65 replies to this topic

[conchulio]

Hello guys,

well as many others i also consider to buy Windows 7 which the media and others claim to be a true piece of great work.

as a simmer i am mainly interested if W7 has any performance impacts on FSX.

so, the reason why i created this topic is to gather your opinion about the the question:

"Does W7 increase/decrease the performance of FSX?"


i hope a lot of people post their opinions and experience!


happy landings


Conchi

[-Dexter]

Windows 7 shows better performance than Vista, but almost the same performance as Windows XP.

In my eyes, it would be worth the upgrade to Windows 7 from Windows XP simply because of the new features; also DirectX 11 is stationed in W7 exclusively.

So, in short, yes you should upgrade. You won't see any amazing performance boost, but like I said W7 fixed a lot of problems with Vista.

[conchulio]

pwn247, on Nov 6 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Windows 7 shows better performance than Vista, but almost the same performance as Windows XP.

In my eyes, it would be worth the upgrade to Windows 7 from Windows XP simply because of the new features; also DirectX 11 is stationed in W7 exclusively.

So, in short, yes you should upgrade. You won't see any amazing performance boost, but like I said W7 fixed a lot of problems with Vista.

hm, i currently use Win XP. So, do i recall right, that i won't experience any difference at all in FSX?

so for people who have a computer, dedicated only for FSX, and who use winXP, an upgrade to W7 won't be necesarry at all, as FSX does not use DX11 and the "new features" make no difference perf. wise.

[Bell417]

I upgraded from XP to 7, and my overall impression is that I like it. It's fairly easy to navigate, it connects to the internet almost immediately after start-up, it has lots of nice features, and it still runs FSX well. There only a few things that I'm not crazy about. The largest problem is email--MS decided to drop Outlook Express. Unless you have Outlook, you are stuck with a third-party program, or MS's replacement for Outlook Express, Windows Live Mail. It's not horrible, but there are a couple things I don't like, such as not being able to arrange existing email folders, and having to jump through lots of hoops to import your old emails. The only other gripes I have with Windows 7 are that it takes a little longer to start up than XP (that might be because I have chosen to password-protect my user account, and didn't do that on XP,) and that...actually, I can't think of any other problems I've had. As I've said, overall, I like it, and if I had to go back and do it again, I would still upgrade from XP to 7. I hope this helps you.

[conchulio]

did you have any problems concerning add-ons? i heared some add-ons have issues with W7.

[Hawke]

I installed Windows 7 on my new system after using XP and love it,  have both FSX and FS9 installed and up to yet haven't had any problems installing any addons into either sim. Any paticular addons your worried about?

[lqcorsa]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Windows+7+FSX+Performance

[conchulio]

Hawke, on Nov 6 2009, 07:49 PM, said:

I installed Windows 7 on my new system after using XP and love it,  have both FSX and FS9 installed and up to yet haven't had any problems installing any addons into either sim. Any paticular addons your worried about?

well, i heared about a problem with the ORBx products but it seems like they have solved it already.

i have no particular concern but as i use XP currently and as it is a very big step to upgrade to W7, i just want to get sure i don't regret it.
as i want to do a clean install, which means days of installing everything for FSX, i would be quite depressed if a certain addon creates unpredictable problems.

and of course i was just curious if W7 helps in someway making FSX more enjoyable  

[Buziel-411_RED]

My opinion of it has nosedived since getting it.

I was just doing my very, very first commercial flight in FSX - and in Windows 7 - and the stupid OS starts crashing. I have a 100% flight failure rate at the moment.

Feels like Vista.

[xcrider]

Im runnning FSX on 7 and so far its working nicely. Runs MUCH better than vista.

Buziel-411_RED, on Nov 8 2009, 04:17 PM, said:

My opinion of it has nosedived since getting it.

I was just doing my very, very first commercial flight in FSX - and in Windows 7 - and the stupid OS starts crashing. I have a 100% flight failure rate at the moment.

Feels like Vista.

I had this problem. Turns out it was the last Nvidia drivers i downloaded. Theyed crash my whole pc.

[Toyuko]

W7 the best OS since XP!

[conchulio]

Toyuko, on Nov 9 2009, 03:40 AM, said:

W7 the best OS since XP!

could you explain why exactly it is so much better, if possible in connection with FSX?

i mean, saying "W7 is superduper" doesn't really help in any way  

[Buziel-411_RED]

Toyuko, on Nov 8 2009, 10:40 PM, said:

W7 the best OS since XP!

Gonna have to disagree there....

I think it's the best version of Windows since XP, but not the best OS since XP

Edited by Buziel-411_RED, 09 November 2009 - 06:56 PM.

[Independence76]

pwn247, on Nov 6 2009, 07:14 AM, said:

So, in short, yes you should upgrade. You won't see any amazing performance boost, but like I said W7 fixed a lot of problems with Vista.

The Apple commercial a few weeks ago said different, didn't it?

Buziel-411_RED, on Nov 8 2009, 06:17 PM, said:

My opinion of it has nosedived since getting it.

I was just doing my very, very first commercial flight in FSX - and in Windows 7 - and the stupid OS starts crashing. I have a 100% flight failure rate at the moment.

Feels like Vista.

What computer was this on?

Edited by Independence76, 09 November 2009 - 07:08 PM.

[Buziel-411_RED]

Independence76, on Nov 9 2009, 08:07 PM, said:

pwn247, on Nov 6 2009, 07:14 AM, said:

So, in short, yes you should upgrade. You won't see any amazing performance boost, but like I said W7 fixed a lot of problems with Vista.

The Apple commercial a few weeks ago said different, didn't it?

Well, not really. I don't think Apple is saying Microsoft didn't change Windows 7 at all, but they're saying it's still Windows.

OSX still proves to be more stable.
Windows still has more viruses.
Windows still has the registry (Microsoft needs to dump this).
Windows still has the UAC (it was improved, but I find it worthless).
Windows still has a jumble of DLL's.
Windows still degrades after a few weeks of use.

To talk about the last one...

After 4 months of using OSX (I partitioned the hard drive, upgraded the operating system, installed and uninstalled large programs, moved and created large databases. I have never defragmented the hard drive or ran any OS cleanup programs.), OSX is still very fast. It shuts down in under 4 seconds and boots up in about 33 seconds. However, after running Windows for awhile (it doesn't matter if it's XP, Vista, or 7), a PC begins to crawl.

Example:

I defragmented my old HP's laptop every two weeks, reinstalled Windows three times, and was careful to keep it free of junk (Norton, bad programs, viruses). This took effort, and the general user wouldn't know how to do this. A program, Firefox for example, would launch in under 7 seconds, the PC shut down in about 30 seconds, and booted up in about a minute.

My mom had an identical HP laptop. She ran Norton, never defragmented the hard drive, and never reistalled Vista. After a measly two years of use, boot up time was 3 minutes and 5 seconds, and shut down time was 1 minute 15 seconds. I timed it when she still used it (she has subsequently upgraded to a Macbook Pro).

Ever walk into a library and get on one of the computers running Windows that are a few years old? Windows wasn't maintained properly. It wheezes to a start, it takes an eternity to open a program, and it shuts down very slowly. (My school computers can open a tab in IE or Firefox in 5 seconds. Snappy!)

And don't whine about fanboyism. I've timed every computer in this house. This has covered Vista, XP, Windows 7, Leopard, and Snow Leopard. I've kept track of the maintenance of each PC. My dad's 1 year old Dell has slowed down dramatically since he got it.

Both Macs in the house run strong.

But, Windows 7 is still an improvement. It is faster than Vista, and it seems to be a bit more stable. I also like the look of the new taskbar and the borders of the windows in full screen modes (In Vista, they were an ugly black.) I can't say I like the function of the new taskbar, though....

Quote

Buziel-411_RED, on Nov 8 2009, 06:17 PM, said:

My opinion of it has nosedived since getting it.

I was just doing my very, very first commercial flight in FSX - and in Windows 7 - and the stupid OS starts crashing. I have a 100% flight failure rate at the moment.

Feels like Vista.

What computer was this on?

The computer listed in my signature.

Edited by Buziel-411_RED, 09 November 2009 - 07:27 PM.

[Independence76]

Buziel-411_RED, on Nov 9 2009, 06:19 PM, said:

Well, not really. I don't think Apple is saying Microsoft didn't change Windows 7 at all, but they're saying it's still Windows.

OSX still proves to be more stable.
Windows still has more viruses.
Windows still has the registry (Microsoft needs to dump this).
Windows still has the UAC (it was improved, but I find it worthless).
Windows still has a jumble of DLL's.
Windows still degrades after a few weeks of use.

To talk about the last one...

After 4 months of using OSX (I partitioned the hard drive, upgraded the operating system, installed and uninstalled large programs, moved and created large databases. I have never defragmented the hard drive or ran any OS cleanup programs.), OSX is still very fast. It shuts down in under 4 seconds and boots up in about 33 seconds. However, after running Windows for awhile (it doesn't matter if it's XP, Vista, or 7), a PC begins to crawl.

Example:

I defragmented my old HP's laptop every two weeks, reinstalled Windows three times, and was careful to keep it free of junk (Norton, bad programs, viruses). This took effort, and the general user wouldn't know how to do this. A program, Firefox for example, would launch in under 7 seconds, the PC shut down in about 30 seconds, and booted up in about a minute.

My mom had an identical HP laptop. She ran Norton, never defragmented the hard drive, and never reistalled Vista. After a measly two years of use, boot up time was 3 minutes and 5 seconds, and shut down time was 1 minute 15 seconds. I timed it when she still used it (she has subsequently upgraded to a Macbook Pro).

Ever walk into a library and get on one of the computers running Windows that are a few years old? Windows wasn't maintained properly. It wheezes to a start, it takes an eternity to open a program, and it shuts down very slowly. (My school computers can open a tab in IE or Firefox in 5 seconds. Snappy!)

And don't whine about fanboyism. I've timed every computer in this house. This has covered Vista, XP, Windows 7, Leopard, and Snow Leopard. I've kept track of the maintenance of each PC. My dad's 1 year old Dell has slowed down dramatically since he got it.

Both Macs in the house run strong.

But, Windows 7 is still an improvement. It is faster than Vista, and it seems to be a bit more stable. I also like the look of the new taskbar and the borders of the windows in full screen modes (In Vista, they were an ugly black.) I can't say I like the function of the new taskbar, though....

I'm just not gonna read all that. I notice the difference between people who hold bias on the market and those who hold standards on it.

Quote

The computer listed in my signature.

If you bought the upgrade, I'm pretty sure it's a problem I've seen a fix for.

[-Dexter]

Quote

I'm just not gonna read all that. I notice the difference between people who hold bias on the market and those who hold standards on it.

I see.

Make arguments and ignore counterarguments. Not much of a standard to base your arguments on, if any.

Sorry to jump in here, I'll be leaving again now.

[Independence76]

pwn247, on Nov 9 2009, 07:21 PM, said:

Quote

I'm just not gonna read all that. I notice the difference between people who hold bias on the market and those who hold standards on it.

I see.

Make arguments and ignore counterarguments. Not much of a standard to base your arguments on, if any.

Sorry to jump in here, I'll be leaving again now.

Well, if someone you know is biased on technology, are you really going to listen to their view on things?

The same thing goes for news networks. Every news network is just as biased as you put Fox as, it just may not be as obvious. If I want to hear a review, I want to hear it from someone who has a lot of experience and updates about worldwide markets.

Edited by Independence76, 09 November 2009 - 08:34 PM.

[Buziel-411_RED]

Independence76, on Nov 9 2009, 09:33 PM, said:

pwn247, on Nov 9 2009, 07:21 PM, said:

Quote

I'm just not gonna read all that. I notice the difference between people who hold bias on the market and those who hold standards on it.

I see.

Make arguments and ignore counterarguments. Not much of a standard to base your arguments on, if any.

Sorry to jump in here, I'll be leaving again now.

Well, if someone you know is biased on technology, are you really going to listen to their view on things?

The same thing goes for news networks. Every news network is just as biased as you put Fox as, it just may not be as obvious. If I want to hear a review, I want to hear it from someone who has a lot of experience and updates about worldwide markets.

Bias has nothing to do with it.

The majority was comparing boot up times for Windows 7, Vista, XP, Leopard, and Snow Leopard on multiple machines during different times, and showed that Windows degraded severely (in speed), while all tested versions of OSX survived no hard drive defragmentation, no OS cleanup software, a partitioning of the hard drive, an upgrade of the OS (10.5 to 10.6), the installation and deinstallation of multiple programs, and the creation and destruction of large databases

Windows didn't make it past 2 weeks of moderate use before all around speed and snappiness plummeted.

Read the post and you'll see boot up and shut down times compared, along with examples of opening programs and Windows opening a blank tab in IE or Firefox in 5 seconds (snappy!).

Independence76, on Nov 9 2009, 08:51 PM, said:

I'm just not gonna read all that. I notice the difference between people who hold bias on the market and those who hold standards on it.

Oh, of course... You hold no bias at all towards Windows and PCs, do you?

Quote

Quote

The computer listed in my signature.

If you bought the upgrade, I'm pretty sure it's a problem I've seen a fix for.

What?

FSX just had a hiccup and crashed. It's one of the few times it has crashed in Windows 7, but it happened at an inconvenient time. I was doing a flight for a VA, so it was rather annoying.

Are you implying I pirated Windows (the bolded part)?

Edited by Buziel-411_RED, 09 November 2009 - 08:49 PM.

[Independence76]

Buziel-411_RED, on Nov 9 2009, 07:52 PM, said:

Bias has nothing to do with it.

The majority was comparing boot up times for Windows 7, Vista, XP, Leopard, and Snow Leopard on multiple machines during different times, and showed that Windows degraded severely (in speed), while all tested versions of OSX survived no hard drive defragmentation, no OS cleanup software, a partitioning of the hard drive, an upgrade of the OS (10.5 to 10.6), the installation and deinstallation of multiple programs, and the creation and destruction of large databases

Windows didn't make it past 2 weeks of moderate use before all around speed and snappiness plummeted.

Read the post and you'll see boot up and shut down times compared, along with examples of opening programs and Windows opening a blank tab in IE or Firefox in 5 seconds (snappy!).

He wasn't asking about boot times, he was asking about overall use.

Boot times are just a convenience, and if I really wanted a great boot time, I'd go out and get Instant Boot.

I don't have Windows 7, but I did try it at OfficeMax a few days ago on a Sony Vaio. Pretty freaking "snappy" if you ask me.

Quote

Oh, of course... You hold no bias at all towards Windows and PCs, do you?

I don't mind people buying Macs. It's when they buy one, brag to everyone about the tiny little features they have that don't really matter, randomly yell out "Windows sucks!" everytime they learn about a new feature in OSX, and clearly give out one-sided views on the computer industry that gets me very annoyed.

Quote

What?

FSX just had a hiccup and crashed. It's one of the few times it has crashed in Windows 7, but it happened at an inconvenient time. I was doing a flight for a VA, so it was rather annoying.

Are you implying I pirated Windows (the bolded part)?

Pirated? Absolutely not.

You have to remember, FSX/FS9 isn't programmed very well. Even on Macs, I'm pretty sure FS will crash. Like Windows Me, it doesn't matter how powerful your computer is, it will still crash. FSX/FS9 are far from perfect programs altogether.

While the OP is asking about mainly FS experiences, we also have to consider what else he will use the OS for in the future.

Edited by Independence76, 09 November 2009 - 09:22 PM.