If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
Any one have opinions on which works better as a overclocking operating
system. And does it make a difference if you have AMD or Intel? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:23:01 -0700, leadfoot wrote:
Any one have opinions on which works better as a overclocking operating system. And does it make a difference if you have AMD or Intel? CPU shouldn't matter, but I've heard Vista is a a resource hog mainly to do with all the DRM crap imbedded in it and running all the time eating up cpu cycles. Personally I couldn't care less. I've never run MS on any of my personal machines. -- Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, maybe.
It's slower than XP. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html -- Ed Light Bring the Troops Home: http://bringthemhomenow.org http://antiwar.com Send spam to the FTC at Thanks, robots. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"Ed Light" wrote in message ... It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, maybe. It's slower than XP. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html -- That's interesting. I upgraded XP on my laptop right after it came out and it runs significantly faster. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. My laptop: Gateway 6421 AMD Turion 64 ML-32 1 GB RAM 100 GB HD ATI 200M integrated graphics (it runs Aero and Flip 3d just fine) Vista Home Premium Upgrade 32 bit (from XP Media Center) I put it on my other home machine: AMD 64 X2 4200 2 GB RAM 250 GB Sata Drive ATI 2006 All-In-Wonder Vista Home Premium OEM 32 bit Runs great on that one too. The only driver problem I had was with the AIWs capture but a quick Google fixed that. I just got 2 more licenses from Newegg and am upgrading my wife and daughter's computers. I like it. It hasn't crashed once. Every program I use runs well on it. It shows 50% RAM usage base but I can run alot of stuff on it before it budges much above that mark. Like I said, guess I got lucky but I like like it much better than XP. Art |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"Ed Light" wrote in message
... It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, maybe. It's slower than XP. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html -- Ed Light Bring the Troops Home: http://bringthemhomenow.org http://antiwar.com Send spam to the FTC at Thanks, robots. Another bunch of tests to ponder: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2096940,00.asp |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"Bob" wrote in message ... "Ed Light" wrote in message ... It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, maybe. It's slower than XP. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html -- Ed Light Bring the Troops Home: http://bringthemhomenow.org http://antiwar.com Send spam to the FTC at Thanks, robots. Another bunch of tests to ponder: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2096940,00.asp The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
'leadfoot' wrote:
| The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB _____ The operating system has nothing to do with the FrontSide Bus speed. Nothing at all. In any way. The only effect the operating system MIGHT have is in the amount of memory used; but that is a difference you might see between DOS and, say, Windows 2000 or later. Phil Weldon "leadfoot" wrote in message ... | | "Bob" wrote in message | ... | "Ed Light" wrote in message | ... | It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, | maybe. | | It's slower than XP. | http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html | -- | Ed Light | | Bring the Troops Home: | http://bringthemhomenow.org | http://antiwar.com | | Send spam to the FTC at | | Thanks, robots. | | Another bunch of tests to ponder: | http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2096940,00.asp | | The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB | | | | | | | | | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"Phil Weldon" wrote in message ink.net... 'leadfoot' wrote: | The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB _____ The operating system has nothing to do with the FrontSide Bus speed. Nothing at all. In any way. The only effect the operating system MIGHT have is in the amount of memory used; but that is a difference you might see between DOS and, say, Windows 2000 or later. So I can't have dual boot 200FSB stock nForce4 system where WinXP is Ptime95 stable at 265FSB and a Vista that is Prime95 stable at 255FSB??? You sure about that? Phil Weldon "leadfoot" wrote in message ... | | "Bob" wrote in message | ... | "Ed Light" wrote in message | ... | It's a bit early to be thinking Vista. After a service pack or two, | maybe. | | It's slower than XP. | http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html | -- | Ed Light | | Bring the Troops Home: | http://bringthemhomenow.org | http://antiwar.com | | Send spam to the FTC at | | Thanks, robots. | | Another bunch of tests to ponder: | http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2096940,00.asp | | The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB | | | | | | | | | |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"leadfoot" wrote in message ... "Phil Weldon" wrote in message ink.net... 'leadfoot' wrote: | The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB _____ The operating system has nothing to do with the FrontSide Bus speed. Nothing at all. In any way. The only effect the operating system MIGHT have is in the amount of memory used; but that is a difference you might see between DOS and, say, Windows 2000 or later. So I can't have dual boot 200FSB stock nForce4 system where WinXP is Ptime95 stable at 265FSB and a Vista that is Prime95 stable at 255FSB??? You sure about that? Unless you want to go into your bios and change the speeds every time you boot. Phil is correct in the fact that the OS has nothing to do with your fsb speeds. Stability of the OS might be a different matter at OC'd speeds. I haven't had enough time with Vista to really give it a good run-through when overclocking to know if it is more or less stable than XP. Like Phil said, memory used and how it is accessed can make a huge difference in OS stability when hardware is overclocked (or not for that matter). Your best bet is to get as high as you can and still be stable in both OSs and leave it at that. Ed |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Vista VS XP overclocking
"ED" wrote in message ... "leadfoot" wrote in message ... "Phil Weldon" wrote in message ink.net... 'leadfoot' wrote: | The benchmarks are great information but what I was wondering was which OS | provides the highest stable overclock. i.e which one has the highest FSB _____ The operating system has nothing to do with the FrontSide Bus speed. Nothing at all. In any way. The only effect the operating system MIGHT have is in the amount of memory used; but that is a difference you might see between DOS and, say, Windows 2000 or later. So I can't have dual boot 200FSB stock nForce4 system where WinXP is Ptime95 stable at 265FSB and a Vista that is Prime95 stable at 255FSB??? You sure about that? Unless you want to go into your bios and change the speeds every time you boot. Phil is correct in the fact that the OS has nothing to do with your fsb speeds. Stability of the OS might be a different matter at OC'd speeds. I haven't had enough time with Vista to really give it a good run-through when overclocking to know if it is more or less stable than XP. Like Phil said, memory used and how it is accessed can make a huge difference in OS stability when hardware is overclocked (or not for that matter). Your best bet is to get as high as you can and still be stable in both OSs and leave it at that. I'm glad someone figured out what I was looking for. I'm not a newcomer to overclocking but I haven't posted here for a while. I seem to recall there was some controversy over XP over win98 as an overclocking system when XP came out so I though that the OS COULD have an impact on FSB stability. My guess was that XP would be better due to all the resources being used by Vista but I would thing that a few people have done OC in both OS and might have an opinion by now. Ed |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vista VS XP overclocking | leadfoot | Overclocking | 17 | May 30th 07 06:42 AM |
Overclocking Nvidia card in Vista | Danny | Nvidia Videocards | 3 | February 8th 07 04:09 AM |
Vista 64-bit overclocking | Leadfoot | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | September 19th 06 11:21 PM |
Overclocking Noob Requires Advise on overclocking-unlocking | DVS__DVIT__INC | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | September 13th 04 07:07 PM |
P4C800 bootproblem: BIOS: Overclocking Failed while not overclocking | Roger Zoul | Asus Motherboards | 3 | July 17th 03 02:00 AM |