Couple of questions to tose running the RTM code

[Kai-Uwe v. d. Ohe]

Now that some here in the group do actually have the "final"
code, I'd like to ask a few questions.

I installed Beta 2, pre-RC1, RC1 and finally RC2 on my desktop
system. It has a CPU (2 GHz) from AMD (rated as 2800+ by
AMD), a pretty fast hd (7.2k rpm) and 1 GB of DDR RAM. Ex-
cept for the (low end, i know that) graphics card, a NVIDIA FX
5200 with 128 MB, which scores a "2", all other components
score well above "4". Though there was a very noticeable jump
in speed from Beta 2 to RC1/RC2, I'm still unhappy with the
performance and right now, I'am pretty certain it wouldn't make
to much sense to install Vista on this box. My question is, has
Vista /noticeably/ improved, speedwise, with the RTM version?

Next question.: Would a better graphics card do much regarding
the overal experience or is it the CPU, the RAM or maybe even
the chipset (VIA KT 400) that is responsible for the slow operation
and constantly high CPU load?

On my new laptop I'd already have switched to Vista RC2 entirely,
if Pinnacle would have made a driver for my USB-based TV-box.
As of now, there isn't to much on their site reg. Vista, Haupauge is
apparently /much/ better in this regard. Vista runs fine on this Core
Duo based laptop with 1.5 Gb of DDR2 RAM, an ATi card and a
speedy hd; even battery life isn't to bad and hopefully better with
the final code.

Does by chance someone run the RTM version on such a laptop
and can say if/how much battery life is improved compared to RC2?

Thanks for your time,

Kai-Uwe

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

They are not Answering my Questions about RTM either, so they must be Under
a Non Disclosure Agreement, Just FYI.

 

[Jeff]

Kevin,
I've only seen ONE person say theyre runnin RTM.
And Andre's a busy man.
Psst.
Guess what?
I'm thinking of signing up for technet plus !!!!FYI
:-O

Jeff

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

Good For You, Jeff, Just FYI.

Kevin,
I've only seen ONE person say theyre runnin RTM.
And Andre's a busy man.
Psst.
Guess what?
I'm thinking of signing up for technet plus !!!!FYI
:-O

Jeff

 

[Kai-Uwe v. d. Ohe]

Thanks for the responses so far and sorry for the
typo in the subject. I've meant "those" of course..

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Yes, there is a speed bump coming from RC2, I have a Sempron 1.6 Ghz 64-Bit,
512 MBs of RAM, 128 MB video card and the system is very responsive. Oh, and
Glass came back by the way, its disabled by default for performance reasons,
but if your card supports it, you can manually enable it without the reg
hack. Media Center is especially with performance.

 

[Roy Coorne]

Yes, there is a speed bump coming from RC2, I have a Sempron 1.6 Ghz 64-Bit,
512 MBs of RAM, 128 MB video card and the system is very responsive. Oh, and
Glass came back by the way, its disabled by default for performance reasons,
but if your card supports it, you can manually enable it without the reg
hack. Media Center is especially with performance.

I have a very similar system, among others, and it is responsive, too,
with b. 5744.
A major question is how the system will behave under a more heavy
load, with MS Office etc. (My 'testing' phase has not finished yet;-)

Roy

 

[MSDN Fan]

RTM Vista "has leaked" Says Andre, And "people are pointing fingers at me".
So You Might Have RTM Soon. Just FYI.

 

[Kai-Uwe v. d. Ohe]

Yes, there is a speed bump coming from RC2, I have a Sempron 1.6 Ghz
64-Bit, 512 MBs of RAM, 128 MB video card and the system is very
responsive. Oh, and Glass came back by the way, its disabled by default
for performance reasons, but if your card supports it, you can manually
enable it without the reg hack. Media Center is especially with
performance.

Sounds interesting! Thanks for the info.

 

[Alexander Suhovey]

I have a very similar system, among others, and it is responsive, too,
with b. 5744.
A major question is how the system will behave under a more heavy load,
with MS Office etc. (My 'testing' phase has not finished yet;-)

In this case ReadyBoost should help you. Or additional RAM. RAM and/or
chache of any kind plays major role in Vista performance, same as it was
with XP.

As Jim Allchin put it:
"Performance... Performance is a mix bag. If you've got a low-memory
machine, then Windows Vista, depending on what you are doing, could be
slower than XP [...]. As you get around 1Gig mark, then it's about, give or
take, about the same - tremendously generalizing here because it's very
complicated [...] And then, as you get above 1Gig, then Vista starts to pull
away pretty dramatically from XP in terms of performance."
http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=254997