new build with vista 64 bit

hi im buildin new machine and here how its gonna come out

processor : intel dual core 2.66 ghz

intel dg43nb socket 775 motherboard

windows vista 64 bit with 8 gig of ram

Geforce gtx 280 factory overclocked

power suply 750 W


Will SL run smoth on this?

Yes.

The most complete answer is SL doesn't really run "smoothly" on anything. It's going to be somewhat laggy, no matter what. Most of that has more to do with inefficient content than with the software itself, though, but that's a whole other subject.

That said, on the system you described, SL should run just about as smoothly as it possibly can at this point in history, if that makes sense. You've got a top notch video card, plenty of RAM, a good CPU, and a solid OS. That's about all you can ask for.

i love that part...lol

im very exited about it...im goin to the shop to pick it up in 1 hour, i have 3 pcs, one is crapy the other is a dell xps 410 with 4 gig and windows xp 32 bit and a 8800 gt..

but im a freak when it comes to graphic...and i do other games also such as cal of dutty, far cry etc...so he told me the best thing wold be to build a new gamer pc...my only concern is the vista 64 bit OS that i never used before and the GTX 280 video card that i dont see on the suported grafic cards especifications but i know a few people that told they use the GTX 280 and they dont have problems...

just very exited about it, i know that are many people like my self that has the same questions i have about the GTX 280 so i will post my experience here later when i pick the system up...

thanks for the reply

Not with Vista it won't, due to Aero and the poor GL support. Consider Linux instead if you want to get the maximum out of that hardware. Your other stuff will still run. http://debian.org/ http://www.winehq.org/

Nonsense.

I've got three Vista x64 machines here, and they all run SL fantastically well.

As for Aero, well yeah, it's unfortunately not a good thing to use. It can cause video driver errors when graphics intensive apps are running. And even when it's not fighting with programs, it's little more than a waste of resources. It looks pretty enough, if you like that particular aesthetic, but it doesn't serve any really useful purpose.

The only real downside to turning Aero off is that the Vista basic theme really sucks. I hate all that pale blue, myself. There's an easy fix, though. Vista Glazz is a 10-second download, and then you can install any theme you want. DeviantArt has a lot of nice ones, or you can make your own.

well i got it now and from my test its runin very fast but im havin some issues....

not sure if is the OS but its freezin alot , firefox gets stuck sometimes,
and some programs are lockin up also...

also i cant get to close some programs from the task manager...

but i do see a diference on the vista 64 bit from the xp media center i had
not sure that is because im exited about the new system but i think its is runin faster when it comes to open programs and clickin on stuff...

but im thinkin about goin back to xp just to test if this problem gonna get fixed...if it dont then is because something is wrong on the hardware side since its a build system and not something that i got it made from a store...

i hope is the vista so i can try to fix,wold sux if it has anything to do with the new hardware

will post here again with the update on the problem !

If you're going to reply out of context with the intent to deliberately distort the meaning, please don't reply. Vista ships with defaults that are massively resource draining; these settings must be changed to acheive anything remotely close to usable framerates.

I told you so.

I've gotten SL to run smoothly under Vista on a computer that was significantly less powerful than the OP's using the default settings.

I have the same system spec'd above, but with his older video card (8800GT) running vista 64 (well now windows 7) and SL has always run flawlessly for me without any tweaks or changes. Aero might take some resources but no where near enough to impact performance on a decent system.

As for using linux alternative instead, if your just using secondlife and nothing else, sure go for it... if you have any other need for your system don't bother, wine is not stable enough or compatable enough to be a true alternative.

(and no i'm not bashing, i'm actually a *nix lover... but i'm tired of people always saying for folks who won't know how to use it properly to install it... ubuntu is great, but it's not the be all end all to make linux viable for the average consumer)

If you haven't used Wine in the last few months, you might want to look again.



If my 70-year-old grandma can use Linux (she does), anybody can.

nothing wrong with Vista it will run fine (drivers for 64 are the issue)
is that Linux 64bit? I have no clue tried 3 times (red hat,unbeto?, and some other crap)can't run 1/2 of my Recording software with it well at least a year ago, and from what I hear still!
I ove my Windows XP and Vista I like including Arrow (no issue running that on mine for hours on end (vistas still a buggy OS win7 will suck even worse it seems from what I have been reading ) like the G-5 for Logic and am really liking Vista on the (yes run its a DELL!) xps 530 laptop!

http://www.linuxalt.com/

Also, look into audacity. If you paid for your recording software, ask 'em when they'll offer a Linux version. Usually companies are willing to not get too crazy with things if they know at least some of their users are trying to run it in wine even if they're not willing to provide tech support for wine.

Good on ya for having a go and building your own system.
I don't think that a shop bought system is better at all. If you install much software, the factory setup will have issues in not much time, and there is the problem of factory installed crap-ware too, i.e. Norton stuff.
And being a gamer machine, Linux won't cut the mustard as it's got no DirectX. A lot of games use DirectX.

That's not true, Linux supports DX and Win32 programs via Wine quite well. Steam, TF2, and the Half Life 2 series (which has no OpenGL version) all work wonderfully. Most other games also work well or perfectly. The GTA series, all titles, perform better in Wine on Linux than natively on Windows 2000, XP or Vista. About the only thing I can think of that actually is a nonstarter are games that use PunkBuster. (Valve Anticheat works fine, though).

http://www.winehq.org/

Linux is awesome! I use it myself and have for over ten years.

However don't listen to the guys telling you you need it for performance. I have just as many windows machines as I do Linux, and they have proven over time that with a little bit of work they can be just as good.

It's a matter of how much screwing with it to get there you want to do. You get the speed out of the box with Linux, not after hours of tweaking and reboots like on Windows.

whow, hold on.... Do you actualy use linux? It is not exactly a "just works" OS.

Go head over to the linux testing forum and take a look at how many people got SL working "out of the box" as you put it

In fact I'll follow my last post up with this.

Anyone considering switching over to linux after reading this thread, don't! You will regret it when you have to reinstall windows.

Instead, get a crapy computer from a yardsale and install linux on it. Becuase it will take you months to learn how to do everything you could do on your windows machine.

I wish everyone could have experience with linux, becuase once you know how to use it (and trust me it's as much to absorb as a few years of school) it becomes a powerful tool.

I gotta disagree with the runs DX perfectly, especially when talking about the GTA series. I cannot run GTA4 under wine (even tried using the 1.1 devel latest), and some of the other games I enjoy have small 'flaws'. But yes wine is definitely improving vastly and rather quickly, and will solve 99% of issue's in needing a windows program. Tho also leads me to wonder who/what is causing the huge leaps forward in wine's compatibility level.. going from barely able to run anything more then notepad / calc ... to full support for everything from cs4 to directx gaming in less then a year.. after 15 years of developement.. but I'll leave that to the conspiracy theorists

If it's not, you're not using the right distro.



And in 90% of the cases, they're using a specialised distro to do a more general task outside the intended scope of the distro. After all, you can use your head to drive a nail, but odds are it'll result in a bloody mess and a huge headache. As such, Ubuntu doesn't do well beyond a basic home or office desktop, Fedora and Red Hat suck outside the corporate desktop world, Slackware is a poor choice for people not already using Slackware, etc.

Windows isn't immune from this problem, either. Windows has had multiple distributions per version, and there's many mutually incompatible versions and distributions of Windows. If you don't believe that, go ahead and try installing something for Windows CE or Windows Mobile in XP or Vista, or try running something written for 3.1 in NT4 Server.

If anything, the situation isn't as pronounced in Linux because: 1) people are willing to accept that variety is not an option when it's already all around them in their supposedly "homogenous" environment, and 2) the accessability of the code allows for much more rapid development in usability.

Even when the hardware is designed for Windows, you're still more likely to get a usable environment out of the machine much more readily in Linux. It takes ~4 hours to install and get all the updates for Vista Home Basic on my ThinkPad T400, and then tweaking is still reqiured to run anything using DX or GL smoothly. It takes about 45 minutes to do the same in Debian, /with/ DX and GL support working properly.

Anybody who says "linux is hard" needs to get over themselves and remember that Second Life, heck Windows itself, is harder to deal with. Windows is just as hard, and in many cases, harder, to install and maintain than Windows. My grandma can't maintain a Windows machine for the life of her, but she finds Debian to be a snap.

With that method, yeah, it will take months. If you make it your primary OS and pick up the crappy machine for Windows, you'll find your transition time is closer to days to weeks.

If you shortchange Linux when you give it a try, it will shortchange you. Give it a real try, and it'll give you real results.

Many eyes make bugs shallow. Once you get the basic framework working, getting the rest going is relatively easy.