[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3DMark[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Obviously this is for Windows only, as several of the tests require DirectX 9C, don't see that on the distro list for Ubuntu.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
The results actually shocked me a little as this is a synthetic benchmark. Remember how Vista performed in the SiSoft test? As you can see, XP Professional wins this one hands down. It isn't even close with exception of the CPU score which has been a recurring result througout all the tests so far. Of course this is quite expected since graphic drivers will need time to mature, a process that will happen more rapidly as the user base for Vista grows. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
DVD Shrink[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
We ripped the War of the Worlds bonus feature off the disk at 100% and compressed the file from the hard drive to 70%. Times are in minutes:seconds, and lower is better. We were able to run DVD Shrink on all three systems giving us a good snapshot.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Time in Minutes:Seconds, Lower is better [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Even with the above tests completed, Vista's performance impressed me here. While it did outperform XP Pro, the efficiency of Ubuntu shines here, taking both Microsoft OS's to task (not to mention DVD Shrink was running under WINE in Ubuntu).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
WAV to MP3[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
We ripped Bad Company “Desolation Angels†to a single large wav file on our hard drive (this alleviates DVD ROM spin time etc), we then took that wav and encoded it to a 384Kbs MP3. We used CDex for all three with Ubuntu running it under WINE again.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Time in Minutes:Seconds, Lower is better [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Surprisingly again, Vista outperforms XP Pro, however not surprisingly, Ubuntu outperforms all of the above (is there a trend here?).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Video Encoding[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
We took our original rip of War of the Worlds bonus feature, then we re-encoded it to an Mpeg2 file at 5000kbs. Times are in minutes:seconds, and lower is better.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Time in Minutes:Seconds, Lower is better [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
While Vista outperforms XP Pro handily, Ubuntu once again shows its muscle. Vista and XP both used TMPGEnc while Ubuntu used FFMPEG.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Quake 4[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
This originally was the point at which I started to rip into ATI for not having OpenGL drivers for Vista, and then they ship them the day it is released (Beta drivers had no OpenGL support). I was of course going to then get into the whole not having CrossFire ability for Linux as well. Unfortunately for me, but, fortunately for you, they got them on the download just in time for first ship.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Vista is impressive, both in Time Demo mode and in actual play. You notice at first launch, Q4 is sluggish but by the time you count to 5 its moving smooth as butter. This is quite common with Vista and games on dual core CPU systems. The time demo gives the same attributes; if you simply go into Q4 and launch a time demo it will lag at first then go full steam ahead, the 2nd time demo will always be faster then the first due to Quake 4's caching. XP takes 2nd, albeit far behind, and just behind XP is Ubuntu.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
UT2004[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Well, now UT2004 supports DX9 or OpenGL. I was glad to be able to show the performance of all 3 OS's, as well as show the difference between OpenGL and DX9.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Hrmm, look at that graph, is it descriptive enough to make your decision? Probably not, that doesn't mean that you can't look at it and say “Vista is owning the gamesâ€. I was surprised at this one as well. I would have laid money on Ubuntu before the test started (I would have lost). In fact, Ubuntu brings up the rear in this scenario.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Final Words [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
While Microsoft owns the desktop space, we have noticed some chinks in the armor, and Apple is not the only other game in town. When you add the cost of the hardware and software together, Open Source solutions such as Ubuntu, Fedora Core and Suse (just to name a few) are appealing alternatives.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Suffice it to say, unless you have a relatively new system in hand or you are looking to upgrade your system, don't even pick up the MS Vista box; leave it on the shelf. MS Windows XP Professional is still a very viable OS, and apparently, outperforms or maintains pace with Vista in almost every test we have run with current hardware in place. Vista has the advantage of utilizing the performance a newer setup offers, XP is falling behind in that it is not as efficient with multiple processors or large amounts of memory. Other then the new hardware advantages, does Vista bring that much over XP? In a lot of cases there are still negatives for Vista, being that it is new and all of the quirks are not ironed out, you bet XP is a better solution, TODAY! Once that first Service Pack is released, you might just want to leave XP behind. That said, gaming performance was pretty high, higher than we expected Vista to have and in most cases beat out the other two contenders. Of course, ours is but one setup and as always, you should check out other sites with similiar articles and take an average before making a decision. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
What about Ubuntu you ask? Well, my bias leans towards running Ubuntu (or any Linux for that matter) anyway, however I am a realist and I fully understand that DirectX games such as Flat Out2, BF2 and BF2142 will not run, or must be emulated to run on Linux. Thats not to say it would not be a good solution, because obviously you are getting a lot of performance out of older as well as new hardware, especially when you consider what you pay . [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
In the end, obviously you the reader to need to make the choice of what is right for you. How much pain are you willing to endure in order to have an OS that fits your requirements? What reason would compel you to move to a new OS? Is it sexy to stay with XP Pro? Not so much. Is it sexy to move to Vista? Certainly. Is it sexy to move to Ubuntu? Maybe, no matter, it definitely is kewl.[/FONT]