Warp wrote:
>   Slower than what? XP? Well, there's at least this:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xp-vs-vista,1531.html

That was pretty good. I'm actually rather surprised that there's a 
noticeable difference in speed on computer-bound tasks like encoding. 
You would think that there isn't much you can do to hurt that, but 
perhaps some of the changes like tighter scheduling is adding overhead 
that isn't useful when you only have one compute-bound task running. 
Even so, 20% seems rather a large overhead for something like that.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message