So I have two computers, and these are the specs:

1. Windows XP
1 GB RAM
131 GB Drive
Some average processor

2. Windows Vista
3 GB RAM
500 GB Drive
AMD Athlon 5600 Dual-Core processor

And yet, whenever I play games, computer 1. is much faster than computer 2.
Such as Minecraft. With computer 1., I can play the game at default with no lag, yet with computer 2., I gotta do everything possible to reduce lag.

My guess to what explains this, is that Windows Vista is just a bad OS for games and speed. Or maybe I am missing a fact?

Or maybe you've got crap installed on #2? There's a ton of things that can affect a computer's speed. You can use Process Monitor to help locate your culprit: maybe it's another program, or you accessing disk too much, etc.

Huh. You mention games but completely fail to mention the graphics hardware of either of your two computers. It's kind of an important detail...

Oh I should mention:

1. 56/131 GB Drive

2. 386/500 GB Drive

But I've been told everywhere, that how much crap you got inside a computer, won't effect its performance.

Huh. You mention games but completely fail to mention the graphics hardware of either of your two computers. It's kind of an important detail...

Well it should be obvious that the 2nd computer has a better graphics engine. And yes I've researched both of them.

[quote name='Bacterius' timestamp='1346017495' post='4973581']
Huh. You mention games but completely fail to mention the graphics hardware of either of your two computers. It's kind of an important detail...

Well it should be obvious that the 2nd computer has a better graphics engine. And yes I've researched both of them.
[/quote]
How so? It could be a custom-built computer with a monster graphics card, or a DELL desktop with a crappy motherboard graphics chipset. If you've researched both of them, perhaps you could at least mention what they are... I mean, why leave out details?

Oh I should mention:

1. 56/131 GB Drive

2. 386/500 GB Drive

But I've been told everywhere, that how much crap you got inside a computer, won't effect its performance.

I'm not even sure what those numbers mean (is the first one used or free space??). But that's not what I was talking about. What's on your disk and its size isn't that big of a deal. It's what's installed and running on your computer. Thinks like antivirus software, for example, can cripple a system. I'm talking about what's installed and running on the computer.

[quote name='Bacterius' timestamp='1346017495' post='4973581']
Huh. You mention games but completely fail to mention the graphics hardware of either of your two computers. It's kind of an important detail...

Well it should be obvious that the 2nd computer has a better graphics engine. And yes I've researched both of them.
[/quote]
It should be obvious that that isn't obvious. We have no clue what your computers are like. You've researched them. Great. We still don't know anything about them. At all.

This is kinda like throwing darts at a dart board from across the room with all the lights turned off.

Vista is a memory hog. The OS alone cam swamp any system that has less than 4GB of ram

[quote name='azonicrider' timestamp='1346017570' post='4973582']
Oh I should mention:

1. 56/131 GB Drive

2. 386/500 GB Drive

But I've been told everywhere, that how much crap you got inside a computer, won't effect its performance.

I'm not even sure what those numbers mean (is the first one used or free space??). But that's not what I was talking about. What's on your disk and its size isn't that big of a deal. It's what's installed and running on your computer. Thinks like antivirus software, for example, can cripple a system. I'm talking about what's installed and running on the computer.

[quote name='Bacterius' timestamp='1346017495' post='4973581']
Huh. You mention games but completely fail to mention the graphics hardware of either of your two computers. It's kind of an important detail...

Well it should be obvious that the 2nd computer has a better graphics engine. And yes I've researched both of them.
[/quote]
It should be obvious that that isn't obvious. We have no clue what your computers are like. You've researched them. Great. We still don't know anything about them. At all.

This is kinda like throwing darts at a dart board from across the room with all the lights turned off.
[/quote]56 used out of 131 GB
386 used out of 500 GB

Alright, I'll admit I forgot the graphics engine for the first computer.
Although the second computer has a NVIDIA GF 6150F graphics engine.

Some games I play(such as Limbo being the latest game), won't accept the graphics engine on the first computer, yet they'll accept the graphics engine on the second computer.

Anyways, just believe when I say the second computer has better graphics.

I believe this has more to do with the OS's. Shippou I agree with it being a hog, but I doubt it really requires that much ram.

<nit>graphics card != graphics engine</nit>

Based on the complete lack of details, I have to come to the conclusion that I have absolutely no clue.