Announcement

**dalomar_cg** · 18-04-2008, 06:59 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

I'll be quick cause I got to go, but here's some quick comments

- 4 gigs RAM (may choose 8, still deciding)

Rhino will only use about 3.6 Gb cause its still a 32 bit app...they say v5 will be 64bit but thats a long way off.

Also, the Geforce graphics card is capable of supporting Direct X10 and X9 so the OpenGL issues with Vista I'm HOPING will not be a problem. But hoping is what's making me uncomfortable when I'm going to spend this much cash.

The only major display issues I saw with my vista machine were using the initial release. Once SR1 came around that it was fine. There isn't much noise about vista display issues on the Rhino NG so thats a good sign

And, is Vista going to slow down my performance becuase it uses more RAM?

I'd say that would be an issue on a laptop, but not a machine like your building.

Does Vray or Rhino experience problems with Vista if Direct X10 or 9 are used in place of open GL?

V-Ray won't care as all its doing is using Rhino to display stuff...If its fine with Rhino, then its fine with V-Ray.

At this point I think it comes down to whether or not you want to use Vista. From the case you propose there doesn't seam to be a standout reason to choose one over the other. I have a XP64 machine and it runs great, no problems. There are somethings about working on Vista that I don't necessarily enjoy, but there are some nice things too. Your call

**Hoop** · 18-04-2008, 10:43 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Thanks for the feedback dalomar. Out of curiosity, what are some of the things you don't like about working with vista? We are on XP here at work so i've never had extensive use with Vista, only played around with it a little, so i'm not super knowledgeable about it's pro's and con's. My only "urge" towards getting it was that it is the "next thing" so to speak. . .

**dalomar_cg** · 18-04-2008, 12:17 PM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Lets see...some of the things I like....
the file browsing/exploring is a little more user friendly
searching is typically faster
looks sexier ;D

things I don't like...
+the type to find your program thing (in the start menu) is annoying to me (I like the previous style)
+it always asking you if you want to do anything (but you can turn this off for the most point)
+automatically updating things during startup before even getting to the logon screen (sucks to sit in front of your computer for 5 minutes while it installs some update that you may not want/care about)
+The "Shut Down" button (in the start menu) just shutting down as opposed to XP asking for shutdown, log off, or sleep (hitting it by accident sucks)
+Some of the navigation dialogs are annoying

There are more small things that I like and more small things that I dislike. If I was forced to use Vista I don't think I'd go postal, but since I have a choice I don't. I don't think that wanting the "next thing" is really a good enough reason, considering how MS is already talking about the OS that will replace Vista.

If I had to get a new machine tomorrow and had to choose between the two, then XP it would be. But I currently have my laptop (purchased towards the end of the summer) dual booting, and I like that configuration. I can test the waters without having to be up a creek...it has come with some bumps along the road though (would have been fewer if all my drivers were available for XP).

**Micha_cg** · 19-04-2008, 11:42 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Originally posted by Hoop

My concern with XP is that it looks like it will be a thing of the past in a short time. I don't want to but a new compter with an oudated OS.

At some webpages I read, that Vista could get the status of the Millenium WINDOWS edition. So, maybe Vista is faster outdated than XP64.

I'm very happy with XP64 at five machines. The question for me is, which advantages could bring Vista for my work? I don't need special effects, I need a stable OS without to much RAM usage.

**dalomar_cg** · 19-04-2008, 11:51 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Originally posted by Micha

I need a stable OS without to much RAM usage.

Vista is stable, so that isn't really an issue, and w/ 4 gb RAM, that isn't much of an issue either. Even with the OS taking 3/4 gb (which vista does...compared to xp64@300mb) Rhino will still run into the memory ceiling before your system runs out of memory to use

Originally posted by Micha

The question for me is, which advantages could bring Vista for my work?

Thats the bigger one to me, and honestly I can say that it probably wouldn't bring any.

Maybe the make or break for this decision would be if you are going to use Distributed Rendering. If thats the case, then having matching OS is a good rule of thumb (xp to xp...vista to vista)

**Hoop** · 21-04-2008, 08:09 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

This is really good feedback Dalomar and Micha, and I appreciate it. I did read an article over the weekend about Vista being replaced possibly as early as 2009 . . . very interesting. Kind of makes you wonder what heck is up with Microsoft . . . but's that an entirely different subject!

**dalomar_cg** · 21-04-2008, 08:40 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Originally posted by Hoop

Kind of makes you wonder what heck is up with Microsoft . . . but's that an entirely different subject!

IMHO, I think a lot if it really boils down to trying to force-feed people medicine when they weren't sick. XP is a pretty darn good, and stable, OS. People have been using it for a while, and the haven't seen the need for things to be upgraded or to change (thats perception, not reality). Then MS came around with Vista and forced (as much as they could) people to use it. It became a thing of "MS is just trying to make money" rather than "Its a better product so I want to use it". Even though MS is HUGE, the power still lies with the market (although its much harder getting the market to mobilize)...It seams pretty clear that the market has told MS "We'd rather not have Vista".

...just on opinion from an obscure corner of the world

**Sando** · 13-08-2008, 08:09 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

I have two machines, one with XP x64 the other with Vista x64 on the other. Both of them work fine using rhino 4.0 and the latest vray. I have found that more and more companies are starting to develop drivers only for vista x64 and forgetting about XP x64. Having said that it's a minor issue at the moment and I haven't had that many problems that I would have to switch.

Either way if you build a 64 bit machine then at the end of that day, if you really had to change from XP to Vista or visa versa it wouldn't matter because your system is built for it.

**Joppi** · 25-08-2008, 01:35 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Thanks everyone, this was a really useful topic/dialogue!!!

I´m in the same situation as Hoop, getting a new station. I would be more then happy if you can give me som short feedback about:

- What is the main advantages of go XPpro64, instead of XPpro32 ???
- Will it causes issues with other softwares (Adobe CS, sketchup, office, shareware... what is your experiences?

- Is RAM 4MB, 512 graphic card enough?

//Joppi

**Sando** · 25-08-2008, 05:34 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Another way to look at the situation is how much you want to try and future proof your machine. 64bit windows or Vista are 32 bit compatable which means programs like adobe, sketchup and rhino will run with no problems and they do because I use them on my WinXP64 machine. They just get installed into a folder called "Program Files (x86)" instead of the usual "Program Files" which is reserved for 64Bit native programs. Having said that, it's hard to know which way technology will take us...

The only problems that I have had with WinXP x64 is itunes and my USB 3G wireless modem. Having said that, these programs and hardware work fine on my Vista 64bit machine as drivers and or the programs have been developed to work on Vista x64 but not WinXP x64.

Like the rest have said, 64bit machines can handle and make use of more RAM etc. but Rhino is still a 32 based program so it's no use to you but V-Ray can make use of the extra RAM. Rhino will eventually become 64bit native but from what I have heard, not until version 5.0 which might be a while. I suppose it will also depend on demand from users and other developers who use Rhino in some form or another.

Look at what you are trying to produce as the end result and whether is warrants a 64bit machine.

Joopi,
A 4gb RAM machine with 512graphics card will do just fine. I would have to agree with the others and probably spend more on the graphics card so you don't have to upgrade so soon as RAM is cheaper.

**Joppi** · 25-08-2008, 06:45 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Thanks Sando! Good help.

Then I understand a bit more! If I go XP64, do I manually have to install 32bit programs in "program files (x86), for example software and drivers for Rhino, scanners, printers, cameras and so on??? Or will this taken care of with the installation guides? If you see what I worries about...

Im thinking of at this point choose: HP xw4600, XPpro(32bit), 4 MB RAM, 512 or more graphic card, Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 / 3.16 GHz... or same with 64Bit.

The main thing will bee architectual modelling & rendering (often large scenes) togheter with graphical work with CS...

**Micha_cg** · 25-08-2008, 06:55 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Originally posted by Joppi

Thanks everyone, this was a really useful topic/dialogue!!!

I´m in the same situation as Hoop, getting a new station. I would be more then happy if you can give me som short feedback about:

- What is the main advantages of go XPpro64, instead of XPpro32 ???
- Will it causes issues with other softwares (Adobe CS, sketchup, office, shareware... what is your experiences?

- Is RAM 4MB, 512 graphic card enough?

//Joppi

XP64 allow you to use Rhino 4 until 3.6GB RAM, at XP32 it will crash earlier - so, if you want to do your best for your large models, than use XP64.
Rhino4 will crash at approx. 3.6GB, if you installed 5GB RAM or more, if you use less RAM, it will crash earlier, so my experience. Only the Adobe PDF Printer dosn't work here.

**dalomar_cg** · 25-08-2008, 07:01 AM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

I've actually seen 3.6 gbs on my xp 64 bit machine and I only have 2gb of physical memory, so that means that the 3.6 gbs was achieved by using virtual memory. Slow I know, but better than crashing ;D

**Sando** · 25-08-2008, 05:23 PM

Re: Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Originally posted by Joppi

Thanks Sando! Good help.

Then I understand a bit more! If I go XP64, do I manually have to install 32bit programs in "program files (x86), for example software and drivers for Rhino, scanners, printers, cameras and so on??? Or will this taken care of with the installation guides? If you see what I worries about...

Im thinking of at this point choose: HP xw4600, XPpro(32bit), 4 MB RAM, 512 or more graphic card, Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 / 3.16 GHz... or same with 64Bit.

The main thing will bee architectual modelling & rendering (often large scenes) togheter with graphical work with CS...

On 64bit machine the 32bit programs will automatically install to the right location. The other question you might want to ask yourself is... Are you going to be linking any other machines? From what you have said I would go with 64bit system and maybe have at least 5gb Ram.

Announcement

Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Vista vs. XP, 64 Bit

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment