Mamakcafe.com Malaysia Forum | Technology  | Property | Web Hosting & Domain | Online Marketing forum

 !forgotpw!
 Register with Mamakcafe
!search!
BigDomain.my  Free Website Builder dear user, mamakcafe is a free service, please do not be provocative and offensive to others user. if user are found to be offensive, it will be removed from the system and permenently banned
!show!: 2618|!reply!: 6

Windows 7 vs Vista vs XP

[!share_url_copy!]

0

!threads!

0

!friends!

16

!credits!

Active Member

Rank: 2

!poston!: 7-1-2010 01:36 AM
|!thread_show_all!
Post Last Edit by kongzai at 7-1-2010 01:37 AM

So which is best - Windows XP, Vista or Windows 7? Read on to find out what we've uncovered.


Performance
It'soften said that recent versions of Windows have become bloated, andit's hardly unreasonable to expect each new OS to perform better thanits previous iteration. However, when Windows XP first appeared back in2001, it was designed to run happily on 300MHz Pentium II CPUs with amere 128MB of RAM. Thus, it should come as no surprise that thelightweight OS runs quickly on today's processors. Newer OSes canoptimise for modern hardware and include more powerful features, but isthis extra functionality really just slowing us down?
To findout, we decided to test each operating system's performance on anaverage PC. The system is nothing particularly special by today'sstandards, consisting of an Intel dual-core E5200 CPU, 2GB of RAM andan ATI Radeon HD4550 graphics card. We installed XP, Vista and Windows7 in that order (all 32-bit versions) on the machine's 500GB hard driveand ran a number of real-world benchmarks to find out which OS wasbest.



The boot time test provided no surprises – Vista took thelongest time to get started, XP came in second place and Windows 7 wasthe fastest.

SWITCHED ON:
Scores

XP: 3.5 / 5
Vista: 3 / 5
Windows 7: 4.5 / 5

Tired of lengthy boot times? We bear good news. Even the beta of Windows 7 can beat Vista's sluggish start
Atfirst it seemed like our file transfer benchmarks would deliver thesame results. Vista produced poor copy speeds in our small file tests,XP again placed second and Windows 7 came out on top. But when we triedtransferring larger 1GB files, Vista surprisingly just managed to winout over XP. Both were beaten by the speedy Windows 7, though.
Thisproved true for our application tests as well. Open a small Excelspreadsheet or PDF file, say, and XP beats Vista, but heavy-dutyspreadsheets and PDF files opened faster under Vista than XP. Onceagain, however, both were trounced by the newcomer.
You mighthave spotted the theme here. Windows 7 delivered excellent results,beating or coming close to the performance of the lightweight XP injust about every category. It's quite remarkable given that this is anoperating system still in beta. When all the drivers are fullyfinished, we should see even better performance.
If we'd runthe benchmarks on a less powerful PC, perhaps one with only 1GB of RAM,then it's possible that Windows XP would have fared better than it didhere. But for even a fairly basic modern PC, Windows 7 delivers thebest performance around.

!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

0

!threads!

0

!friends!

16

!credits!

Active Member

Rank: 2

!poston!: 7-1-2010 01:38 AM
|!thread_show_all!
Post Last Edit by kongzai at 7-1-2010 01:39 AM

3D POWER:

Scores

XP: 4 / 5
Vista: 3 / 5
Windows 7: 4 / 5


Windows 7's gaming performance is already impressive, and it's only going to get better

Wesay 'should' because Vista has performance issues and doesn't make thebest of RAM – a real problem when you're playing more demanding games.Does Windows 7 improve the situation? Our first tests didn't give clearanswers: Windows 7 managed the best frame rates when we ran Unreal Tournament 3, but XP won out in our Company of Heroes tests (a shame-faced Vista came last each time).
Whatwe can say is that Windows 7 performed really well for a pre-releaseversion and should be faster still by the time it's released. TheWindows XP advantage also tends to fall away as you use fasterhardware. So, if you have a decent mid-range PC, Windows 7 wouldmarginally be our preference for gaming, although XP still performsremarkably well.
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

0

!threads!

0

!friends!

16

!credits!

Active Member

Rank: 2

!poston!: 7-1-2010 01:39 AM
|!thread_show_all!
POWER UP: Windows XP's low requirements make it ideal for netbooks, but Windows 7 looks set take over


Itseems that the increased CPU use from running Vista's extra featureswill often cancel out any benefit from its power management controls.That's been more than a little embarrassing for Microsoft, but at leastthe company has learned from the experience. Windows 7 takes a morein-depth approach.
The focus is now on idle time. The typicallaptop will spend most of the time just idling while it's waiting forsomething to do, so reducing the power consumption at this stage canmake a real difference to battery life. With this in mind, Windows 7makes considerable efforts to reduce repeated background activities inWindows, drivers and applications.
In addition to this, Windows7 services will often start only when they're required (Bluetooth won'tbe launched until a Bluetooth device is attached, for example). Best ofall, a new core parking scheme turns off all but one CPU core whenthere's little to do, saving a significant amount of power when you'reonly performing simple tasks.
The end result, according to ourinformal tests, is that Windows 7 appears to deliver even longerbattery life than XP. We can't say that definitively yet – there aretoo many factors involved and our test group is too limited – but it'slooking promising, and we think it's likely that the disappointments ofVista will be forgotten soon after Windows 7's launch.
Onceyou've also taken into account its excellent performance, relativelylow system requirements and the advantages of being able to use itssimplified networking while you're out and about, Windows 7 has to bethe standout winner of our Mobility category. Windows XP takes arespectable second place for being handily lightweight, which makes itmore than suitable for extensive on-the-go use. Meanwhile, WindowsVista's performance issues and its selection of well-meaning butineffective power saving features means that it comes trailing into adismal third place once again.
Scores

XP: 3.5 / 5
Vista: 2.5 / 5
Windows 7: 4 / 5
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

0

!threads!

0

!friends!

16

!credits!

Active Member

Rank: 2

!poston!: 7-1-2010 01:40 AM
|!thread_show_all!
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

14

!threads!

0

!friends!

545

!credits!

VIP

Rank: 6Rank: 6

!poston!: 23-12-2014 10:21 PM
|!thread_show_all!
To bad becase Microsoft shut down the support for XP .

For me XP is the best version of OS. It has a decent system requirements and very fast speed.
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

5

!threads!

0

!friends!

455

!credits!

Senior Member

Rank: 4

!poston!: 27-12-2014 01:13 PM
|!thread_show_all!
Excellent reviews and I must say Windows XP is still best among all latest but nobody can replace Windows XP as most easiest OS to handle for customers.
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

banner1

0

!threads!

0

!friends!

295

!credits!

SuperMember

Rank: 3Rank: 3

!poston!: 19-9-2016 10:40 PM
|!thread_show_all!
used window 8 now
!reply!

!thread_magic! !report!

RM5.99 Malaysia Domain names with FREE Hosting @ bigdomain.my

Mobile version| Archiver| Mamakcafe.com a Malaysia Forum | Technology | Property | Web Hosting & Domain | Online Marketing forum , hosted on Bigdomain.my

!time_now! , Processed in 0.215401 sec., 20 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X2.5

Release 20121101, © 2001-2019 Comsenz Inc.

MultiLingual version, Rev. 85, © 2009-2019 codersclub.org

!scrolltop!