Mistakes were made when upgrading my graphics card on my Windows 8 gaming PC and now I think the only fix is re-installing windows. I think i'm going to downgrade to windows 7. After using 8 for months, I kind of miss the look of Win7 and the normal start menu.

Are there any gaming specific reason to stick with Windows 8? Is there any kind of PC Win8 exclusive titles or Directx stuff that I really need?

NOPE.

Wasn't DirectX 11.1 only for Windows 8? Yeah, you'll be missing out on all of the features that includes and all the games that support them.

It doesn't matter either way.

You won't be able to play such amazing exclusives as... Skulls of the Shogun?

In other words, no, right now there is no need to go with Windows 8 for games.

i can't think of any reason to stay with 8.

Or Windows in general. OS X all the way.

games.

He's kidding duder!

well, now i feel silly.

It uses less system resources than Windows 7? Nah, Windows 8 is lame either way. :P

Downgrade isn't really the best word to use, but I get what you're saying. :p

Windows 8 + Classic Shell > Windows 7. There is absolutely no reason to go back to Win7 when Win8 is superior in every way except for the UI, which can be changed back (and made even more customizable) with Classic Shell. Those saying otherwise are misinforming.

@andorski:Superior in every way? Would you mind giving some evidence to support your statement please? (Not trying to be confrontational btw, I'm just curious what the thought is behind it, even though I disagree.)

It's hard for me to post sources since I'm on my iPad, but a quick Google search will shows that Windows 8 is less resource intensive, boots up faster, and has an improved file browser and file transfer system. The OS integrates Microsoft Security Essentials into Defender for better security management, and Win8 will of course be supported later than Win7. Windows 8 is basically an extremely robust SP update for Windows 7 with the Metro UI slapped on top of it. I wouldn't recommend those currently using Win7 to pay to upgrade, but if you are already on the Win8 platform then you might as well stay in it and reap the benefit of its improvements. Also, despite Metro's obvious implications of Microsoft trying to close down their OS ecosystem, Windows 8 is still as open as prior releases. Classic Shell is just one way to change the desktop UI back to the way you want it. Other programs like Start8 can do the same thing.

@mellotronrules: lol I dunno, I mean, I'm pretty sure he's kidding.

Not kidding. More and more games have OS X versions...I play WoW, Guild Wars 2, League of Legends and The Sims 3 on my Mac, and all Valve games have Mac versions. More and more games are available for Mac on Steam as well.

I also run Windows 8 via BootCamp to run Windows games on occasion, but I run into a lot of problems which I imagine are caused by Windows 8. I love Windows 8, the UI is much better than any other version, but it doesn't always work right.

I would imagine DirectX 12 will come with the next xbox, and it will probably be windows 8 exclusive.

Try this, http://www.stardock.com/products/start8/index.asp it has a free trial and it's pretty cheap if you decide you like it.

@jdh5153 said:

So like, I know you're a dummy and all, but anyone serious about gaming on a computermachine is going to use a PC. Macs are totally fine (I use 'em) but they ain't for games.

It doesn't seem like there is a significant reason to be on windows 8 at the moment.

@mellotronrules said:

I can't think of any reason to go from Windows 7 to 8 or to use 8 at all.

Windows 8 Desktop is OK, I kinda like it.. runs faster and looks better IMO, it also seems to be very robust and stable ya know for a WinOS.

The metro side of things is pretty darn stupid thou, single window, no option to resize or kill aps, menus are often lame and hidden, its overal a very patronising, emasculating and limited core design... I don't want to hate on microsoft, but if this is their vision of a "touch" future, they really really need more competent designers.

Sorry about my little rant, going back to topic: Gaming wise, you supposedly have better performance with W8 because of the better/modern W8 kernel (W7 Kernel is a improved version of vista... yikes). If true the performance is so minimal I don't think anyone would notice.

i don't think there's any question that 8 runs snappier than 7- but for the current price tag, and all the tomfoolery associated with the metro interface (i actually like the aesthetic, but have no need for it), i'm not motivated to upgrade in the slightest.

tl;dr- stay where you are if you aren't having issues. if on 7, great. if on 8, great. if 8 is giving you problems, move back to 7. if 7 is giving you problems, 8 won't help you.

If you have both, go with what you want.

Windows 8 is significantly more efficient, so if you are low on RAM, I'd honestly stick with 8. If you really want a start menu, A) you're silly, and B) it's super easy to get it back in Windows 8.

I don't know why you'd go back if you have Windows 8. It runs better, and if your only problem is the lack of the start menu, stick with 8. When the next DirectX comes out, it will be Windows 8 exclusive, so just stay with 8, get used to it, and don't put yourself in a position where you need to upgrade again just to get access to a more efficient, better looking DirectX.

But, it's not a huge difference unless you're running 4GB or less of RAM. Still... Windows 8 is fine, and the only possible issue you can have with it is the start menu not being there. Which again, is silly. Use the taskbar for applications you use regularly, use Start Search for those you don't, and use the bottom left corner click to get to the system level stuff like Control Panel. Honestly, when you figure out how to use Windows 7/8 without the start menu, your life gets better for it.

If you want a start menu, just look at this.

It's a significantly better OS. More efficient, much better Explorer, a lot of good stuff especially for those who go below the surface layer.

The performance is notable on some machines, especially those with less RAM. Windows 8 uses significantly less RAM than Windows 7. And I've definitely noticed an increase in how snappy the system feels, that kind of stuff is a bit less noticeable in a game because you need much bigger improvements to care usually. But if you're running low on memory, you'll probably notice in games that use a lot of your memory.

@mordeaniischaos said:

I'm not being a jerk I'm actually curious here, what kind of good stuff? I'm not sure what you mean by efficient, and how is the Win8 explorer better?

@mordeaniischaos: I see, The snapiness and better driver support its definitely the best thing W8 has going on, at least for me so far. My system has 16gb RAM thou, once in game I see no difference whatsoever with W7.

@donpixel: Yeah, I have a very high end PC, so I don't see much benefit form that added efficiency. I really like the feature set though.

I red an article, I'm not sure if it was Tom's Hardware about the improvements on the new W8 kernel, it has to do with better management of memory and MS getting rid of a bunch of inefficient legacy code, so basically the W8 kernel is better for current/modern system architecture x86 64bit.

Its a shame then they put the stoopid metro interface over it, cus that indeed sucks.

@officegamer: I mean it takes fewer resources away from other stuff. Especially memory. It is also a more complete 64Bit OS. It makes use of modern hardware a bit better, basically.

As for the explorer stuff, it's a lot of stuff. I'm not just a gamer, I do a lot with my PC. Namely a lot of Photoshop/video editing/Blender work. So I have a lot of files to work with and move a lot of shit around, etc. Windows 8 does a much better job handling the movement of files, especially when there are duplicates and the like involved.

And there's the ribbon, which some people hate, but as someone who works with a lot of different kinds of files, it's nice having everything laid out for me, especially as I can tailor it to my needs.

And it's generally much quicker. Search in particular is better, in my experience.

The Task Manager is also a hell of a lot better. A lot of good performance data that's useful for finding troublesome background apps and the like.

Then there's the multimonitor support, which is oh so much better than past Windows implementations.

It's a lot of small things that add up.

Of course, at the moment I would not advise anyone to purchase it (at least no where near full price) unless they absolutely require a new OS. Windows 7 costs about the same amount (I think more, even with the raise in price that 8 saw recently), so you're not going to save money going to that instead. And Windows 8 is essentially an extra polished and refined and snappier Windows 7. The Metro stuff isn't as bad as people say, and is not at all a required feature for anyone. Anyone who says you can'd avoid it is lying. If you don't want it, don't use it. I don't mind it because it has benefits like Notifications on my Calendar/Mail and even Giant Bomb thanks to the nice app we have on the Metro store. That stuff is designed for platforms other than the PC, so I generally avoid it except for a few useful bits.

If you're looking to buy an OS, it should be Windows 8. Anyone who still stands stubbornly in the "Windows 8 is the devil" crowd is just being a dumb ass. It's better in pretty much every way, and losing the Start Menu is the only thing anyone should give a damn about. And even that, they shouldn't give a damn about because the Start Menu has always been a unnecessary evil, not an awesome feature. Except when it debuted. I'm glad it's gone. Means I can fit one more thing on my taskbar.

So you based your 'opinion' on what then? If you've used Windows 8 you'd already have known these things. Windows 8 is a more refined version of 7, with a separate UI you can completely ignore except for the 0.5 seconds it takes you to hit the Windows key the first time you log in.

My PC now boots in less than 2 seconds (after BIOS, which has nothing to do with Windows anyway, obv), it has more helpful keyboard shortcuts, the task manager is way more detailed and useful, it uses less resources, MSE is built in so it's secure. That's not all of the things, but that's all I think of off the top of my head.

@donpixel: The Metro interface is a separate thing. And it's neither stupid, nor does it "suck." We may not have use for it, but saying something is dumb or bad or what have you just because it's not for you is kind of silly. On the right platform or in the right hands, it's actually pretty cool. With more support, it'd be a really good platform. And it's not over anything, it's to the side of the desktop experience. My experience hasn't really changed in any major way since Windows 7, just improved with a lot of smaller feature upgrades and additions.

Acting like that idiot who told his pops to pretend like Windows 8 is an impossible maze full of dark and terrible corners and shitty design in that dumb video isn't going to get ya anywhere. It's fine. It may not be for you, but it's not flawed. Perfect? No, not that either. But it's pretty good at what it does. And the rest of what we want is still there.

As I said W8 desktop is good, I have no problems with it props to MS for finally fixing their flagship product. About Metro I'm not complaining about its performance, I'm complaining about its core design. When you speak about design is a matter of opinion, having used a W8 phone for a month, fooled around with a friend Surface, and tested several Metro Aps on my desktop. Personally: I JUST DONT LIKE METRO, its bad even in touch, it is horrible with mouse/keyboard.

Make your pick: iOS, Android, Unbuntu heck even what I saw of Firefox OS seems way better than Windows Touch/Metro in my opinion. Its not just me, lots of people found Metro as I said: Limited, Patronising, Emasculating, and just an overall poor designed OS. Metro as it is right now seems more like a pointless exercise in typography and funky colours than the foundation for a solid OS, therefore most metro apps suck, because the dev guidelines and core design philosophy behind metro are just bad.

Numbers can speak for me too, W8 has a lower rate of adoption than Vista for god sake, Is this schizophrenic half ass design what's suppose to save the PC? good job MS. Windows RT isn't doing great either, as it is right now there are more OEMs announcing firefox devices than Windows RT, yes.. FIREFOX.

@donpixel: I could care less how many units it moves. W8 isn't selling because MS doesn't understand A) pricing and B) they were screwed by a bunch of assholes on the internet telling everyone that it's a piece of shit because they're afraid of not having a start menu.

I have a WP7 phone, had it for months, and I still like it a lot. I think the way the OS is structured is way better than iOS (haven't used Android much, but know until very recently, it's been an OS of compromises, though probably ones I'd be happy with). It's not perfect, but I really like the Metro style of things. It's simple, it's to the point, and that's good. Because when I go to something like a phone, I don't need a computer. I just want a few features, easy access to my data and networks, and that's about it. Metro is good for that stuff. No one claimed it would be complex or sophisticated. It's not designed for that, that's why it's the side feature. It's the extra thing to use on the side.

The W8 version of Metro stuff isn't good enough to be an OS on it's own, so I think Windows RT or whatever is dumb. But only because WP7/8 are better at doing the same thing.

Again, you're just saying it doesn't do what you want it to do. That doesn't make it shitty, that makes it limited. Which no shit, why would they have two full environments on one OS? The Metro stuff is basically rainmeter for me. I can check quick data in a glance, get access to basic functionality, and be notified of things I want to be notified about.

It's limited. Saying it's emasculating is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I'm sorry, but it somehow makes you feel like frail child, or less of a man? What kind of life are you leading that the extra side thing you can bring up to glance at your emails and the news much like you'd glace at the lock screen of a smart phone makes you feel like less of a person.

I totally get it not being useful to you, and I get you not liking it. However, saying it's shitty just because you don't like it is as shitty as you think Metro is. You clearly expect way more out of it than makes sense. And I'm glad it's just a very simple thing, otherwise it'd be overwhelming and needlessly complex.

@mordeaniischaos: Lets not be weird there is no need to fight because of this, free country. Just get the Mobil OS that suits your needs and taste.

Well, that's the only reason I put up with Windows on my PC. If OS X was licensable for third party hardware (without going the Hackintosh route, which I may actually just do one day) and could actually run most/all modern games, I'd drop Windows in an instant and never look back. OS X (and even Linux in some respects) is a far superior OS in terms of actual human/machine interface. Text rendering is a great example and very indicative of the larger general differences between the OSs. Text and readability is complete shit on Windows (7 at least, maybe it's better with 8) and OS X always looks nice and clean and extremely readable. Small example, sure, but it's a part of the overall philosophy differences. Windows is like McDonald's and OS X is actually nice to use (although I'm kind of crazy and never moved past Snow Leopard, as I don't like the changes they made Lion onward.)

TL;DR: OS X is a superior OS, but I put up with Windows cuz gamez.

I think the only reason I never went hackintosh is games, personally.

Stick with 7, but if you're buying an OS, get 8.