to change over to the Casetronic C137 case so I can use the 4GB CF card. So much for that beautiful silver/black case that matched my car so well. lol

Ok, Chris31......Greatwhite.....any one else who is going to get a kick out of this.....

With the new motherboard, I will be able to take advantage of Readyboost, Readydrive, and Superfetch.....so........God, I hate saying this.....

I will be running Vista Ultimate in my car!

And it looks like it's going to kick XP's butt. Making that administrator account visible started changing my mind.

greatwhite · 05-16-2008, 07:06 PM

Kick out it?

NaH.

Whatever works or ya..............

PersonallY, I don't hink I would run vista in the car. There's alot of fat there that the car pc just doesn't need. I'm sure Nlite versions will show up soon enough though.............

But it's the shiznit in my HTPC for media center.................

danielkh · 05-16-2008, 07:10 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by greatwhite

Kick out it?

NaH.

Whatever works or ya..............

PersonallY, I don't hink I would run vista in the car.

it's the shiznit in my HTPC for media center though.................

Final call will be when the computer is installed, but just that resume time is enough for me. 2gb ram, 4gb readyboost, 2.33 core duo...it should work fine.

danielkh · 05-16-2008, 07:16 PM

And since I am trying Vista, my first true test has to be on centrafuse.

Installing RC2.

-zip- · 05-16-2008, 11:07 PM

danielkh secretly LOVES Centrafuse.. ADMIT IT!

LOL

Jabs · 05-16-2008, 11:58 PM

I saw a 'gamer's comparison' review the other day, and the initial 10% performance gap under the heavy loads of Crysis, World In Conflict, etc., has been absolutely closed in the last 18 months. Driver-related performance issues are a thing of the past.

That said, now the target has been laid on Vista's percieved 'bloat'. The latest word I've heard on that front (this week) is the solution is to run Microsoft Server 2008. All the 'good' parts of Vista, none of the bloat.

I run Vista on my desktop, and once you turn User Account Control off, it's been just fine for me - on an upgrade that was laid down over a 10-minute-old reinstall of XP-SP2.

netchris · 07-14-2008, 08:46 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by danielkh

Got my hybrid readydrive in and loaded XP. Not a lot of speed improvements (as expected). Out of S3 suspend, about 10 seconds to actually be able to do anything.

Then I loaded Vista Ultimate. Took awhile to go into standby, no biggy. But out of S3 standby? 2 SECONDS! And I haven't even tried Readyboost yet. I have to change over to the Casetronic C137 case so I can use the 4GB CF card. So much for that beautiful silver/black case that matched my car so well. lol

Ok, Chris31......Greatwhite.....any one else who is going to get a kick out of this.....

With the new motherboard, I will be able to take advantage of Readyboost, Readydrive, and Superfetch.....so........God, I hate saying this.....

I will be running Vista Ultimate in my car!

And it looks like it's going to kick XP's butt. Making that administrator account visible started changing my mind.

how did your cold boots and hibernates between xp and vista compare? also, have readyboost and/or superfetch given you any improvement in boot times? (i wouldn't think so by their descriptions but just asking)

danielkh · 07-14-2008, 09:09 PM

I can't answer. Once I loaded everything for the car, I realized that vista took all my audio controls away and wouldn't allow any customizing. After that, I had no choice but to go back to XP MCE where I have just a little bit more control.

(click to enlarge)
Any further testing was meaningless. I did a little testing with readyboost with no measurable improvement.
Coldboots and hibernates, if I remember right, were faster with Vista. I did prefer Vista's performance right up to the audio thing. And that was too big to work around.

Machinehead · 07-15-2008, 07:20 AM

There's no way that Vista loads faster than XP in either hibernate or cold boots. Even with stripped down versions like TinyVista the boot times are slower.

Tidder · 07-15-2008, 07:26 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Jabs

I saw a 'gamer's comparison' review the other day, and the initial 10% performance gap under the heavy loads of Crysis, World In Conflict, etc., has been absolutely closed in the last 18 months. Driver-related performance issues are a thing of the past.

That said, now the target has been laid on Vista's percieved 'bloat'. The latest word I've heard on that front (this week) is the solution is to run Microsoft Server 2008. All the 'good' parts of Vista, none of the bloat.

Same goes for XP and server 03. I run Micro2003 in my car, it's based off of server 03 enterprise. Very VERY fast once all the server services are removed. It'll boot on my lappy in about 8 seconds. NOT resume from hibernate, we're talking normal boot. Resuming from hibernate actually takes longer cause I have a gig o ram.

Takes about 25 seconds to boot on my carPC (From a CF card), but that's an EPIA 800 in there, slow as **** and a cheap CF card, slow as ****. It IS faster at hibernate resume in the car. Rock solid and stable for a few months now tho. Plus got EWF working with it now.

ANYWAY... long story short. Server 08 will prolly be the way to go for speed and stability if you wanna stick with a Vista flavor.

Quote: Originally Posted by Machinehead

There's no way that Vista loads faster than XP in either hibernate or cold boots. Even with stripped down versions like TinyVista the boot times are slower.

Just depends on the system. If it's a system that was intended to run Vista super fast, with more than the recommended specs, it's faster. But vista was designed to take advantage of a powerful system such as that. XP on the other hand, is old. It was designed back when 2ghz was an extreme beast to have, and a gig o ram was a **** load... So lets say for instance you have a 1ghz machine with 512mb ram. Vista will go the way of a felcher and XP will run ok. But you take a 3.4ghz system with 2gb ram, bad *** vid card, etc, vista will outshine XP. Just the differences in design mang.

danielkh · 07-15-2008, 07:28 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Machinehead

There's no way that Vista loads faster than XP in either hibernate or cold boots. Even with stripped down versions like TinyVista the boot times are slower.

Not going to argue the point as I would totally agree with you if I hadn't been the one running the test. Using the current system in my profile, with the core duo/hybrid drive and all, Vista did run equal to faster than XP under all circumstance. The resume from standby blew me away. 10 seconds XP to 2 seconds Vista? Like I said, I wouldn't have believed it myself.

I guess you could say Vista lost one race. Going into standby, Vista took over 30 seconds, but your basically shutting down, so what does it matter?

I'm a hardcore XP user, so there was not bias in the testing. I was trying to prove Vista couldn't work. It just came on the computer I was testing and I thought "what the hell", let's try this readyboost/superfetch stuff.

danielkh · 07-15-2008, 07:29 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Tidder

Same goes for XP and server 03. I run Micro2003 in my car, it's based off of server 03 enterprise. Very VERY fast once all the server services are removed. It'll boot on my lappy in about 8 seconds. NOT resume from hibernate, we're talking normal boot. Resuming from hibernate actually takes longer cause I have a gig o ram.

Takes about 25 seconds to boot on my carPC (From a CF card), but that's an EPIA 800 in there, slow as **** and a cheap CF card, slow as ****. It IS faster at hibernate resume in the car. Rock solid and stable for a few months now tho. Plus got EWF working with it now.

ANYWAY... long story short. Server 08 will prolly be the way to go for speed and stability if you wanna stick with a Vista flavor.

I run full blown versions of OS's because of my needs. As for Vista "flavor", I have never gotten used to the layout/command structure.

danielkh · 07-15-2008, 07:44 AM

These are cold boots to running Streetdeck without any software optimization:

1. vista/sd alone to music: hybrid 1:10.21 1:17.32 1:15.50 (alone means no readyboost)
1. xp/sd alone to music : hybrid 1:25.56

There was an extra 10-15 second load time for SD under XP because of a setup issue (that's why there is only 1 result. After that, I stopped), so you are looking at equal performance under Vista.

As for readyboost, it depends on your setup, memory card, etc., but first test really showed worse performance:

2. vista/sd 4gb readyboost to music : 1:44.45 1:25.10 1:18.03 1:24.76 1:15.81

But it seemed to be getting better the more times it was booted.

john1701 · 07-15-2008, 07:45 AM

running vista in the car for a while now, no problems.

danielkh · 07-15-2008, 07:57 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by john1701

running vista in the car for a while now, no problems.

I would too if I hadn't ran into the audio problem. I guess I should define that better.....

The sound worked fine, but Streetdeck would no longer see the individual ports for XM stuff (line-in) so I couldn't configure it. Now that I use 3 separate line-ins (XM,HDradio,HQCT), there is no way it would work.