Vista vs. XP - please post your pros/cons (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Spragleknas
- Start date
Netherlands
1. First start by running msconfig (either from the Run dialog or Start menu search box)
2. Click on the Boot tab, and then click the "No GUI boot" checkbox. Click OK.
3. Reboot the computer and you should see the new boot screen.
-level20peon
PS: Sorry for OT :sorry:
Vista 32 supports HW acceleration of H264 and MPEG2 streams (with a compliant videocard ofcourse) and EVR.
I believe there are some issues with some of these on XP.
I use Vista 32 and I'm happy with it, I would choose Vista 32 if you have high-end hardware; core 2 duo with 800 or 1366 memory bus and at least 2 GB of RAM(Max. 3GB) . If you have older hardware (Like 1 year old) or less memory (1GB) and don't want to upgrade, stick with windows XP.
This is offcourse my opinion, I'm sure there are Vista users with less hardware requirments that confirm good working situation, I'm sure about 1 thing: Vista is more demanding on your hardware as XP.
I believe there are some issues with some of these on XP.
I use Vista 32 and I'm happy with it, I would choose Vista 32 if you have high-end hardware; core 2 duo with 800 or 1366 memory bus and at least 2 GB of RAM(Max. 3GB) . If you have older hardware (Like 1 year old) or less memory (1GB) and don't want to upgrade, stick with windows XP.
This is offcourse my opinion, I'm sure there are Vista users with less hardware requirments that confirm good working situation, I'm sure about 1 thing: Vista is more demanding on your hardware as XP.
What is your source on this ? Hardware acceleration of H264 and MPEG2 has nothing to do with the OS (unless you use DOS or Windows 95/98...) but with your video-card and its driver.
Don't get this wrong: This should not be a thread for "believing" against "non believing" but for facts.
-level20peon
Well, it's in the first post of https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/vista_and_evr_support_part_2-t30845.html?t=30845&highlight=evr --> "EVR will work in XP and Vista, but you will only get HW-acceleration under Vista."
But you're right; "This should not be a thread for "believing" against "non believing" but for facts." I don't have the technical knowledge to confirm this, so maybe I shouldn't be writing this.
But I will encourage people who are interested in the difference between VMR9/EVR(Vista) to read the above thread; it has some usefull information that I "believe" is right but can't confirm.
I only can say at my own experience that EVR gives a far better picture quality on my NVidia 8600GTS and that's a fact!
This is 100% correct but EVR does not equal basic H264 and MPEG2 acceleration...
-level20peon
So can you please explain how it works? I'm getting confused about this. I think clearing this thing up is valuable to this thread because it shows a clear difference between XP and Vista and that's what this thread is about.
I thought the combination H264 and MPEG2 acceleration and EVR couldn't be done in Windows XP so you had to use Vista for this.
Offcourse:
- VMR9 & H264 and MPEG2 acceleration is possible in Windows XP
- EVR is working with .Net Framework 3 on Windows XP.
So, if quote #2 is 100% correct, What's wrong with quote #1; I thought HW acceleration was only the decoding of the videostream by the videocard(only the codecs that are supported by the videocard ofcourse), but it seems now that there's something more.
Well in my opinion h.264 HW decoding does NOT work in VMR9 and XP SP2 (at least not stutterfree).
See my experiences here: https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/showthread.php?t=32204
So I vote for Vista when it comes to HD material (using GPU decoding & using EVR).
But I do agree on that Vista is more recource hungry than XP - but if you turn off most of the "gadgets" it is working
really well. But the boot time is still waaaayyyy longer than XP though.
Regards,