Windows 7 vs Windows Vista vs Windows XP

Shinanigans · 16th January 2009, 4:25 PM

Windows 7 vs Windows Vista vs Windows XP
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

System Info...
Intel E8500 @ 4.03GHz (425*9.5)
Gigabyte EP45-DS3 F7
2x2GB G.Skill PQ @ 850MHz 5-5-5-15
HD4870X2 @ 750/900MHz
Cat8.12 official drivers (including Win7, no hotfix)
WD 160GB (Win7/XP) & WD 640GB (Vista)

Settings...
Left4Dead & Call of Duty 4: 1920x1200 4xAA, Maximum detail. Timedemo looped till consistant.
Crysis: 1920x1200 0xAA, "High" detail, DX9, 32-bit. Best of 4 runs.

Notes...
Boot times were recorded from power on to OS idle and ready, after games, drivers and software was installed and HDD defragged. The Catalyst Control Panel was always last thing to load up so once the fan speed on the X2 ramped up, that was the indication it was ready.
I didn't run Vista on the 160GB because i had to format my main drive anyway and didn't want to do it twice just for a boot time run. Safe to say there could be a few seconds added on top in comparison to the 160GB.
It goes without saying, Windows7 is a BETA so don't take these figures to be final. Performance is likely to improve further because for one, i'm using Vista video drivers...
I noted the Vram usage in the XP tests out of curiosity sake. These were recorded with Rivatuner 2.22.
Software used from standard (including bootup) was Rivatuner, Catalyst Control Panel & Logitech 3.01 keyboard.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

Windows 7 Ultimate BETA 7000 build 64-bit

Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem
Run1: 116fps
Run2: 117fps
Run3: 123fps (alttab)
Run4: 123fps

COD4 - lankerus1.dem
Run1: 136fps
Run2: 136fps
Run3: 135fps (alttab)

Crysis - GPU_benchmark
Min: 39fps
Avg: 51fps
Max: 67fps

Boot time - 1:15 (superfetch enabled)*
*will test with it disabled soon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit

Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem (470MB Vram)
Run1: 137fps
Run2: 139fps
Run3: 139fps
Run4: 141fps
Run5: 139fps

COD4 - lankerus1.dem (500MB Vram)
Run1: 145fps
Run2: 145fps
Run3: 144fps (alttab)

Crysis - GPU_benchmark (450MB Vram) (700MB Vram 4xAA)
Min: 32fps
Avg: 49fps
Max: 62fps

Boot time - 1:12

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 64-bit

Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem
Run1: 117fps
Run2: 108fps (alttab)
Run3: 117fps
Run4: 118fps

COD4 - lankerus1.dem
Run1: 134fps
Run2: 136fps
Run3: 137fps
Run4: 137fps

Crysis - GPU_benchmark
Min: 24fps
Avg: 50fps
Max: 65fps

Boot time - 1:25 (without superfetch)*
*this install was done on the WD640 which is a quicker drive than the WD160. Didn't want to install Vista on the bench drive and then again on the main drive.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

3Dmark06
WinXP - 3DMark Score 19459 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 8647
SM 3.0 Score 10938
CPU Score 3599

Win7 - 3DMark Score 18958 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 8327
SM 3.0 Score 10635
CPU Score 3553

Shinanigans · 16th January 2009, 4:26 PM

Piccies! \o/

Control Panel no longer offers "Classic View" in the navigation bar. Instead, down the bottom you have "All Control Panel Items"

The new "Action Center" is basically the Windows security alerts on roids. More features to annoy you about lack of virus protection/firewall etc.

Some of you may have already seen the Internet Explorer 8 BETA. Well, here it is if you haven't. Very similar to IE7 with a few minor changes. Also, note the taskbar and it's colour coding (or lack of) in comparison to Vista.

Preview of the new folder setup. Quite a significant change here. They've already dropped the username based "My Documents" that was introduced in Vista and now have "Favourites" and "Libraries". Not sure i like it yet. Have to fiddle moar.

Another preview of "Control Panel", "Libraries" and "Computer" folders.

A slightly updated Windows Defrag. A little less sub-menu, a little more cake.

Slightly different Start Menu. Seems MS have gone for a more slimmed down version. No power icons, etc. Also, "Recent Items" has been removed as a group and is now individually shown per program. You'll notice an arrow next to "Paint" which drops down to show recent Paint files.

Windows 7 Services for those curious.

MSN 2009

Few changes with the taskbar in Win7. I forgot to get a shot of the actual task bar icons in action, but here you've got the system tray icons and their customisability. It's no longer hide or show!

Now, a few comparisons...

And just for good measure. Thought i'd note how much of a prick XP was to use after so long using Vista. The first issue i ran into (well, after having to install LAN drivers to get the net working) was when i installed my motherboard chipset drivers. When it finished installing them it wanted me to click 'Next', but it's a little hard when it disconnects the USB devices (keyboard & mouse) and doesn't reconnect them. I had to power the system down with the power button...

The next issue i ran into was an example of how Vista and above incorporate things so seemlessly. Take for instance the Flash installation; On Vista and Win7 i install Flash and Steam's front page picks it up after a simple refresh click. XP on the other hand had to close Steam completely before it would load Flash. Minor, but an example nonetheless...

Conclusion and stuff...
Well, i'm very impressed with Windows 7 even in BETA format. I've still got to post up a video i took on how it alt+tabs out of a game which is nothing short of instant. 7 is a refined, cut down and toned version of Vista, which is exactly what Vista needed. Whilst XP's idle RAM usage is somewhere around the 400MB vicinity and Vista's from memory is around 1000MB, Win7 sits somewhere in the middle at around 800MB so those "RAM whore" haters should be a little more pleased.

Performance wise the system felt very snappy and very smooth. I didn't delve too far into it and haven't had much of a chance to play around but it certainly does give off that "speed of XP, looks of Vista" impression. Left4Dead and COD4 certainly did perform better on XP than it did on Win7, albeit at levels far beyond necessary frame rates, however i must remind you that this is BETA and on Vista drivers. Who knows what kind of performance increase we can expect with proper Win7 drivers and with 6-12 months of further development. Interestingly enough, yet not so surprisingly, Crysis performed best on Win7 out of all 3 systems. I'm going to assume this is because of two things; for one, XP is 32-bit and left me with a total of 2.75GB after the X2 helped itself to a large chunk of that 4GB. The other thing is given that even Vista performed better than XP did i'm going to generalise it down to new, high-tech gaming engines perform better on new, high-tech operating systems. Whether or not Vista's shared video memory plays a big role in this performance increase, i'm not sure. Interestingly enough though and contrary to the point, COD4 used the most Vram out of all 3 games (on XP), so i'm really left high and dry as to why Crysis runs better. One thing's for certain though, i will definitely be throwing a tonne more games at Win7 once retail is out!

There are a few minor cosmetic changes to get used to but most of it's just customisable so it can be tinkered to suit. I'm not sure how much/if things will change from BETA to Retail versions but i think aside from getting used to it, it should work quite well in the end.

Cheers

ravescar · 16th January 2009, 4:43 PM

Nice Writeup mate! I have window 7 installed on my main rig atm and I agree with most of the points you have raised.

I have L4D and TF2 on my machine which has XP SP2 and Window 7 as well, maybe i should do a performance comparision too.

Have you tried Networking sharing (specially, the playing of media file over network on a different machine)by the way? they are about the only thing that have very significant performance problem in window 7 compared to XP Atm. I have some feeling it is a configuration problem but I have been at this problem for 2 day at moment, trying different tweak and setting to no Avail.

BlackSniper87 · 16th January 2009, 4:56 PM

so windows seven is looking good? Thats good to know, hopefully will shut up the apple fanbois as theya re really starting to piss me off

chainbolt · 16th January 2009, 5:00 PM

Interesting results! Thank you for that.

Quote:

Whilst XP's idle RAM usage is somewhere around the 400MB vicinity and Vista's from memory is around 1000MB, Win7 sits somewhere in the middle at around 800MB so those "RAM whore" haters should be a little more pleased.

More like 600 MB in my case. MS is claiming they cut memory usage by 50%, which seems to be a bit exaggerated though.

anthony256 · 16th January 2009, 5:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chainbolt

More like 600 MB in my case. MS is claiming they cut memory usage by 50%, which seems to be a bit exaggerated though.

On a netbook I wouldn't doubt it

Franko · 16th January 2009, 5:08 PM

Excellent write up, I am going to throw Win7 onto my machine soon

bumography · 16th January 2009, 5:31 PM

Just wondering, does Windows 7 beta has a date where after u install it, it wont let you use it anymore?
Also, does it use Vista drivers ?
Thanks

chainbolt · 16th January 2009, 5:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumography

Just wondering, does Windows 7 beta has a date where after u install it, it wont let you use it anymore?
Also, does it use Vista drivers ?
Thanks

Its time bombed for 1 August, and it is using Vista drives. You can't upgrade from XP.

the scotsman · 16th January 2009, 6:54 PM

You got to remember "RAM usage" in Vista and 7 can't be compared to XP.

Superfecth in Vista and XP will cache your ree RAM to make use of it. So it might look lik emore RAM is being used...in a way it is, but not in the same way you would see in XP. In Vista/7 it is beneficial to have the free RAM being "used up".

Oh and the beta version is "feature complete" so what you see is what you get. Nothing new will apear.

I don't use Libraries at all...but they may be useful to some people.

The new Contro Panel view can't be changed. I bugged this with MS, but they closed it as "Won't Fix". A few people in the beat newsgroups have mentioned how they don't lik ethe default view and it can't be changed.

Sorry...I diverse from the thread subject...

chainbolt · 16th January 2009, 8:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anthony256

On a netbook I wouldn't doubt it

On a netbook it would be more like 250 MB, as shown here:

My system is a desktop with a X58 chipset and a 965, I will re-check the RAM usage, but I clearly remember something like 600 MB.

MR CHILLED · 16th January 2009, 11:10 PM

Some good testing there Shinanigans.....and shows why people are still keen to use XP.

ni9ht_5ta1k3r · 16th January 2009, 11:47 PM

Shinanigans, those numbers are impressive and now I can't wait for 7 to get released....wished there was a date for it.

congoh · 17th January 2009, 12:18 PM

Thanks for all the hard work you put in.

Interesting read. Looking forward to future reports.

chainbolt · 17th January 2009, 1:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ni9ht_5ta1k3r

Shinanigans, those numbers are impressive and now I can't wait for 7 to get released....wished there was a date for it.

4th quarter it seems.

16th January 2009, 4:25 PM	#1
Shinanigans Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Frankfurt, Germany Posts: 4,813	Windows 7 vs Windows Vista vs Windows XP Windows 7 vs Windows Vista vs Windows XP ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ System Info... Intel E8500 @ 4.03GHz (4259.5) Gigabyte EP45-DS3 F7 2x2GB G.Skill PQ @ 850MHz 5-5-5-15 HD4870X2 @ 750/900MHz Cat8.12 official drivers (including Win7, no hotfix) WD 160GB (Win7/XP) & WD 640GB (Vista) Settings...* Left4Dead & Call of Duty 4: 1920x1200 4xAA, Maximum detail. Timedemo looped till consistant. Crysis: 1920x1200 0xAA, "High" detail, DX9, 32-bit. Best of 4 runs. Notes... Boot times were recorded from power on to OS idle and ready, after games, drivers and software was installed and HDD defragged. The Catalyst Control Panel was always last thing to load up so once the fan speed on the X2 ramped up, that was the indication it was ready. I didn't run Vista on the 160GB because i had to format my main drive anyway and didn't want to do it twice just for a boot time run. Safe to say there could be a few seconds added on top in comparison to the 160GB. It goes without saying, Windows7 is a BETA so don't take these figures to be final. Performance is likely to improve further because for one, i'm using Vista video drivers... I noted the Vram usage in the XP tests out of curiosity sake. These were recorded with Rivatuner 2.22. Software used from standard (including bootup) was Rivatuner, Catalyst Control Panel & Logitech 3.01 keyboard. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ Windows 7 Ultimate BETA 7000 build 64-bit Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem Run1: 116fps Run2: 117fps Run3: 123fps (alttab) Run4: 123fps COD4 - lankerus1.dem Run1: 136fps Run2: 136fps Run3: 135fps (alttab) Crysis - GPU_benchmark Min: 39fps Avg: 51fps Max: 67fps Boot time - 1:15 (superfetch enabled)* will test with it disabled soon. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ Windows XP Pro SP3 32-bit* Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem (470MB Vram) Run1: 137fps Run2: 139fps Run3: 139fps Run4: 141fps Run5: 139fps COD4 - lankerus1.dem (500MB Vram) Run1: 145fps Run2: 145fps Run3: 144fps (alttab) Crysis - GPU_benchmark (450MB Vram) (700MB Vram 4xAA) Min: 32fps Avg: 49fps Max: 62fps Boot time - 1:12 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 64-bit Left4Dead - l4d_bench.dem Run1: 117fps Run2: 108fps (alttab) Run3: 117fps Run4: 118fps COD4 - lankerus1.dem Run1: 134fps Run2: 136fps Run3: 137fps Run4: 137fps Crysis - GPU_benchmark Min: 24fps Avg: 50fps Max: 65fps Boot time - 1:25 (without superfetch)* this install was done on the WD640 which is a quicker drive than the WD160. Didn't want to install Vista on the bench drive and then again on the main drive. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ 3Dmark06* WinXP - 3DMark Score 19459 3DMarks SM 2.0 Score 8647 SM 3.0 Score 10938 CPU Score 3599 Win7 - 3DMark Score 18958 3DMarks SM 2.0 Score 8327 SM 3.0 Score 10635 CPU Score 3553 __________________ i5 2500K @ 3.4GHz :: P67A-UD4-B3 :: 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1333CL8 :: Gigabyte GTX 580 WFX3 :: CM CM690 w/HX750 :: Samsung BX2450 LED :: *OCZ 60GB SSD/WD1001FALS2** Win7 Performance \| 4870CF Performance \| P182 vs 900

16th January 2009, 4:26 PM	#2
Shinanigans Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Frankfurt, Germany Posts: 4,813	Piccies! \o/ Control Panel no longer offers "Classic View" in the navigation bar. Instead, down the bottom you have "All Control Panel Items" The new "Action Center" is basically the Windows security alerts on roids. More features to annoy you about lack of virus protection/firewall etc. Some of you may have already seen the Internet Explorer 8 BETA. Well, here it is if you haven't. Very similar to IE7 with a few minor changes. Also, note the taskbar and it's colour coding (or lack of) in comparison to Vista. Preview of the new folder setup. Quite a significant change here. They've already dropped the username based "My Documents" that was introduced in Vista and now have "Favourites" and "Libraries". Not sure i like it yet. Have to fiddle moar. Another preview of "Control Panel", "Libraries" and "Computer" folders. A slightly updated Windows Defrag. A little less sub-menu, a little more cake. Slightly different Start Menu. Seems MS have gone for a more slimmed down version. No power icons, etc. Also, "Recent Items" has been removed as a group and is now individually shown per program. You'll notice an arrow next to "Paint" which drops down to show recent Paint files. Windows 7 Services for those curious. MSN 2009 Few changes with the taskbar in Win7. I forgot to get a shot of the actual task bar icons in action, but here you've got the system tray icons and their customisability. It's no longer hide or show! Now, a few comparisons... And just for good measure. Thought i'd note how much of a prick XP was to use after so long using Vista. The first issue i ran into (well, after having to install LAN drivers to get the net working) was when i installed my motherboard chipset drivers. When it finished installing them it wanted me to click 'Next', but it's a little hard when it disconnects the USB devices (keyboard & mouse) and doesn't reconnect them. I had to power the system down with the power button... The next issue i ran into was an example of how Vista and above incorporate things so seemlessly. Take for instance the Flash installation; On Vista and Win7 i install Flash and Steam's front page picks it up after a simple refresh click. XP on the other hand had to close Steam completely before it would load Flash. Minor, but an example nonetheless... Conclusion and stuff... Well, i'm very impressed with Windows 7 even in BETA format. I've still got to post up a video i took on how it alt+tabs out of a game which is nothing short of instant. 7 is a refined, cut down and toned version of Vista, which is exactly what Vista needed. Whilst XP's idle RAM usage is somewhere around the 400MB vicinity and Vista's from memory is around 1000MB, Win7 sits somewhere in the middle at around 800MB so those "RAM whore" haters should be a little more pleased. Performance wise the system felt very snappy and very smooth. I didn't delve too far into it and haven't had much of a chance to play around but it certainly does give off that "speed of XP, looks of Vista" impression. Left4Dead and COD4 certainly did perform better on XP than it did on Win7, albeit at levels far beyond necessary frame rates, however i must remind you that this is BETA and on Vista drivers. Who knows what kind of performance increase we can expect with proper Win7 drivers and with 6-12 months of further development. Interestingly enough, yet not so surprisingly, Crysis performed best on Win7 out of all 3 systems. I'm going to assume this is because of two things; for one, XP is 32-bit and left me with a total of 2.75GB after the X2 helped itself to a large chunk of that 4GB. The other thing is given that even Vista performed better than XP did i'm going to generalise it down to new, high-tech gaming engines perform better on new, high-tech operating systems. Whether or not Vista's shared video memory plays a big role in this performance increase, i'm not sure. Interestingly enough though and contrary to the point, COD4 used the most Vram out of all 3 games (on XP), so i'm really left high and dry as to why Crysis runs better. One thing's for certain though, i will definitely be throwing a tonne more games at Win7 once retail is out! There are a few minor cosmetic changes to get used to but most of it's just customisable so it can be tinkered to suit. I'm not sure how much/if things will change from BETA to Retail versions but i think aside from getting used to it, it should work quite well in the end. Cheers __________________ i5 2500K @ 3.4GHz :: P67A-UD4-B3 :: 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1333CL8 :: Gigabyte GTX 580 WFX3 :: CM CM690 w/HX750 :: Samsung BX2450 LED :: *OCZ 60GB SSD/WD1001FALS2** Win7 Performance \| 4870CF Performance \| P182 vs 900

16th January 2009, 4:43 PM	#3
ravescar Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Darwin Posts: 1,590	Nice Writeup mate! I have window 7 installed on my main rig atm and I agree with most of the points you have raised. I have L4D and TF2 on my machine which has XP SP2 and Window 7 as well, maybe i should do a performance comparision too. Have you tried Networking sharing (specially, the playing of media file over network on a different machine)by the way? they are about the only thing that have very significant performance problem in window 7 compared to XP Atm. I have some feeling it is a configuration problem but I have been at this problem for 2 day at moment, trying different tweak and setting to no Avail. __________________ My Rig: Xeon W3520 4.2ghz 24/7@1.24v with Noctual NH-D14, ICD 7 TIM\| Gigabyte X58A-UD3R Revision 1\| G.SKILL Trident 2000Mhz CL9 6gb \| Sapphire 5870 1GB \| Intel X25-M 80gb SSD \| Enermax Revolution 85+ 1050w \| Coolermaster HAF-X\|Yamakasi Catleap Q270 + Sony 20 inch\|Ducky Shine White LED with MX Brown, Logitech G9x, Leopold FC500R MX Red with Firm Landing Pad\|Window 7 Pro Last edited by ravescar; 16th January 2009 at 4:58 PM.

16th January 2009, 4:56 PM	#4
BlackSniper87 Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Townsville Posts: 1,839	so windows seven is looking good? Thats good to know, hopefully will shut up the apple fanbois as theya re really starting to piss me off __________________ EVGA FTW3 X58 Intel i7 950 (3.06), Razer Deathadder, Logitech g110, 850W PSU, Samsung 275T, ASUS GTX 590, Windows 7 professional, 2x Seagate 500GB, Coolermaster HAF X, Corsair 12GB Kit 1600

16th January 2009, 5:31 PM	#8
bumography Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Adel Posts: 1,372	Just wondering, does Windows 7 beta has a date where after u install it, it wont let you use it anymore? Also, does it use Vista drivers ? Thanks __________________ Another useless post for OCAU by bumography Q66600 - P335-DS39 - 48gb RAM - 150TB - 99500 GTX - Philips 199' 54:45 - Antec HE5550W PSU - Antec P180 EE66750 - G333M-S29 - 40Gb RAM - 320TB HDD - 96600GT - Samsung 22553 - Seasonic S2 4530W PSU - Silverstone TJ908 AMD X2 42000 - MA7800G-S73H- 48Gb RAM - 6.40TB HDD - 199' BenQ LCD - Coolermaster 4600W PSU

16th January 2009, 5:08 PM	#7
Franko Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Fremantle, Perth WA Posts: 833	Excellent write up, I am going to throw Win7 onto my machine soon

16th January 2009, 6:54 PM	#10
the scotsman Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: NSW South Coast Posts: 6,447	You got to remember "RAM usage" in Vista and 7 can't be compared to XP. Superfecth in Vista and XP will cache your ree RAM to make use of it. So it might look lik emore RAM is being used...in a way it is, but not in the same way you would see in XP. In Vista/7 it is beneficial to have the free RAM being "used up". Oh and the beta version is "feature complete" so what you see is what you get. Nothing new will apear. I don't use Libraries at all...but they may be useful to some people. The new Contro Panel view can't be changed. I bugged this with MS, but they closed it as "Won't Fix". A few people in the beat newsgroups have mentioned how they don't lik ethe default view and it can't be changed. Sorry...I diverse from the thread subject... __________________ XDA-Developers Assistant Administrator \| Ausdroid Writer \| HTC One owner Free Stuff \| OCAU Bargains Thread Last edited by the scotsman; 16th January 2009 at 6:58 PM.

16th January 2009, 11:10 PM	#12
MR CHILLED D'oh! Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Keep it up! :D Posts: 89,930	Some good testing there Shinanigans.....and shows why people are still keen to use XP. __________________ Co2 is weightless apparently. Be careful what you vote for. Howard on the economy: ''When the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and others tell you that the Australian economy is doing better than most – they are right,'' Asked how cash payments of baby bonus and school bonus are any different, Opposition Leader tony abbott says 'well look, they just are.'

16th January 2009, 11:47 PM	#13
ni9ht_5ta1k3r Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Slicin' & dicin'! Posts: 19,327	Shinanigans, those numbers are impressive and now I can't wait for 7 to get released....wished there was a date for it. __________________ XBOX Live/Steam: The Gh0sts - PSN: TheGhosts - Origin: Th3_Gh0sts HTPC: Prodigy HTPC \| Main PC: Armor A30 Work & Gaming PC \| My Portfolio - KL-23 Media

17th January 2009, 12:18 PM	#14
congoh Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, not too far from Monash Uni. Posts: 3,752	Thanks for all the hard work you put in. Interesting read. Looking forward to future reports.