The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

It's out on the torrents. I don't think it's illegal to download because it's an Alpha built(a note on this: People have reviewed the ALPHA build and said it's snappy).

Here is the link

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4476166/Windows_7_Beta_Build_6801_(32bit)

 

Wow this is gettin on my nerves.

Guys dont download it yet. It's not working for me

 

orry for the triple post in Advance.

Alright, so it was just a bad burn. I burnt it at 2x and it worked fine. Currently running on a Athlon XP 2200+ with 768MB of RAM and a 5 year old VIA Integrated graphics chipset. I cant turn on the eyecandy because of the Integrated graphics.

Anyway, I have 5 IE windows open(and each Windows has tabs open) and several windows explorer things open as well. It still feels SNAPPY of all things, almost as fast as XP. Vista would kill this computer, and this is an ALPHA release. Oh and ram usage is around 525 MB.

 

abuzar: Is that the latest build for Win 7 out right now? (6801)

 

yeah, that's the latest that they gave to the PDC attendees.

 

Aight!! Someone tell me how crappy this RAM is cause I'm buying it unless a personal "friend" has had BAD experiences!!!

link to OCZ 2x2GB RAM

....gm

Oh btw.. Windows 7 is holding the GM's interest very high!!! If anyone runs across a version with the "tool bar" I'm in for trying it.. I've got who knows how many little HDD's that'll love some testing.

 

Platinum versions were bad, not sure about this...

Windows 7 is very good. The Taskbar one should be out early 09 I think.

 

Russ I'm pretty sure 2000 pro, is just like XP pro, and vista premium, same OS just little differences to the other versions?

Oh and ask Sam, vista is needed when gaming, DX10, crossfire support, etc etc. If you want to use 2 4870X2s, you cant in XP. Not even in XP64.

And the P5Q hint was a joke, note the "" at the end, and the bottom board is a brilliant OCer, esp fro the price, whats wrong with it?

Drivers are not the problem of the OS but of lazy developers. The beta was out a long time before the final release, but its not MSs fault they couldnt be bothered to give drivers. Most have by now as it is.

And vista feels a hell lot more snappier to me than XP. It could be that im using hardware that can actually run vista, or the fact the superfetch is brilliant, either way, to me vista has been the best OS MS have made

 

Lol!
Agreed.
Vista is wise for certain games in dual graphics, but only a select few, if you only have two GPUs (which you really only should). Age of Conan and Crysis:Warhead are the only games I've proved you need vista for to use dual graphics, and the performance impact of DX10 is absolutely shameful, it's about 30%, with no change in graphics. I suspect GRiD also needs vista to run as CF doesn't seem to work in XP, but I haven't tested it yet.
In general, however, Vista will NEVER be faster than XP, that's just absurd.

 

So that's what the "" means! ROFLMSOAO!! I Swear, I never knew! LOL!!

The hardware doesn't really matter! Regardless of which OS you use, they still have to make the same calls to the CPU. It has little to do with what hardware you use!

That's where Win 7 is going to be brilliant! It should do all you say Vista does, and much more! By now you should be able to see where this is all going? It's going to be geared to Core i7! With no fsb, Intel & M$ can do a lot of things to speed up all the internal processes. Look at what AMD did with the same concept a few years back! The were King until the C2D, and I'm pretty sure Intel is going to go AMD at least one better! LOL!! If they get it right, and you can be almost assured that they will. M$ couldn't have picked a better time either. By the time it's ready for Core i7, Core i7 should be ready for it. Bugs, bios updates, all that stuff should be pretty sorted out by the time Win 7 is released! I sure hope I'm right! LOL!!

Russ

 

Well it just means, "hehe" like a person sticking their tongue out at someone

Still I know many a person (on forums) that have them, a good few months now with 3.6GHz OCed Q6600s

I do hate its placement of the 24 pin ATX cable, and that alone would be a reason I wouldnt buy it.

Well guys, im using a P4 3.1GHz for XP and a 3.4GHZ C2d for vista, IMO its faster

Hahaha

Which is why I said it will be due to the hardware

me <3 vista

I can understand why you wont like it, due to it not running, or booting in 10mins etc, but form the day I installed it, (July 07) apart from nVidia 64-bit drivers in march, I have had no BSODs or any vista related problems. If I do BSOD its when I push an OC too far!
I have not had any Compatibility problems with older games, software, or hardware I have used. This is completely different to how my XP life started out, when installing RA2 would cause a BSOD every time , after SP2 it was brilliant though. Truth be told, I didnt NEED to upgrade to windows, but when I got new hardware, I thought why not (as I used to bash it before) and I was glad I did. I remember XP installations would take hours, where as Vistas was about 45 mins, till I could use firefox . These are the reason why I really didnt get why people were bashing it as I once was, and I assumed that most never used it and started bashing, or were using old hardware.

 

Did anyone see what I wrote about Windows 7? It uses about 525 MB of ram. That's incredible to me, because Vista would be using up way more than 1GB doing the same stuff.

 

Again, please stop quoting that XP installs took hours. They only did on old P3 systems. An XP install has never taken me more than 40 minutes in the last three years or so. A Vista install has never taken less than an hour.

 

Im not saying for everyone it took hours, I am saying in my own real life findings, I dreaded to reinstall XP, as it took a long time, vista doesnt to install. Now this may be becuase I was installing XP on a P4 and 160GB sata HDD, but it took its time

Sam, you installed vista on a bascially full HDD and it took 10 mins to boot up, thats your findings, these are mine.

boozer, is that 32 bit or 64 bit. also when running games, would it be possible with 1GB of RAM, or a minimum 2GB for windows 7 32 bit will be needed?

IMO even for vista 32, 4GB was a minimum for gaming, as with 2GBs i used to hit 97-98% usage while playign cod4

 

That's exactly why, and it makes that statement irrelevant, and also false.

 

i wish i had work lool!

and yet i can still buy a £300 4870x2

grants FTW

 

but its not. its relavent to me, and to my experiances with both OSes. i never once claimed it was fact for everyone did i?

 

well my GPU isnt bad.just had it checked out. its fine. so i guess my next thing to have tested i the PSU.then the mobo i guess???oh i dont wanna go through another return to gigabyte..lol3 weeks is to long to be without...