Oh no! I must not be a serious gamer because I'm still using XP!

I probably will upgrade to Windows 7 though on my next machine.

Fair enough but I doubt the guy running a 5+ year old card is worried about 5.1 compatibility And yeah Creative sucks at drivers, always has, always will. All of that said, Windows 7 provides pretty ridiculous compatibility for an immense array of hardware. It's much harder to find products without drivers than with.

If read the little blurb under "more" you'd see a fundamental flaw in that driver.

It does not support the original tool set.

Which means you can no longer set Low Frequency Crossover to active. I know by the way that modern subwoofers support setting this hz value independent , but not activating this will cause your subwoofer to not receive any signal at all. Which is a pretty big deal considering that 5.1 means 5 speakers and 1 subwoofer....

Creatives drivers just suck though - its not a fault of windows 7

Like Verno said:

The Windows 7 driver compatibility level is pretty ridiculous even for that ancient card you're using - Windows 7 Audigy 2 ZS drivers

Audigy 2 ZS.

The hardware compatibility wasn't quite amazing when I tried it. I couldn't find any drivers for my sound card. I had to use unofficial hacked Vista drivers. As for software emulation, from what I've read, it only works for games that don't use 3D acceleration.

What hardware? I find that hard to believe unless you are referring to the beta period. And yes, XP mode is not targeted at games, there are plenty of existing emulation solutions for those. None of which changes how great Windows 7 is. It is literally XP with Vista/7 improvements.

I guess. All I really care about is that Vista essentially requires double the amount of memory for no noticeable gains in games.

Yeah, since 2gb of ram extra costs less than a 6-pack these days, that's really terrible and a super valid point.

And it does't double it. It reports memory differently. By precaching the fuck out of things, it is just stuffed into memory where it will stay untill it has to move out.. This makes it seem like the OS is using more RAM than it really is. The argument is that data just used is probably going to be used again, so lets make all that free ram more useful.

Edit: Oh, and HORRAY§!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! for mafia 2, can't wait!

By the way, I have a c2d, 280 gtx and XP, so start flaming me! (but that's only because my win7 install decided my copy was pirated even though it was from MSDN so it wouldn't work anymore).

This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 12:50.

Vista is much better at making use of your memory through aggressive precaching. XP requires less overall system resources to remain usable is the correct phrase.

I guess. All I really care about is that Vista essentially requires double the amount of memory for no noticeable gains in games.

Windows 7 is essentially XP's lightweight with Vista's features and there is no real reason to stick with XP anymore given that Windows 7 also has amazing hardware compatibility and software emulation for old XP binaries.

The hardware compatibility wasn't quite amazing when I tried it. I couldn't find any drivers for my sound card. I had to use unofficial hacked Vista drivers. As for software emulation, from what I've read, it only works for games that don't use 3D acceleration.

This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 12:20.

XP is still faster and more memory-efficient than Vista

This isn't true, it's actually the other way around. Vista is much better at making use of your memory through aggressive precaching. XP requires less overall system resources to remain usable is the correct phrase. Windows 7 is essentially XP's lightweight with Vista's features and there is no real reason to stick with XP anymore given that Windows 7 also has amazing hardware compatibility and software emulation for old XP binaries.

Game now plz.

Sticking with XP now after two and a half years is a bit of a joke.

Can't agree with you there. XP is still faster and more memory-efficient than Vista. It also has better backwards compatibility with both hardware and software. The only reason to use Vista would be DX10 and thus far, no implementations of DX10 have been particularly noteworthy. Pretty much every DX10 "exclusive" effect can be done in DX9, usually with the same or better performance. I'm hoping DX11's advances are far more substantial.

name one decent game besides COH and Crysis that uses DX10

World in Conflict + expansion, Assassin's Creed, Call of Juarez and Far Cry II.

name one decent game besides COH and Crysis that uses DX10

Bioshock & S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky

Jesus Christ you guys argue a lot...

Every fucking thread is filled with excrement from you guys shitting all over each other.

On topic- this screenshot is killer:

http://www.bluesnews.com/screenshots/games/mafia2/20090819/mafia_ii_gamescom_7_.jpg

Note that it does have PhysX support. More and more of the bigger releases are offering PhysX support (at least the ones I plan on buying):

Batman: Arkham Asylum
Borderlands
Dragon Age: Origins
Mafia II

etc...

ATI must be chomping at the bit to get PhysX support in their drivers as soon their possible, if anything just to look good on the box.

I never said graphics were more important than gameplay

I didn't say you did. You strongly implied graphics are what define hardcore gaming. That's not true.

but anybody that takes gaming seriously will buy the hardware and software to keep up with modern trends.

False. Anyone serious about graphics will update, but that's a small part of hardcore gaming.

You equate bleeding edge with hardcore, and that's just plain false.

To me a serious gamer still using XP is like a serious chef only using budget supermarket products

Because you think that serious gamers are only into the latest and greatest retail games with bleeding edge graphics. That's only one aspect to hardcore gaming.

Hardcore gaming also includes poeple who build MAME machines to play old arcade games from the 80's and 90's. No bleeding edge graphics there. Hardcore gamers also include people who are into anything which could be considered unusual or obsessive. I'd say all those countless thousands of Counterstrike players who play it for hours every day and go to CS lan events are hardcore.

Why am I wasting my time educating a kiddie TF2 player.. nevermind.

This comment was edited on Aug 19, 2009, 20:46.

Why are those two titles disqualified? Disprove my argument but the catch is that you can't present an argument of your own!!! Have at you!

name one decent game besides COH and Crysis that uses DX10

LOL at your categorical statement. Because graphics are what make anyone serious about gaming. No, not gameplay or game style but bleeding edge graphics are what define serious gamers.

I never said graphics were more important than gameplay but anybody that takes gaming seriously will buy the hardware and software to keep up with modern trends. I'm not suggesting everyone should immediately buy Win7 and a DX11 card but certainly a year to eighteen months is a reasonable expectation, even if you stick to mid-range parts. Sticking with XP now after two and a half years is a bit of a joke. That's without factoring in the obvious biggies like Vista support 4GB of RAM and more. To me a serious gamer still using XP is like a serious chef only using budget supermarket products - they can still enjoy their hobby but they're not coming close to its full potential.

Wow, he was being clever and worked a (famous) part of a quote into his comment that took a shot at how horrible XP64 was by design and you read that as a personal attack... thats weird.

I heard some people call that sarcasm.

Aside that - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_J._Farnsworth