punisher.ita Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 YEAH! Sure! We all believe you and install Windows 7 now! ROTFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTA3Freak-2001 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Talking about software that can only be obtained via illegal means is fine, so long as links to the software and discussion on how to obtain it are not mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 not going so well atm lol, win 7 installed just fine but installing gta is a different matter lol, came up with can't access some manifest file which i have no idea what it is and mu suckurom replacement throws up an error saying it can't run gtaiv.exe and and real suckurom throws up error 2000 i will continue to plug away though lol. also win7 keeps on saying explorer has stopped working during the installation but nothing crashes and nothing seems to be affected weird, nice OS though responsive unlike vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruXter Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I don't trust this thread and the posts. This place has been slammed by flames/trolls/pranksters You will not see me trusting anything like this, until a reputable person posts. when I say reputable, I mean someone I trust. not going so well atm lol, win 7 installed just fine but installing gta is a different matter lol, came up with can't access some manifest file which i have no idea what it is and mu suckurom replacement throws up an error saying it can't run gtaiv.exe and and real suckurom throws up error 2000 i will continue to plug away though lol. also win7 keeps on saying explorer has stopped working during the installation but nothing crashes and nothing seems to be affected weird, nice OS though responsive unlike vista. Reputable chatter, by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 lol er thanks i guess. reinstalling it at the moment to see if it makes any difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruXter Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 lol er thanks i guess. reinstalling it at the moment to see if it makes any difference lol, not flirtin with ya. just you been here just short of 7 years and haven't risked your account, says plenty. Eagle seems to be on the truth track also. as apposed " the wonder drug, the cure all cures warts measles hair loss, run in your stocking coughs colds runny nose" sales pitch crap. You two are posting legit stuff. Specific errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) okay! i do like this OS though, even IE is quick which is a slap around the face from the usual page loading times in xp still will use opera though! this might be an OS i will actually upgrade to if they don't fill it full of bloat like they did vista, but have to wait for a release candidate to judge that. //edit ok: manifest error was due to win7 not liking the Visual c++ package on the disk, so installed seperately it worked and now able to install live (which didn't install because of this) and suckurom launcher can now execute gta4! just gotta do all the updates and i should be ready to benchmark. Edited January 8, 2009 by noVa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redemption80 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Using it now, and have to say, very impressed so far. As you said, IE is nippy as hell when you use, it just a pity i use Firefox lol Will try GTAIV now for anyone who is interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sethos Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 GTA runs like crap under Windows 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) right i have done benchmarks on both games now and i'm quite surprised ( ) at the results to let you know these were the conditions: Windows XP SP3, Installed 2 Days ago, some software installed (Opera, itunes -everything including help disabled) Windows 7 - fresh install Both have my latest chipset drivers, latest Graphics ATI 8.12, Latest Directx Runtimes (November 08). Both setup exactly the same in Catalyst. and heres my results from benchmarks: Windows XP SP3: Statistics Average FPS: 48.00 Duration: 37.29 sec CPU Usage: 83% System memory usage: 48% Video memory usage: 78% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Render Quality: Highest View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 6.14.10.6891 Audio Adapter: E-DSP Wave [EC00] Intel Pentium III Xeon processor Windows 7: Statistics Average FPS: 48.37 Duration: 37.26 sec CPU Usage: 93% System memory usage: 54% Video memory usage: 75% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Render Quality: Highest View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 7.14.10.630 Audio Adapter: Speakers (E-MU E-DSP) Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz UPDATED>> Right, after a fresh install of gta 4, due to me thinking something was wrong seeing as the gap was so large.. and there was! im an idiot and forgot i had modded my xp gta 4 sorry! re done the benchmark and reinstalled it on the same partition as XP for a fiar comparison, and as you can see theres 0.37 frames a second difference. So yeh, i can't see any difference between the two except for one thing, My XP installation gets tiny stutters at regular intervals (i mean tiny doesn't register as a frame rate drop) My Windows 7 install does not get these tiny stutters (so gives the impression of a smoother fps) but does get image tearing. So my conclusion.. i'll stick to XP for the time being as i find image tearing highly annoying, and fiddle around with windows 7 to see what its capable of and if i can get rid of the image tearing. Edited January 8, 2009 by noVa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpope17 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Yeah I will give you all a benchmark later on today. ^^dosent look like it made much of a diference though, but will see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 yep, although the benchmark isn't at all accurate anyways, i got a 58fps one on xp earlier but most consistant number, i took about 5-10 on each were both hovering just below 50 on both os's im going to try optimising windows 7 later see what i can squeeze out of it becuase 48-50 is the most i can get consistently out of xp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamjam1000 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 um, is windows 7 an entirely new OS? How can you be able to download that for free? If I download it, will I have to replace XP and go through the whole rigmarole of installing a new OS? If that's so, I don't see how you guys can flaunt this windows 7 as a replacement for XP if its not even released yet. Or is Windows 7 some kind of patch like an SP4 or something for XP. I dunno, sounds like a bit much just for game performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilrex Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Windows 7 is not out. When it is, it will be costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp2018 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 To be fair you must realise that the windows 7 beta does not contain all the processes that the final build will be running, the Vista beta would of been the same if they didn't have all the bugs in it, however since windows 7 is just a tweaked vista with other things added in those bugs are mostly squashed, so a cut down OS will perform much better. Of course Windows 7 should still be quicker, but the final build most likely won't be quicker to the extreme you are seeing now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) To be fair you must realise that the windows 7 beta does not contain all the processes that the final build will be running, the Vista beta would of been the same if they didn't have all the bugs in it, however since windows 7 is just a tweaked vista with other things added in those bugs are mostly squashed, so a cut down OS will perform much better. Of course Windows 7 should still be quicker, but the final build most likely won't be quicker to the extreme you are seeing now. MS did say that win 7 will be heavily optimised, they've gone back over everything and tried to get everything working for speed and efficiency (i don't usually believe anything ms say but win7 is a very responsive os) and they also said this beta version is the single most complete pre release they've done that isn't a rc . whether the final product is the same i have no idea, i'd be quite happy to run this beta version if they started selling it tomorrow, has all the functionality i could want. forgot to mention that my benchmark was done with all the bells and whistles turned on so i'm going to go back and see if i can fine tune it as the XP i have is stripped of most things that can hinder performance. so matching the performance of a stripped down xp with everything turned on is still pretty good imo. //edit apparently this version of windows 7 is "feature complete", so any further releases would be bug/error fixes rather than bloated feature addons. Edited January 8, 2009 by noVa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishman82 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 um, is windows 7 an entirely new OS? How can you be able to download that for free? If I download it, will I have to replace XP and go through the whole rigmarole of installing a new OS? If that's so, I don't see how you guys can flaunt this windows 7 as a replacement for XP if its not even released yet. Or is Windows 7 some kind of patch like an SP4 or something for XP. I dunno, sounds like a bit much just for game performance Windows 7 is a new OS, different from XP and Vista, you can download it for free because Microsoft give out test versions to certain people but they quickly get passed around to other people, tomorrow you will be able to get an official Beta key from microsoft and try it legally. Most of the people who are testing it are installing it on a spare hard drive anyway so they can install it, play around with it but still keep their XP installation on their main hard drive, it only took me 15 minutes to install from start to finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpope17 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Can someone tell me how much of a partition on my hdd i need to make?, like how many Gigabytes do i need to install Windows 7? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Can someone tell me how much of a partition on my hdd i need to make?, like how many Gigabytes do i need to install Windows 7? i think it said you need atleast 16gb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpope17 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Thanks I guess I'll do 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharmingCharlie Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Whilst not strictly GTA 4 related to those that may want to try Windows 7 LEGITIMATELY it appears MS is going to offer it up for free in beta form from this Friday :- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer announced at CES today that Windows 7—the highly anticipated followup to Windows Vista—will be available as a free, public download on Friday, January 9. source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 be quick though only 2.5 million licenses and they'll go pretty quick i imagine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llamaguy Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 Glad to see you guys trying it out. I wasn't bullsh*ttin ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSD T Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Of course it is outdoing the others, wise ass. So did Vista when it was pre-beta. It wasn't riddled with useless junk then. Same as XP. I know it's petty but... No it f*cking never, not at any single point of Longhorns pre-build pre beta/beta stages did it appear remotely faster than XP. The only amusment was all the f*cknuts that bought the final release insisting its superior performance superior memory management (is that what you call inefficient use of memory and continual disk thrashing these days?)and the usual obsolete XP comments. Some of these drones somehow still exist today. Never a bigger pile of sh*t to have the morons gorging themselves on even the Emperor would have said he was naked at that con, it reminds me of Johnny Rotten's "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?", hang on, I see parallels here, but cannae quite put ma' finger on it... Edited January 8, 2009 by LSD T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 no one else going to post benchmarks? becuase at the moment i appear to be the only one who has done one properly and it showed no improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpope17 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 no one else going to post benchmarks? becuase at the moment i appear to be the only one who has done one properly and it showed no improvement. I would but everytime I do I get a fatel error message. Anybody know what this is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpope17 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 ok I benchmarked with Windows 7, here is what I got, will do Vista in a bit. Average FPS - 32.26 CPU usage - 96% System Memory 92% Video Memory 97% resolution- 1280x 1024 Texture Quality: Medium Render Quality: Medium View Distance: 15 Detail Distance: 15 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: Nvidia Geforce 9800GT Video Driver version: 185.20 AMD Athlon Dual Core Processor 64x2 6000+ These may look like low results but when I play the game it definitely feels like a performance increase, i think it is more of a steady 32FPS, no more dropping alot when you reach a wide open environment. Also I tried upping my details quite a bit after, like render to high and view sliders to 40, and I only dropped 2FPS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp2018 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 ok I benchmarked with Windows 7, here is what I got, will do Vista in a bit. Average FPS - 32.26 CPU usage - 96% System Memory 92% Video Memory 97% resolution- 1280x 1024 Texture Quality: Medium Render Quality: Medium View Distance: 15 Detail Distance: 15 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: Nvidia Geforce 9800GT Video Driver version: 185.20 AMD Athlon Dual Core Processor 64x2 6000+ These may look like low results but when I play the game it definitely feels like a performance increase, i think it is more of a steady 32FPS, no more dropping alot when you reach a wide open environment. Also I tried upping my details quite a bit after, like render to high and view sliders to 40, and I only dropped 2FPS. Only remember that the dual core optimiser probably wont work on windows 7, so again, it isnt a fair comparison, full windows 7 will also have bloatware attached. Still, keep up the benchmarks, if the beta's going to be around a while, it sure would make a good gaming OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noVa Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) ok I benchmarked with Windows 7, here is what I got, will do Vista in a bit. Average FPS - 32.26 CPU usage - 96% System Memory 92% Video Memory 97% resolution- 1280x 1024 Texture Quality: Medium Render Quality: Medium View Distance: 15 Detail Distance: 15 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: Nvidia Geforce 9800GT Video Driver version: 185.20 AMD Athlon Dual Core Processor 64x2 6000+ These may look like low results but when I play the game it definitely feels like a performance increase, i think it is more of a steady 32FPS, no more dropping alot when you reach a wide open environment. Also I tried upping my details quite a bit after, like render to high and view sliders to 40, and I only dropped 2FPS. Only remember that the dual core optimiser probably wont work on windows 7, so again, it isnt a fair comparison, full windows 7 will also have bloatware attached. Still, keep up the benchmarks, if the beta's going to be around a while, it sure would make a good gaming OS. do people not read.. the beta is FULL FEATURED, which means no extra bloat will (hopefully) be added, microsoft have also stated they want windows 7 install size to be REDUCED by release date. i'm by no means an ms fanboy but it does seem they are doing things properly this time after the catastrophy that was vista. Edited January 9, 2009 by noVa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppehrson Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Of course it is outdoing the others, wise ass. So did Vista when it was pre-beta. It wasn't riddled with useless junk then. Same as XP. I know it's petty but... No it f*cking never, not at any single point of Longhorns pre-build pre beta/beta stages did it appear remotely faster than XP. The only amusment was all the f*cknuts that bought the final release insisting its superior performance superior memory management (is that what you call inefficient use of memory and continual disk thrashing these days?)and the usual obsolete XP comments. Some of these drones somehow still exist today. Never a bigger pile of sh*t to have the morons gorging themselves on even the Emperor would have said he was naked at that con, it reminds me of Johnny Rotten's "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?", hang on, I see parallels here, but cannae quite put ma' finger on it... That is wrong. And if I test my dual boot xp and vista, vista is faster. Why? Because the current computer architecture is built for Vista, not XP. In fact, many new computers won't run XP. At least, not with the full features of the chipsets due to drivers only being written for Vista. Mind you I am a professional computer tech. I would also like to add that the reason why I blew up b/c of the warez post was that I know what it costs to have your software stolen. And Microsoft has been pretty secure about the pre-beta of Win7 until ... well in about 12 hours. Additionally ... Microsoft has always said that they would optimize their software from pre beta to beta to beta to rc.... it always end up being bloated with unnecessary stuff reducing the time devs have to optimize. Finally. Win 7 will not be a totally new, state of the art OS. To me it reminds me a lot of Vista. Features moved, removed, new added etc... but the core, graphics, desktop etc. look like Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now