Don't bother with ancient relics, install Windows 8.1 64 bit and enjoy.
Not only will it work 5x faster than XP, but it is also secure and has absolutely maximum stability and as well best compatibility with older applications than any other newer windows system. It boots in 7 seconds on my WD6400AAKS hard drive.

If your concern is system speed and security dont experiment. Windows 8.1 has everything covered. I am using it for almost 2 years for now. Not a single error/crash occurred. If you ask me, best system Micro$oft ever made.

[Edit]

Also a little pattern I noticed that pretty much never failed so far 🤣
Windows XP - NT 2600
Windows 7 - NT7600
Windows 8.1 - NT9600

All NT ending in 600 was the most costumer pleasing 😀

I would go with Windows 7.

What exactly is the advantage of using Windows 7 over XP-64? It just seems like a downgrade to me in every possible way, except for DX11 support. I don't like how they "fixed" things that didn't need fixing, especially the audio/midi stack. That's the biggest gripe I have with Vista/7/8.

I'm reading up a bit on virtual machines and apparently there's something called Xen that allows to run multiple operating systems on the same hardware through VT-d cpu extensions. Anyone has any experience with that? It looks like a great alternative to dual-booting.

As far as contemporary Nvidia drivers go, I found that some features simply don't work under XP despite being present, while they work fine in 7. There are probably similar cases for other hardware, and 7 is also better suited for SSDs.

jwt27 wrote:

What exactly is the advantage of using Windows 7 over XP-64?

Efficient use of your mountains of RAM, efficient multi-core thread scheduler, asynchronous disk IO (so your system doesn't freeze when you put a DVD in, for example), will receive security and bugfix patches beyond April this year, the list goes on.

Windows XP x64 came out in 2005, it's a total dog.

The virtualisation technology means you can run other operating systems on simulated hardware, but with access to the main operating systems files if you wish, and to certain "real" hardware.

With 7 you could download MS Virtual PC which gave you XP. But you can also use Virtualbox, VMware and others.

I use VMs for Linux and unix installs and XP - it completely removes the headaches of driver issues for Linux/unix as far as I have found. But it's probably not so good for gaming although you can rn a game server in say Linux in a VM and connect to it from your main 7 install or whatever.

For a newish desktop PC I would go with 7 because it does all I need. I do use 8.1 on a laptop but without a touch screen I would hate it with a vengeance. WITH a touchscreen however, it ends up with a dual personality which I've got used to - on the one hand tablet-style time-wasting tile-based shenanigans [ebay, facebook, twitter etc], then flip into classic desktop mode when you need to get some work done. Partly because most "serious" stuff I'm interested in only runs on the classic desktop anyway. But I always find it useful to have separate environments for different activities [actually another plus for VMs too].

I had no major issues going 7 x64 except for a certain couple of games not working at all, but the jump from XP64 is more than beneficial. I don't consider it as a 'downgrade' OS, though its handling of accellerated audio leaves little to be desired...

Windows 8.1 is better at core than Windows 7. Plus it boots faster and operates fast over time. I experienced major slowdowns in windows 7, as opposed to windows 8.1.
As for MIDI i have no idea, i use my other PCs for MIDI.

Pros and Cons for each Windows choice at this moment:

Windows XP x32
Pros: Will be able to run 16-bit Windows apps natively. (May need to download additional drivers first.)
Cons: No good reason to have more than 2 GB of RAM, some modern games and software will choke as a result, slower than Windows 7, can't run x64 software.

Windows XP x64
Pros: ...none that I can think of.
Cons: Lackluster support, both first and third party.

Windows 7 x64
Pros: Most compatible with 32-bit/64-bit software that's out there, best driver support.
Cons: Slower than Windows 8, hardest Windows OS to fix when things go wrong.

Windows 8 (8.1) x64
Pros: Fastest Windows OS yet, will stay supported by Microsoft the longest at this point since it's the newest.
Cons: Poor hardware accelerated graphics for Direct3D 8 or less, worst (though not terrible) compatibility with non-Win8 software, fewer appearance customization features.

Everything else is a matter of preference. I find the Start Screen in Windows 8 a LOT easier to use than the Start Menu ever was, at least, once you've got it properly customized, but I really wish the pre DX9 support was better. Most Direct3D 8 stuff will run windowed OK, but will run poorly full-screen. Direct3D 7 or earlier is pretty much hit or miss (mostly miss) as to whether it will run well, let alone even run at all. :P

If you're going to be developing software though, I'd go with Windows 8 simply because it's easier to code for backwards compatibility than it is to code for forwards compatibility. :P

I will go for Windows 7.

With what did you experience compatibility problems in Windows 8.1?
All major applications i used on windows 98 work with out flaw on windows 8.1. Especially world craft (hammer editor) that freezes like crazy on ATi rage on my windows 98 machine.
16bit apps would not work at all on any of my windows XP installs trough time i used it.

With what did you experience slowdowns in Windows 7?

You can't go wrong with Windows 7. 😎

Exactly what will you be doing with your system that requires such a beast of a processor?

Also, have you included an SSD? The Crucial M500 series seems to be the better choice at the moment. Depending on how much space you need for your OS and programs, you could get a 120GiB or 240GiB version. Anything bigger for an SSD is overkill at this moment.

Thanks for all your replies and advice so far. I guess Windows 7 is the best and easiest option for me then, so I'll order that too. I absolutely refuse to run Windows 8 because of Microsoft's stupid design decisions and how they arrogantly ignored all their customer's feedback on it. I dislike Windows Vista/7 for the same reason, but to a lesser extent.

Though I'd rather move away from Windows entirely and use an open-source alternative, and I've been meaning to do that for a very long time. I tried doing so before, but certain programs and virtually every game kept pulling me back to Windows. Since I'll have to start from again scratch on this new machine I figured this would be the perfect opportunity for another attempt. Partition tables are set-and-forget for me, once it's set up I'd rather not touch it ever again, so if I am to try this I'll need to have a good plan ready beforehand. It seems Linux has some really fancy ways of dealing with SSDs too, complicating things even further.

The idea of running multiple systems on the same hardware still seems very intriguing to me and is something I really want to look into. And with modern cpu extensions, it seems not impossible... just horrendously complicated.

I think I'll go with a dual-boot setup at first, with both Windows 7 and Debian, and remove either one of them once I've decided what to use as primary OS.

NitroX infinity wrote:

Exactly what will you be doing with your system that requires such a beast of a processor?

Also, have you included an SSD? The Crucial M500 series seems to be the better choice at the moment. Depending on how much space you need for your OS and programs, you could get a 120GiB or 240GiB version. Anything bigger for an SSD is overkill at this moment.

Don't know yet, but I figured getting an overkill cpu might get me doing things I would otherwise be unable to. In any case I want it to be future-proof and well, you can never have too much cpu horsepower, right? 🤣

I did include an SSD but forgot to list it in the first post. I picked a Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, these are some of the fastest SSDs according to hardware.info.

leileilol wrote:

With what did you experience slowdowns in Windows 7?

I never install nothing i wont use on my system, same was with 7. But over time the windows folder grew to 30GB and up, boot time extended to 1 minute some times and more, application start up time noticeably increased, performance of some applications dropped.
I latter scanned my entire hard drive at my friends place with Kaspersky pure 3 and anti maleware tools. No maleware/viruses were found (Microsoft security essentials doing its job) nor was the disk fragmented/damaged/etc.

Windows simply started choking on its own.

jwt27 wrote:

Thanks for all your replies and advice so far. I guess Windows 7 is the best and easiest option for me then, so I'll order that too. I absolutely refuse to run Windows 8 because of Microsoft's stupid design decisions and how they arrogantly ignored all their customer's feedback on it. I dislike Windows Vista/7 for the same reason, but to a lesser extent.

Thats a very common mistake many people make. It is extremely easy to get used to new start and altered shortcuts to system tools. Everything else is the same as windows 7. Plus the new start is much more neater and easier to use/organize.
Keep in mind that Windows 8.1 and Windows 8 differ in UI, where W8.1 is better.

Windows 8.1 still has the schizophrenic UI. Modern UI everywhere, folks! Windows Server 2012 has it too. 😵

Gemini000 wrote:

Pros and Cons for each Windows choice at this moment: Windows 7 x64 Pros: Most compatible with 32-bit/64-bit software that's out […]
Show full quote

Pros and Cons for each Windows choice at this moment:
Windows 7 x64
Pros: Most compatible with 32-bit/64-bit software that's out there, best driver support.
Cons: Slower than Windows 8, hardest Windows OS to fix when things go wrong.

Could you elaborate a little on this ? Is it specific for the 64bit version?
(haven't installed win7 yet, curious as to how much harder to fix things vs win8 or XP)

d1stortion wrote:

I would go with Windows 7.

Me too