XP vs Windows 7

First of all, Linux fanboys please leave if you are not gonna be nice.

Right, with that out the way here is a render tests results I did tonight.

At the time of render Windows 7 was running: Dropbox, Winamp Agent and Avast
Windows XP was running well… nothing.

This was done on the same computer.

Sorry for large images.



well…that’s reasonable
what’s your point?


I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

if you wanted to get fairer results, you could have stopped the processes in task manager.


I already have a license for XP, and I already have a license for Vista Ultimate. I won’t be thinking about getting Windows 7 until the first service pack, if then. That’s a good rule of thumb to use when buying a new operating system that has just been released.

But, like someone else said, I would have turned off the other processes that were running on Windows 7, just to make things fair.

Quoted for agreement. Background apps could steal CPU cycles and throw off your rendering times.

Do window users really expect same hardware performance to improve on a new release?

I mean, really???

You seem to forget about the collusion with hardware manufactures and the ‘upgrade treadmill’ it seems…which isn’t so bad for me since I own some Intel stock and am typing this on a laptop that was ‘obsolete’ when I bought it four or so years ago that does Just Fine™ under the newest linux kernel.

There is no new operating system. Windows 7 is the third service pack to Vista.

Development work on Vista started in 2001 and took 6 years. Do you believe they fixed Vista’s flaws by writing a new OS from scratch in 2 years? Get real!

The name Vista was associated with failure. So instead of releasing “Windows Failure SP3” for free, they decided to call it “Windows Success” – and charge the full price. Duh!

Microsoft may have subpar programmers, but their marketing department is top notch.

what sources do you have to back any of this up or are you just making it up as you go along subpar programmers - That’s a new one, the biggest software company can’t recruit decent programmers when it is located in a region of the world that churns out some of the best engineers and scientists. Vista is a signifcantly different os from xp hence the longer development time, windows 7 is an evolution of vista if apple can churn out a new os practically every year why the hell can’t microsoft do it so in two years.

Back to the subject at hand, I think windows 7 can do all that and still get render times close to xp because in all probability its better able to make use of multi-core processors than xp. I don’t think Intel and AMD where making consumer grade multi-core processor at the time xp came out.

well, windows 7 looks better :stuck_out_tongue:

They’re right though, to get a fair test you should have shut-off the extra processes.

Anyway, i don’t know why anybody is expecting a huge performance increase for windows 7. About the only time i’d expect better performance because windows 7 64-bit is massively better than win xp 64-bit.

Of course it looks better, they created a shell that looks like KDE :stuck_out_tongue:

I have to agree with the performance though. multi-core (maybe) and x64 are the only real gains that you are going to find in the newer versions. It is cool that they took out a little of the bloat that was vista though.

Not that I care, I run linux. (and don’t like KDE for the record.)

What about Vista? I think you may have skipped a generation.

A complete list of the processes would be interesting, never ran vista, so I don’t know how honest the task manager is.My problem with operating systems is that the default mode is bloated to the hilt that includes Linux and OSX, as well as all the modern windows. If a consumer pays for a dual core or quad cpu they should get access to it’s power.

That’s just crazy talk.

That’s just crazy talk.[/quote]

Yea, there’s no apostrophe in the possessive form of the word “its.” Utter crazy talk.

The FSF is primarily about freedom. Most average users of OS’es with the Linux kernel choose to call the OS Linux, knowing full well it’s made of many parts. Full respect to RMS + the FSF for campaigning for freedom in many places no one else will.

Maybe one day they’ll extend that freedom campaign into the “Fifth Freedom”. Letting users be free to call things what they want when talking about them.

Now, I think I’ll just go back to happily using my Blender/Xorg/ALSA/Xine/MESA/Phonon/PULSE/QT/Gstreamer/Plasma/Nepomuk/GTK/Dbus/Avahi/Python/CUPS/Kwin/HAL/Gnome/GNU/Linux system.

Sorry. I do not have vista install disc.

I will quit all those processes and try to do another test when I get some time.

And those that are being anal about Linux name please drop it. Most of the world calls it Linux and I do not care to know why I shouldn’t be using name Linux.

Pointless illustration of fallacious pointless argument.

The difference is that calling GNU/Linux just Linux is accepted and when you say Linux you dont piss people off. Even Linux users call it Linux.

Calling Windows “Microsoft’s Operating Shit Winblows” just shows that you are underage loner who is out to piss people off on the internet. Anyway, Im not a keyboard warrior so im gonna leave this right here. Have a great day.

hey, sure thing man…

i just thought it would be fun to troll a troll… but it seems i’m bad at trolling :frowning: