Update: now read our full Windows 7 review.
Buying a Windows OS used to be so simple. A new version appeared, most people agreed it was better than the last one and you'd get a copy for your next PC. Job done.
But Windows Vista changed all that. Despite many years of availability, Vista's poor reception means that computer manufacturers are still selling new systems with XP. It's also common for laptops to be downgraded from Vista to XP, with battery life reportedly improving as a result.
Deciding which operating system is best for you has become decidedly trickier, then, and the arrival of Windows 7 only complicates things further. Is the newcomer just Vista with a facelift? Or has Microsoft learned from its mistakes and delivered a product that will restore its battered reputation? Perhaps you should forget about Vista and Windows 7 altogether, opting for the mature XP instead?
The choice might be easy. If you have old or extremely basic hardware, for instance, then XP will have a definite advantage: its relatively lightweight core means the operating system can theoretically run with only 64MB of RAM, so there'll be plenty of resources left over for your applications.
However, if you have high-end requirements, such as using a powerful PC to run heavy-duty applications, Vista and Windows 7 come into their own. They're better optimised for multicore CPUs, and Windows 7 in particular includes a number of tweaks to make the best of the latest hardware.
You may well find yourself somewhere between these two extremes, though, and so the 'best' OS to use will be a more difficult decision. But don't worry – help is at hand. We've taken a test PC and laptop, installed XP, Vista and Windows 7 on them and applied a number of testing real-life benchmarks to see which will come out on top. We're aware that speed isn't everything, though, so we've also explored the new features that each OS has introduced. To make life easy for you, we've split our findings over eight categories, with an overall verdict at the end.
So which is best - Windows XP, Vista or Windows 7? Read on to find out what we've uncovered.
Performance
It's often said that recent versions of Windows have become bloated, and it's hardly unreasonable to expect each new OS to perform better than its previous iteration. However, when Windows XP first appeared back in 2001, it was designed to run happily on 300MHz Pentium II CPUs with a mere 128MB of RAM. Thus, it should come as no surprise that the lightweight OS runs quickly on today's processors. Newer OSes can optimise for modern hardware and include more powerful features, but is this extra functionality really just slowing us down?
To find out, we decided to test each operating system's performance on an average PC. The system is nothing particularly special by today's standards, consisting of an Intel dual-core E5200 CPU, 2GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon HD4550 graphics card. We installed XP, Vista and Windows 7 in that order (all 32-bit versions) on the machine's 500GB hard drive and ran a number of real-world benchmarks to find out which OS was best.
The boot time test provided no surprises – Vista took the longest time to get started, XP came in second place and Windows 7 was the fastest.
SWITCHED ON: Tired of lengthy boot times? We bear good news. Even the beta of Windows 7 can beat Vista's sluggish start
At first it seemed like our file transfer benchmarks would deliver the same results. Vista produced poor copy speeds in our small file tests, XP again placed second and Windows 7 came out on top. But when we tried transferring larger 1GB files, Vista surprisingly just managed to win out over XP. Both were beaten by the speedy Windows 7, though.
This proved true for our application tests as well. Open a small Excel spreadsheet or PDF file, say, and XP beats Vista, but heavy-duty spreadsheets and PDF files opened faster under Vista than XP. Once again, however, both were trounced by the newcomer.
You might have spotted the theme here. Windows 7 delivered excellent results, beating or coming close to the performance of the lightweight XP in just about every category. It's quite remarkable given that this is an operating system still in beta. When all the drivers are fully finished, we should see even better performance.
If we'd run the benchmarks on a less powerful PC, perhaps one with only 1GB of RAM, then it's possible that Windows XP would have fared better than it did here. But for even a fairly basic modern PC, Windows 7 delivers the best performance around.
XP: 3.5 / 5
Vista: 3 / 5
Windows 7: 4.5 / 5
Your comments (31) Click to add a new comment
chrwl007
December 20th 2011
31. Interesting article (even though I only came across it today). Regarding the comment that a four year old XP install will boot and shut down slower, not so.
My 1.6 Core Duo with 4GB RAM shuts down in 13 seconds, and boot time is a respectable 48 seconds. Not that boot time bothers me - I use Hibernate.
I must say that Windows 7 is a pleasure to use - I started with the 64-bit release candidate and it felt as responsive as XP from day one.
Alert a moderator
peet_io
November 28th 2010
30. You can have them all with Zinstall.
http://www.zinstall.com
Alert a moderator
motoringmitch
November 27th 2010
29. I have xp pro, vista ultimate and windows 7.
Vista is **** on all counts, it is slow to load and just as slow to shutdown. I will start off with xp pro, my desktop 2ghz dual core,4gb ram, runs swiftly with xp. I did try vista 32bit but found it tiresome on performance so that went in to the bin and a clean instal of xp brought about some normality.
My mother in law uses a laptop, Acer aspire,2gb ram 1.9ghz single core processor.vista home o/s. I have had to trim the startup processess to speed up the boot times, result? it now only takes 200seconds to boot up. Acer don't do a downgrade to xp so there are driver issues, (I have now located a decent set of drivers from the acer forum).The wife has a HP laptop,2.2ghz dual core,4gb ram windows 7 x64bit. From cold it takes 20 seconds to boot. It runs like a greyhound on crack! fast. my feeling is that windows7 is what vista should of been, has all the tasty bits of vista with the speed of xp!
Alert a moderator
kasim89
September 18th 2010
28. Lets start with speed: XP can perform reasonable speed on any computer. whereas Vista is so .... powerfull, speed is not on the good books. So Windows 7?.... Yep its got everything going for it as far as speed is concerned, the speed beats Vista with ease. It can also beat XP. Gaming: On heavy memory games eg. Flight Sim X, The sreen is often jumping therefore you have hardley any control over the plane/car/gun. Windows vista is ok on games. The game may take awhile to download and it may take up a ridiculous amount of memory, FSX (18GB?). So Windows 7 it has all that you relly need for gaming and it does well on speed better than the other to. If you are looking for an outstanding Pc/laptop ext, choose 7 no doubt.
Cheers Kasim........
Alert a moderator
anhminh1232002
July 10th 2010
27. New windows, new operation will be just a new lesson that costs our time to learn how to use. I am just loyal to Windows XP.
Alert a moderator
skondgekar
May 27th 2010
26. As per my opinion microsoft might have released Vista when the world is not ready. The world is not ready for powerful operating systems. Vista operates well on fairly good PC. Even all of the high end games works fine on vista. in upcoming windows 7 they might have downgraded some of the power to give extra speed and added some of the tools which feels 7 is the better one. This dosent mean Win 7 will not do someting windows vista can do. We should see the true difference.
Talking about ubuntu, it is a bad experience regarding office files as office 2007 which is the masterpiece MS have developed. Open office far away in the stone age than office 2007. You would never prefer Open Office if you are familiar to use office 2007. Again there are practically not much high end games compatible to ubuntu. So I think users having vista and liked it then stick to it time will come when world will be ready soon.
Alert a moderator
dandutch
April 11th 2010
25. I realise that this article is aimed at a comparison between XP Vista and 7, but I cant help notice that the way many of the responses are written implicate that all of the computing universe is dependant on and decided by what Microsoft does.
In Europe however, Windows no longer holds the complete dominion over the PC empire. By default, when buying a pc, consumers are offered the choice between an Ubuntu or Windows OS. Needless to say that the choice for Ubuntu allows for large discounts in the price. Ubuntu also delivers the same quality OS, but requires far less resources than any MS OS would!
Alert a moderator
razor102
January 3rd 2010
24. windows 7 is alot faster than vista and it has a new feature windows xp mode to run programmes what does not work in vista all you need is a prosscer wat can do intel virtualization in my opinion windows 7 is alot better i hate windows xp i was on windows 98 till vista launched windows xp would never resond when programes stopped responding but you still have windows xp mode to run older programes in windows 7
Alert a moderator
lamotti
December 20th 2009
23. New OS? Sorta. I keep hearing everyone complain that it's so early that Windows 7 came out when Vista just came out. Years and years ago, just when XP was new, the project names were Longhorn (Vista) and Blackcomb (Seven). I forget the others but even the server names and so on have had their names and been in development for years before release. Microsoft decided the way Vista was built was the way to go, however, a test market was needed, and all of you who've put money into Vista (sounds like the same issue sorta with Windows 98 and 98SE) have helped Microsoft see what is good about Vista and what is horrible about it. Thus they made the changes and "finished" the Vista product which is now Windows 7. Support for Vista won't be as long as support was for XP. The ol' sayin' is Seven is just Vista done better, or done right, well that was the intent! Windows 7 won't get the slanders as Vista and it will take the credit for being a more polished product. Everyone should skip Vista and bump from XP to Seven anyway (if you don't want the hassle (hence windows 2000/XP) That's my two cents, No one should be surprised about this, Vista's intent was practically a beta version for Seven.
Alert a moderator
jbasile
December 3rd 2009
22. Well its just the same old thing everytime a new OS comes out..skeptics and optimist...lets be realistic for once OK...Windows XP was a workhorse operating system and was probably the best thing microsoft has ever created..but its time is passed..hardware does more and people want more..demands on the internet call for more secure systems and better multimedia..XP will eventually not compliment the needs..Vista has had 2.5 yrs to work out the bugs and not doing a bad job but has more to go..7 well not much can be judged on a mere 2 months in the open market..let the fixes and updates come before we say its our new savior...Meanwhile if what you have works dont fix it yet..ya never know whats around the corner
Alert a moderator
tech89
November 30th 2009
21. Try these benchmarking tests on machines that have been around the block a bit.
No way that XP shuts down in 33 seconds on pc/laptop thats been in use for a few years.
Get machines that have been running XP for 3-5 years and run the tests.
Alert a moderator
tech89
November 30th 2009
20. It would be a bad decision to buy XP seeing as Microsoft is very soon about to stop updates for XP (that includes security updates).
Vista has the advantage over windows 7 in that its been around longer and so the glitches and bugs have been fixed.
Windows 7 needs a little while to fix any remaining bugs and glitches, but will win more users than vista probably.
Can microsoft publish its grand scheme of things in the future? So I can know when to buy a laptop before its OS is outdated in less than a year.
I'm a little disappointed in that less than a year ago I bought a new laptop with vista (vista was still relatively new)and less than year later another new OS is released. It took microsoft 6 years until vista was released but then less than a year or two windows 7 is brought out, what the hell?. I won't be upgrading to windows 7 purely for the reason I got vista and until windows 8 is out in in 2012 I'll save money for that.
Alert a moderator
kf160k160
November 6th 2009
19. "But don't trust me, check it out your self. Have a nice new FAILUR OS."
For this fellow who said this such thing is primitive and narrow minded. We to need see big picture here. In future, soon, windows XP gradually no longer will support for most software and hardware(if not mistaken, i read in article, XP will be stop update in 2014). I admit that windows XP does simple to use than others due it is matured. But we can not win after market industries mindset, they always greed for better features and they keep demand and create more "powerful" stuff. I can predict that mostly next generation software and hardware will put XP in nightmare (it's just matter of time).
What I am saying is, no matter what, when it is time, we need to change for future coming. For example, for those stubborn said windows 7 is never good, you cannot do anything, your say will not change the world. Eventually you put yourself in agony.
So for now, still early to judging and decide, but soon windows 7 will take over like XP taken over older windows(windows 95, ME and etc)
Alert a moderator
cnacoons
November 4th 2009
18. I have a Windows 7 HP HDX Laptop, and a HP Mini Netbook. MY HDX has 6GB or Ram, and the Netbook has 2GB! You would expect 3x faster performance on the HDX with windows 7, and 6GB of ram right? NOT! My Netbbok was only 2 seconds behind the new windows 7 Unit, with all that memory! They both connect to internet at same speed, or no difference I could detect with my human eye. Apps did open 3 seconds faster on windows 7. However considering the XP has been around since 2001, and 7 is new and offers such small difference, I am installing XP on the HDX now. I am not impressed enough with 7. I think its a paint job OS, not a real change, more bloat, and less boat. Stay true to XP until 7 has time to prove itself. Just my observation. Plus my netbook cost 1/3 as much! Go XP!
Alert a moderator
griffith
October 29th 2009
17. @ salehyassin
"After one month of using Windows 7, the computer started to slow down and became wrost than fista"
Really? Maybe it's called a virus... I've used 7 since it came out, it has been nothing but Awesome... A matter of fact, I am running it in a virtual machine right now, and it's running like a charm. And I LIKED Vista. Maybe you should think about what your saying before you say it, because you're the only person who I've seen who hasn't liked Windows 7 so far.
Alert a moderator
smelly_feet
October 23rd 2009
16. I bet that the vista benchmarks would improve to comparable levels to xp/win7 if 3-3.5 gb ram was used. In my vista box that increasing the ram from 2gb to 3.5 made a world of difference.
Alert a moderator
lovlid
October 21st 2009
15. Also @ salhyassin.
"But don't trust me, check it out your self. Have a nice new FAILUR OS."
Read, weep, and please, come back when you know what you are talking about.
http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/official-windows-7-is-bigger-than-harry-potter-643828
Alert a moderator
healeydave
October 21st 2009
14. Does a new PC with WIN 7 pre-installed qualify the customer to install WIN XP instead and be licensed to do so?
Alert a moderator
lovlid
October 19th 2009
13. @ salehyassin.
"But don't trust me, check it out your self."
Why would we trust someone with the grammar of a 5 year old, and the biased opinion of an utter, utter simpleton?
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments