Windows Blista

[Cleric xtx]

A Tech Strategist within Microsoft, Nigel Page, has gone on record to discuss the hardware requirements for Windows Vista, due out next Christmas.

 

What he's said is kind of shocking.

 

System breakdown

 

Graphics: Vista has changed from using the CPU to display bitmaps on the screen to using the GPU to render vectors. This means the entire display model in Vista has changed. To render the screen in the GPU requires an awful lot of memory to do optimally - 256MB is a happy medium, but you'll actually see benefit from more. Microsoft believes that you're going to see the amount of video memory being shipped on cards hurtle up when Vista ships.

 

CPU: Threading is the main target for Vista. Currently, very little of Windows XP is threaded - the target is to make Vista perform far better on dual-core and multi-core processors.

 

RAM: 2GB is the ideal configuration for 64-bit Vista, we're told. Vista 32-bit will work ideally at 1GB, and minimum 512. However, since 64-bit is handling data chunks that are double the size, you'll need double the memory, hence the 2GB. Nigel mentions DDR3 - which is a little odd, since the roadmap for DDR3, on Intel gear at least, doesn't really kick in until 2007.

 

HDD: SATA is definitely the way forward for Vista, due, Microsoft tells us, to Native Command Queueing. NCQ allows for out of order completions - that is, if Vista needs tasks 1,2,3,4 and 5 done, it can do them in the order 2,5,3,4,1 if that's a more efficient route for the hard drive head to take over the disk. This leads to far faster completion times. NCQ is supported on SATA2 drives, so expect them to start becoming the standard sooner rather than later. Microsoft thinks that these features will provide SCSI-level performance.

 

Bus: AGP is 'not optimal' for Vista. Because of the fact that graphics cards may have to utilise main system memory for some rendering tasks, a fast, bi-direction bus is needed - that's PCI express.

 

Display: Prepare to feel the red mist of rage - no current TFT monitor out there is going to support high definition playback in Vista. You may already have heard rumblings about this, but here it is. To play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray content you need a HDCP compatible monitor. Why? Because these formats use HDCP to encrypt a video signal as it travels along a digital connection to an output device, to prevent people copying it. If you have just standard DVI or even an analogue output, you're going to see HD scaled down to a far-less-than-HD resolution for viewing - which sucks. This isn't really Microsoft's fault - HDCP is something that content makers, in their eternal wisdom, have decided is necessary to stop us all watching pirated movies. Yay.

[Ziggy]

I brought this up last year (probably not here). Vista's minmum requirements far exceed the typical GAMING machine. My computer would barely support Vista if I chose to install it.

 

This horsepower should be going to.. you guessed it.. GAMES. If Half Life 2 already runs like ass on your hardware, what's it going to run like once you make Windows use as much resources as Half Life 2? Well? It won' t run. GeForce 7800GTXes for everyone!

 

And the encrypted monitors thing... I'm considering writing my elected officials about that. That's bullshit. If I want to watch a movie I bought, I should be able to watch it on whatever damn monitor I want to. With no quality loss. Sure, you can't rip it now... but if I want to watch a HD movie, I want to watch an HD movie in HD on my current HD monitor without upgrading to a new HD monitor which would cost me an assload more money that I already spent on the present HD monitor! It's a way for Microsoft to force you into picking "their" brand of monitor (be it NEC, Samsung, Sony, etc.)

 

fsck that.

[DigitalX]

yea like i said on anothert forum XP will do me for next 8 years or so lol

 

or when i can play all games i like on linux

Edited September 9, 2005 by DigitalX