[newzhunter]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1772

[XiaoDongDong]

u mean... vista SP1 is built worse than their RTM?!

[Seventhwave]

The difference between xp sp2 and vista 64-bit rtm is impressive.

[Ultimate Chicke]

What about XP 64 bit edition? <_<

[AuDioFreaK39]

But you guys, check out the difference between XP SP2 and XP SP3

990.8 - 891 = 99.8

Whereas the difference between Vista RTM and Vista SP1 is

1183.1 - 1128.8 = 54.3

[W.o.l.f]

vista 64-bit is very impressive indeed looks like its time to move over from xp

[LiM]

Testing on the same machine?

[Tepkisiz]

What is the testing system?

If the system has 4 GB or more RAM this isnt legit. XP 32 bit cant use it. They should have included XP 64 bit also to see the real difference. This smells bad :|

[AuDioFreaK39]

Originally Posted by Tepkisiz

What is the testing system?

If the system has 4 GB or more RAM this isnt legit. XP 32 bit cant use it. They should have included XP 64 bit also to see the real difference. This smells bad :|

I've tested XP Professional x64 for myself, and in comparison to this graph, the result lies somewhere between XP SP2 and XP SP3. Yes, SP3 is faster, and Microsoft already announced that it's x64 Edition of the OS would not be receiving anymore service packs. Solution? Dual-boot Vista x64 and XP x86 SP3 and call it a day

[jovioh]

kind of unfair for xp

[Lyfeforce]

Originally Posted by jovioh

kind of unfair for xp

Errr...? Fair? Since when has it been fair?

[Niceone]

And why there's only one synthetic test and not a single test that would actually meassure how fast that operating system is?

[DragonFire]

I recall seeing that Server 2003 X64 SP2 contains most of the XP SP3 patches. It can be applied to X64.

DF

[MrBungle]

that graph implies that Vista RTM is faster than XP SP2. it isn't. ignore the graph altogether.

[Ske7ch]

Wtf?