At home, I have a QaudCore CPU with 3 GB ram, 2 NVIDIA 7950GT's, and a crap ton of hdd space. I installed VISTA ULTIMATE (32, and 64 alternatively), and it seemed that the system ran sluggish, so i retro fitted it back to 32bit xp pro. I need to run VISTA so i can stay up to date with clients, so i installed 32bit Vista on my macbook pro, and it runs fine, with very little hiccups. Has anyone else noticed VISTA running better on Laptops, rather than desktops?

Thats is strange how vista run better on laptops. I mean vista needs 1 whole gig of ram, yet you can get 4 in a desktop. Im going to have to experiment with this.

I have noticed that it runs quicker on laptops.

However on my home system Vista runs quicker and smoother then xp as i have both Operating systems on dual boot since i have alot of software that will not work with xp.

What you're looking at is the benefit of properly optimised drivers as the result of using bootcamp. The same can't be said of other makes of laptops.

Hmm... I'll have to see my friend about this as he has Vista on his laptop.

If you've got a more powerful laptop, it'll run better on the laptop. If you've got a more powerful desktop, it'll run better on the desktop.

If you observe anything else, it's PEBKAC.

WaruiKoohii

If you've got a more powerful laptop, it'll run better on the laptop. If you've got a more powerful desktop, it'll run better on the desktop.

If you observe anything else, it's PEBKAC.

So there's no possible way a less powerful machine could perform better due to having properly optimised drivers?

For example the ATi HD2600XT can outperform the Nvidia 8800GT for various tasks running under OS X 10.5.2 due to poorly optimised Nvidia drivers.

Yes and no.

The system as a whole will not be faster, because processor drivers and chipset drivers are fairly universal. Laptops are just miniaturized PC's using (generally) more power efficient parts. This also means that laptop parts don't run quite as fast.

Drivers are also pretty much universal between laptops and desktops. The laptop components are almost always just more power efficient versions of their desktop counterparts, so the drivers work for both.

Therefore, a laptop won't be faster because it's a laptop. If the less powerful laptop is faster than the more powerful desktop, then it's user error, or a hardware malfunction. User error could be anything from a poorly chosen software load, to missing or old drivers.

Logically speaking, laptops would not run vista better than a desktop because it doesn't have the components that are greater than a desktop. Desktop can run quad cores and what not while laptops can run at best a duo (i don't know about the centrino). Desktop can bring in 8 gb of memory while a laptop only 4 gb (all i have seen). Finally the videocards on a laptop is not up to par with videocards on a desktop. So logically speaking... desktops should run vista better than a laptop.

This is said when both are using the same configurations though. My friend has tweaked his laptop a bit so that he can run vista. It runs very smoothly.

If you ever want to remount vista back on your desktop... you can try killing some of the beginning processes that are not needed. Most computers bought from places like Dell, HP, and whatever else usually installs random stuff on the computers they sell. Remove the programs by uninstalling or just make sure they don't turn on during start-up and then it should be good.

Only my opinion :D LOLOLOLOLOL ^^

Desktops vs Laptops...
1. Vista runs smoothly with more RAM so a minimum 2GB is fine.
2. Try updating your drivers and Vista.
3. Form your built system i really dont think there is any problem for you running Vista smoothly. So try update, scan and defrag. your HDD and may also check your motherboard BIOS updates (some BIOS updates do increase performance and patch Vista bugs)

As for laptops
Intel Core 2 T9300
2 GB DDR2 RAM
Geforce 8600 GT
320 GB HDD

This is my laptop spec. and its a customize DELL XPS 1530.
Vista runs smoothly in this laptop.

Well, I can't compare too well, but both my laptop and desktop PC run on Vista. Difference is, my laptop has 2GB of RAM and my PC only has 1. PC is laggy. Same version of vista. Though, you do need at least 1GB of RAM to run vista anyway. [Unless its Vista Basic, in which case, you only need 512] I would rather have my XP media edition back, though.

It cant be

Either your laptop is just optimized better or your desktop is faulty.

There should be no way (especially with that kind of specs on your desktop) that a laptop would run vista faster.

Try and tweak some stuff on your desktop, it could help you a lot

Well it depends on how you use your laptop...if you often use it on batterie vista is not the right choice

Vista, while touted as having improved power management capabilities that would make it easier for users to extend battery life, isn't to some living up to that promise. The main culprit appears to be the Aero Glass interface, a spiffy new user interface that makes Vista more pleasing to the eye with transparent windows and animated transitions when moving from one application to another.

When Aero is turned off, battery life is equal to or better than Windows XP systems. But with it turned on, battery life suffers compared with Windows XP.

Microsoft made some important changes in Vista that do improve some aspects of battery life, such as smarter hibernation modes that override applications that want to keep running, and simpler options for choosing a power management setting. But laptop users who spent extra money on powerful laptops to handle the graphics requirements of Vista and the Aero interface are forced to run the aesthetic equivalent of Vista Basic, the low-cost version of Vista, if they care about battery life.

I use my laptop as desktop pc and i kind of like vista...so if you have no problems with your batteries i would go for vista

I cant compare well too.. but in my experience a well tuned instalation of vista runs well in a pc with enought RAM and CPU, its true that aero eat up you battery life, cause 3d efeccts use mor chipset power, thats means a higher energy drain to the battery, I use a vista ultimate in my desk pc, and runs well, but i only have 1.5 gb in RAM, but i configure it very tough, removing background runing programs of windows that i never will use xD

Well from my experience Vista runs fine on anything as long as you have good hardware.

For instance, my desktop run is it just fine and dandy:
AMD Atlhon64 x2 4600+ | 2gb PC-3200 ram | 8800gts 320mb

On my laptop it also runs fine, not as fast as the desktop, but quite fast anyways:
Intel Core 2 Duo T5550 a 1.83Ghz | 2GB DDR2 PC-5200 | Ati chipset

But when I tried it on a laptop with only 1gb ram, well that was painful. So from what I have experienced vista can run just fine on anything and speed, well depends on the hardware, but I've haven't seen a laptop that runs vista faster than a desktop yet. Just don't try to run vista on just 1gb ram unless you want a slow and painful experience.