digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Windows Vista Gaming Performance - NVIDIA and ATI Compared

pcper.com — So should gamer's run right out and get a copy of Vista today? Apparently not, according this article, especially for NVIDIA users. With quotes like "very obviously let down by the Windows Vista gaming experience" and "NVIDIA's Forceware 100.54 driver on the other hands was more or less a mess" pretty much sums it up!

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 31, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

115 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • crustyone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+63More work on the drivers is needed.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+67"...Whereas Linux is "where it's at" right now ;) Beryl looks a lot better than Aero Glass (I've used both, and use Beryl at home - prettier and lighter on the ol' resources)"

    ...wheras this article is "about gaming" - give me a call when linux can natively run anything more than id titles
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+62Dear OSS whores, Linux "gaming performance" nears ZERO as there is almost NO titles for it.
  • pcgeek101, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20"Not actually even close to true"

    LOL! You call those "titles"? They are severely under-developed games that people use as a pathetic defense for gaming on Linux. Just admit that Linux has no major titles, and get over it ... if you don't want to game, that's fine, but at least admit that you're not running a decent gaming o/s. Fact is fact.
  • ItDepends, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Driver support is better than the betas, but not much
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Benchmarks on OSX running on core duo with ATI card:

    Battlefield 2 : NA
    Call of Duty 2: NA
    Fear: NA
    HL2 Coast: NA
    Prey: NA
  • Homunculiheaded, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Why do people have to fight so much about the linux/windows, it's not like you can't have both. For me linux is a superior OS to windows in every way except gaming. I don't abandon gaming (although I'm not a hardcore gamer), I just have a small windows partition and treat it like a console, when I feel like playing game for a bit I simply boot into it, that doesn't take much longer than turning on the tv and starting up your xbox 360/wii/whatever. If you're a hardcore gamer I can see that this would get frustrating, and I can also see that for your computing needs linux would not be the ideal OS. I love OSS but I don't think it's dirty to have a small windows partition for the things that windows does better, I don't use linux out of principle I use it because it works best for everything else except gaming.
  • TyroPyro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Nvidia is actually still calling the Vista driver a beta, but at least they have something out.
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x64_100.54.html
    "First Beta driver for GeForce 8800 GTX/GTS GPUs"
  • yaosio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14"Creative has problems on Vista, because Vista implements natively many audio features that Creative was doing in a hardware-accelerated way in its soundcards. It will take them a few months to come out with good drivers"
    You write this as if Creative has ever made good drivers.
  • nanx63, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16I won't bother with Vista until I REALLY need it. I'm guessing around the Crysis launch so I can play it in DirectX 10. XP is fine by now...
  • Vigile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Very true -- no one has picked on Creative yet! But the dev time on this OS should have prevented these kids of problems for missing critical drivers..
  • Digg4all, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Quit "wine"ing
  • Takteek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I'd like to see a "ATI gaming performance - Windows XP and Vista compared" article.
  • chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15"These drivers could have been finished a long time ago"

    oh I see. so, ummmm what division of ATI do you work for again? It must be good because you obviously have a lot of experience in this field.
  • hybridcreation, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Some good, mostly bad...just as I expected. Like anything computer-related, it will improve with time.
  • Wootery, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"More work on the drivers is needed."

    Makes a change to hear that about GeForce.
  • EXreaction, on 10/12/2007, -12/+20Wow, that is terrible!

    Shame on nVidia especially, if I was in charge of the driver dev team I would give them all a swift kick in the ass, a pay cut, and then get them back to work on the Vista drivers. These drivers could have been finished a long time ago, I have no doubt nVidia and ATI had copies of the final Vista when it was RTM.

    But I wonder how long it will be before Creative get's their ass in gear and puts out a stable Vista driver...or a stable driver at all for that matter.
  • TopBanana, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I play Battlefield 2 on my Vista machine with an NVidia 7800GT. It runs very well as far as I can tell - even in 1600x1200.
  • XIUgraag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@TyroPyro

    There is also a final release for Vista, not just a beta anymore. It's even WHQL signed.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7http://firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_performance_amd_catalyst_7.1/default.asp

    Enjoy.
  • aaronm67, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10@pozzoe

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX#DirectX_10

    That's about all the evidence you need. You'll see plenty of games released in the next year that run on Direct X 10.

    Also, it's sort of common sense right now that it is a problem with the drivers. Graphics card drivers had to be entirely rewritten for Vista/DirectX10, and so they're fairly new (whether they're "beta" or not). So, people blame the graphics card drivers because that is what makes the most sense.
  • pozzoe, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12aaronm67:

    That's directx10... Of course it will work better in Vista, since we are talking about newer cards, newer architecture and also because dx10 won't be supported in XP (so we'll never actually know).

    But I'm not talking about that... what I mean is, where is the evidence that DX9 cards will work better, or at least the same than XP.
  • MMilitia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Vista's decreased performance has got to be down to increased memory usage. While i'm just pottering around on the desktop it generally reads 30% memory usage. So about 600mb of my 2GB memory. However I'm not complaining - games like RS:Vegas run pretty much the same and I'm not one to be too upset over 5-10FPS. Especially when I'm getting all the functionality of Vista in return.

  • noorman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Fine review, Good on ATI/AMD, bad on nVidia ! ! !
  • Guard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I have an ATI Radeon X1900. I ran 3DMark06 on Windows XP, Windows Vista x64 Beta RC1, Windows Vista x64 Beta RC2 (with beta drivers), and Windows Vista x64 Beta RC2 (with new released 7.1 drivers).

    Setup:
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ Running at 2.1Ghz(the thing thats slowing down my compie the most)
    4GB Dual-Channel DDR2 800 RAM (1GBx4)
    ATI Radeon X1900
    SB Audigy 2 ZS (shouldn't matter for 3DMark though)

    Using Windows Performance Tests, I get a score of 5.0 (with the processor giving 5.0, the rest all give above 5.5)

    3DMark06 Scores:
    XP: ~4900 (XP Reports 3.25GB RAM and Extended Memory Addressing)
    Vista RC1: ~4900 (There were many problems with my computer with RC1, many windows modes didn't function for me, and I would immediately blue screen if I set my 4GB RAM to DDR2.)
    Vista RC2 Beta Drivers: ~5400
    Vista RC2 7.1 Drivers: ~5600

    The 7.1 Drivers also gave significantly faster performance in Vista when changing monitor setups, opening ATI's configuration panel, switching to TV displays, and better startup monitor initialization performance. Overall I was very impressed with the new version.

    Because of these results I've wondered why people have been complaining about Vista's gaming performance, since I got much better results while running Vista, and the only game I've had trouble running is Warcraft 3 (no sound issue once you download the patch). I guess most people are running nVidea though.
  • 3dom, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Linux game support doesn't even get near Mac levels of compatibility, which is still pretty poor, although getting better now they've started putting some serious gfx hardware inside.
  • neko, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I wouldn't blame nVidia, it's not their fault that Microsoft keeps changing their API with every minor version increase.
    With GL, if you've got a neat new bit of hardware functionality, you make an extension to support it.
    With DX, well, just tell everyone they need to upgrade to DirectX9.0c (d,e,f...)
  • ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Unreal Tournament 3 guys... it's UT3 now. Not UT2007.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6ATI is my favorite- however don't mix it with linux, they don't seem to get along.
  • pcgeek101, on 10/12/2007, -10/+15"Dear OSS whores, Linux "gaming performance" nears ZERO as there is almost NO titles for it."

    What about UT2004? That runs on Linux ... oh wait, that's about it, and it's 3 years old! XD
  • TonyCubed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yet another dumb ass comment.

    Vista actually uses your RAM for caching rather than it being used for nothing. When programs need the RAM, Vista releases it, why can't people understand this?
  • JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Did you even read the article? The performance is almost identical on everything except 8800GTX's, which only take such a hit because it wasn't until these latest drivers released YESTERDAY that they were even supported in Vista. If you don't own an 8800GTX, you have no right to bitch because the frame-rates are really almost identical with the other cards (and in some cases Vista even outperforms XP).

    Vista was just released yesterday, new nvidia drivers come out once every few weeks. By the end of February 8800GTX performance will follow suite and be identical to XP.
  • Evoguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What the hell is going on with power dissipation in the ATI/AMD cards? 400W at load vs 280 on nVidia!? Good lord, GeForce8800 is like twice the die size of x1950 too, I fear for R600's power consumption.
  • pozzoe, on 10/12/2007, -9/+13Where is the empirical evidence that make people believe that Vista's performance on games will be better?

    I mean, people keep blaming on the drivers, the betas, and the holy spirit. But why is everyone so sure the performance will be better? Is it only because it should, in theory?
  • calvmari, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Digi

    Now wouldn't it be lovely if we had a diagnostic tool that didn't misrepresent the information about our ram? :)
  • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"""http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX#DirectX_10

    That's about all the evidence you need."""

    Ah. This must be some new use of the word "evidence" I hadn't come across before.

    I suggest you get a games programmer - ie someone who does the dirty work - to walk you through the "benefits" of Direct X 10 + vista over Direct X 9 and give you their analysis of it.

    Jesus, the crap the buzz lightyear brigade will munch happily on if you give them enough buzzwords to throw around. *sigh*
  • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3pozzoe, Vista has supposedly also included improvments to the version of DirectX 9 that ships with the OS (DirectX 9.0 EX) as mentioned in ( http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb173477.aspx ):

    "The Direct3D 9Ex interface provides access to a slight extension of the standard Direct3D 9 API that exposes the virtualized resource allocation, new lost device semantics, and some other new features available while running on Windows Vista. By creating this extended object, the Direct3D 9 API uses the new semantics and therefore requires the application to use different logic (and therefore different code paths) for resource creation, management, and error handling for new kinds of conditions. This API is only available on Windows Vista, and it requires WDDM drivers. Because Direct3D 9Ex uses a separate API and driver code path than Direct3D 9, supporting this API requires additional test cases for your application."

    Greater detail on those specific features can be found at ( http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms681824.aspx )

    Those features are being introduced with the new Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) in Vista, but should be compatible with the majority of DirectX 9 capable cards running on the OS (assuming the final release of drivers to support it, and updates to apps and games that might want to take advantage of the new features)

    I can't say if applying those features necessarily make games faster on Vista, but they do appear to offer a couple of ways to make allocating resources and rendering textures more efficient for DirectX 9 capable software.
  • nypix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why are some morons citing other OS's and how much better they are when we're referencing gaming?
  • rajputwarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3so (has a nvidia card owner) why am i getting vista again? (:@)
  • Jofaba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Anyone else think it's a bad idea to call ATI cards "AMD" cards? AMD wants to keep the ATI name last I heard, and anyway, calling an Intel Core Duo 2 system an "AMD" system just makes things confusing.

    That, and I stopped reading the review as soon as I saw that they didn't unlock the Battlefield 2 fps ceiling. It's not really that hard, and it's an important step. At 1600x1200 all high and 4xaa in Forceware, my Battlefield 2 fps have hit peaks between 250-350fps at regular intervals. I've seen 400+fps when looking at the sky. These kinds of numbers are important, since, as I'm sure you all realize, 101fps is a lot different than 301 when you're trying to show performance comparisons.

    Note: To any naysayers, here's how you unlock the ceiling. "~" to get the console dropdown, then type in "game.lockfps 0" and "~" to close the console.
  • Vigile, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I didn't play much with the betas, but they were around for a good year or so, right?
  • dtjunkie, on 10/12/2007, -10/+13Well this just confirms the overall bad feeling I was getting from the whole Vista thing. I'll just sit back with my still lovely XP service pack 2 and wait for everyone and everything to settle down and get their acts together
  • blueigloo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Wish I could say the same. BF2 on max settings with a 7800GT is nearly unplayable compared to its XPSP2 counterpart.
  • AwesomeMonster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Anybody else feel like they could have used much better games to test this? Why don't they use oblivion, hl2 episode 1, bf2142, etc. those games that they are using are all a tad old.
  • JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Correction: DirectX 10 if available. And I believe it was announced a long time ago that UT3 would not use OpenGL in any way.
  • 3dom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I can assure you that no, I'm not mental. To retort to your points in order:
    1. False, that is an unsupportable claim. Even if they do have linux/mac compatible versions they're usually the best part of a year behind if released at all, at the least delayed after the windows release because that is the de-facto standard for PC gaming. (not their fault obviously, but thats the way things work)
    2. WINE is a copout, whether it's good or not. I'm talking about native support here.
    3. Freeware doesnt count. I don't care if you think linux has excellent game support because it can run java tetris (or something similar).
  • yournamehere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2you sir are an idiot. Vista is going to be the next big push for gaming on the PC. It just came out and drivers need to mature, same thing happened with XP lest we forget and now look at it.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Christ. You don't know a damn thing about Vista's DRM.
  • bmwboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The OpenGL support in both of these companies drivers still needs a ***** of work, I can't even run many OpenGL games in Vista! GET YOUR ACT IN LINE ATi AND nVidia!
  • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You might not be aware of the new push in the Gaming for Windows campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_for_Windows ), but MS is very interested in promoting gaming on the PC with compatibility to the XBox 360 as parts of an overall gaming strategy.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 115 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.