Although the second computer has a NVIDIA GF 6150F graphics engine.

Well, there's your first problem. This (or at least the GF 6150, as the 6150F does not exist) is a fairly old integrated graphics chipset. No wonder the second computer is slow as hell on games. Now about the first computer, I have no idea what the graphics card of the first computer is, but you can't get much worse than the 6150 in terms of performance.

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

No, we cannot "just believe" a fact that may hold the key to your issue. Why are you are so hell-bent on assuming the OS is guilty on something that clearly sounds like a simple hardware performance problem? Well, at least, you can troubleshoot that one without buying anything: install XP on the second computer and try. If it runs faster, then it is either the OS or the software that was installed on the computer (verify that it is the OS by installing fresh Vista and trying then). Personally, I doubt the OS would make much of a difference. Sure, it could make the system a bit slower, but there's a huge gap between that and what you describe as "I gotta do everything possible to reduce lag". No properly configured operating system (especially a newer version) would be such a performance black hole.

I'm going to be fair and honest with you - the lack of information in this topic makes it impossible to give a remotely accurate diagnosis and answer to your question. There are many reasons a computer could be slow, and while we can assist you in troubleshooting what the cause is, we cannot do so if you won't tell us your hardware and a rough overview of what software you've got running on your system. We are not psychic and cannot read your mind nor physically access your computer, so you've got to help us out a bit more here. As the saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. And remember, only change one variable at a time, otherwise you'll be going in circles.

If you wish to conclude that the OS is the cause of your performance problems, you are free to do so, but I cannot agree with that conclusion based on the available facts.

My previous PC was running Vista, and only had 2Gb of RAM and an integrated Raedon HD2400. I could run MC on default settings without problems, so there's definitely another culprit here.

My previous PC was running Vista, and only had 2Gb of RAM and an integrated Raedon HD2400.

Despite also being a pretty crap integrated part, the HD2400 should be considerably faster than his GF 6150.

Unfortunately you can't correctly declare one graphics card better than another simply because it is newer, has more memory, etc. Modern graphics cards are a complex piece is equipment and have a LOT of different parts that can be responsible for better or worse performance, and with a range of different techniques in use one card can even be excellent for certain games but terrible for others.

Your graphics hardware is almost certainly partly (or perhaps completely) responsible.


As mentioned above, running software (AV software, "helper" or "launcher" utilities, etc.) can also make a difference, as can the presence of malware or viruses. These could also be part of your problem.


Using Vista rather than XP is very unlikely to be part of your problem, and a great many people -- putting aside those who refuse to provide full specs and actually diagnose the cause of performance issues -- have no trouble at all with Vista.

For reference, the "RAM hogging" in Vista is intentional, and for the average user (assuming nothing else interferes or is going wrong) will actually result in better performance thanks to commonly used resources being pre-loaded, etc. I never understood why some people want to pay for more RAM and then have it sitting there doing nothing a lot of the time. If your game needs that memory, Vista will happily give some back, and if your game is something you play often Vista may even be using some of it'd RAM to pre-load data FOR your game.


These computers don't make sense because you're not properly examining all the parts, and because you've jumped to (and seem to be sticking to) what is almost certainly a false conclusion.

For reference, the "RAM hogging" in Vista is intentional, and for the average user (assuming nothing else interferes or is going wrong) will actually result in better performance thanks to commonly used resources being pre-loaded, etc. I never understood why some people want to pay for more RAM and then have it sitting there doing nothing a lot of the time. If your game needs that memory, Vista will happily give some back, and if your game is something you play often Vista may even be using some of it'd RAM to pre-load data FOR your game.

Yeah, that has always confused me too but I think it mostly comes down to a total misunderstanding about how a modern OS uses and allocates memory.

Alright forgive me for the lack of details, I thought listing the core specs of the computers, was enough.

I blamed the OS, over the fact that most people frown upon Vista, and heard that people actually jumped from XP to 7.

If I can get more than one person to blame the graphics engine, then I realize that, that is what is contributing to the crappy performance.

Anyways, I'll probably just overhaul the Vista computer soon, get a new graphics card, more ram, and hopefully Windows 7.

This performance issue isn't much of a concern, I just found it strange that the XP's performance is superior.

Alright forgive me for the lack of details, I thought listing the core specs of the computers, was enough.

Video cards are pretty core specs when it comes to game performance

As Cornstalks mentioned, it's a Graphics Card (or Video Card) not a Graphics Engine (two very different things that both matter on programming forums like this one).

My guess: You didn't update the video card driver. Installing the latest driver for your video card will probably resolve your problem instantly. Yeah, it's that important.
My alternative guess: You have a bajillion things running as background processes, possibly including multiple antivirus software conflicting with each other, and maybe including some viruses as well. Hold Ctrl+Shift+Escape to open the process manager - go to the processes tab and see what's taking the most CPU and RAM. Or, open Add/Remove programs and take a gander at all the software you have installed... do you actually still use all that?

Oh, third guess: Your second computer is a laptop, the first is a desktop, and you're comparing apples and oranges.

I used a Dell OEM Vista just fine with 2 GBs of RAM (and a better video card, but still not high-end). My current computer is the same PC, though I moved on to Windows 7 (3 years ago) and added an extra GB of RAM (3 months ago). My computer, though a typical OEM machine from Dell, has lasted me 5 years so far and still runs smooth.
I've only reinstalled the OS twice, neither time out of necessity (once to move from Vista to 7, and I chose to do a clean install, and once at the beginning of this year, just because I wanted a clean install to clear all the old software off to speed things up).

It runs smooth because I take care of it in the following ways:

• I blow the dust out of the case every two months (my video card is defective so I have to re-oil the fan and I blow out the dust at the same time).
  
• Whenever I want to play a new game with modern-ish graphics, I install the latest video card driver. ( ! Important ! )
  
• I have Microsoft Security Essentials installed to protect from viruses.
  
• I run Spybot Search and Destroy every so often (maybe every three months unless I think there's a threat).
  
• When I'm no longer using a game or piece of software, I uninstall it.
  
  I can run most games just fine... though not always at the highest setting. I can run Minecraft at the highest setting... and host a server at the same time. Talking about RAM hogs... Minecraft is way up there, both the server and the client.
  
  Oh, did I mention it's a desktop? A 5 year old 2GB Win 7 32bit desktop... that for games, runs better than the 2 year old, 4 GB, 64 bit Win 7 laptops my parents use. Integrated videocards are horrible for gaming.

Oh, did I mention it's a desktop? A 5 year old 2GB Win 7 32bit desktop... that for games, runs better than the 2 year old, 4 GB, 64 bit Win 7 laptops my parents use. Integrated videocards are horrible for gaming.

Aw, dude, I know what you mean. I used to have a crappy laptop with a POS video chipset for several years, games were barely playable and it was such a pain! Fortunately, I eventually saw the light and built an actual desktop - possibly the best thing I ever did. The graphics card is the most important factor in how well a game plays - processor comes in distant second, immediately followed by memory (of course, there is a baseline requirement for processor and memory which must be met, but diminishing returns are hit much more quickly than with the graphics card).

Also, may I recommend a handy trick I use to keep the amount of software installed on my computer in check - I make use of multiple virtual machines. I find it helps a lot especially if you install a lot of stuff - once you're done with a certain category of things you can just wipe the VM and be done with it, instead of hunting redistributables and registry keys. YMMV as this uses some memory, but it's worth it if you can pull it off IMO.

[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1346042482' post='4973661']
Oh, did I mention it's a desktop? A 5 year old 2GB Win 7 32bit desktop... that for games, runs better than the 2 year old, 4 GB, 64 bit Win 7 laptops my parents use. Integrated videocards are horrible for gaming.

Aw, dude, I know what you mean. I used to have a crappy laptop with a POS video chipset for several years, games were barely playable and it was such a pain! Fortunately, I eventually saw the light and built an actual desktop - possibly the best thing I ever did. The graphics card is the most important factor in how well a game plays - processor comes in distant second, immediately followed by memory (of course, there is a baseline requirement for processor and memory which must be met, but diminishing returns are hit much more quickly than with the graphics card).
[/quote]

Not just "much more quickly", games still scale like shit across multiple cores and most of the performance increase on CPUs in the last few years has come in the form of more cores, more cores, and yet more cores (which most games simply aren't using all that well anyway), You can actually get worse game performance on the CPU side these days by buying a expensive newer 6 core cpu than you'd get with a cheap older 4 core cpu when all other parts are identical.