I recently purchased a Vista machine to use for trading (after I upgrade the graphics card) Does anyone have any graphics cards they recommend that work with Vista and support 3-6 monitors? Thanks, Any help is greatly appreciated.
Which version of Vista is that? I think the basic version is faster because it doesn't have the Aero, and it is less taxing on the system...
The best feature of pro that I haven't seen mentioned is that a pro machine will host remote desktop. Log in from anywhere and control your machine at home. I use it to run some fully auto trading programs when I am on the road.
BOTH Win/XP and Vista are horrible for trading workstations. To prove it, one trader took his working Tradestation platform (and it can really consume CPUs), and ported it to the fastest machine he could purchase using WinXP/Pro. His older machine was running Windows 2000. NOTE: He could never get Tradestation to run as fast or smooth or reliable again....no matter how much he "tuned" Win/XP or his new BIOS and motherboard. Bottomline: Want a good platform, stick with the older ones.....even Windows 2003 Server is a better trading OS than XP or Vista.
Vista Ultimate. And I have Aero and all the bells and whistles enabled. Running Athlon dual-core 4200 w/2 GB memory. H
It would still be interesting to see a comparison between the Basic and Ultimate. My bet is still on the simpler system.... Here is a comparison between XP and Ultimate. XP EASILY wins! http://www.ozhardware.com.au/Hardwa...Vista-Performance-Comparison/Results-PCM.html "We can see an overall performance decrease of about 15% in Vista compared to XP, and when looking through the results, the main culprits are the graphics memory tests, where XP was a massive 11 TIMES Better than Vista!!! XP was able to pass through 3600frames per second compared to Vistaâs lowly 312FPS. Again, hopefully future driver releases can help fix this issue, as thatâs just pathetic. Video playback of a WMV file also suffered greatly under Vista, giving just 30.8FPS compared to 69.1FPS under XP. This means Vista would struggle to do anything else while a WMV video is playing, quite poor really considering the hardware weâre testing on. HDD performance was generally better on XP, but only by a few % barely worth a mention really. The only areas Vista excelled in were rendering transparent windows (i.e. like the Aero theme) and audio decompression. For transparent windows, Vista beats XP almost 4-fold, with 2671windows/sec under Vista, to 713windows/sec under XP. Microsoft has obviously optimised this process quite well for Vista to make the Aero theme run smoothly. Audio decompression was twice as good under Vista, working at 2665KB/s compared to 1371KB/s under XP. Unfortunately audio compression is the same under both, so you wonât be able to rip your CDs to MP3âs any faster." ---------and another one------------- "We installed the RTM (release to manufacturing) Vista Ultimate code on desktop and notebook systems of varying specs and ages, and then we ran a series of benchmarks to answer several key questions about Vista's impact on performance. Our main findings: --Vista is generally slower than XP, but it's better at multitasking on dual-core PCs. --Your PC should have 1GB of RAM at the bare minimum. --Aero won't slow you down if you use a discrete graphics processor and enough memory. --Apps run slower on the 64-bit version of Vista, but adding RAM closes the gap." http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128305-page,1-c,vistalonghorn/article.html
Weird, that's contrary to about every review I've read; they all claim that every speedgain you get from the latest 2-cores is lost by running Vista. They also all claimed that while Vista ran so-so, on the same machine XP blasted their socks off. There must be something you overlooked.
go for vista sooner or later you will find difficulties to get software compatable with XP. Think about it. Can you get software in the market that can run on windows 95..etc
Ahum, yes that problem could arise in 10 years or so. By that time Vista will have been ditched by M$ too, and many serious users and businesses will have migrated to Ubuntu Linux. Heck, it's even unclear whether PC's will still exist by then. Think Google. Vista is the same as XP but with less drivers, more performance-hungry useless bells and colours and more built-in DRM control of your media hardware. And it's less stable. For now XP is best choice.
Mav, Since as a business owner, I assume (maybe) that you have a corp license for your XP on your systems? If so, go with the Vista. Take it for a run. If it is not what you want, you can always load up your (legitimate) copy of XP on to your system. As a corp license, you are allowed to use the same program with the same activations on the number of computers you originally specified in your license (just shut down one you don't use) This way you will have a system you feel comfortable with, and if you want to go back to Vista, you'll always have the original installation discs that came with the laptop.