http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspxThanks for the comments on the last post, here's part 2 of roughly 5. We think most applications will run as fast or faster on Windows Vista, but there are some changes we want to keep an eye on. Please be on the lookout for: Overall GDI drawing performanceen-USCommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#576292Fri, 14 Apr 2006 10:41:23 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:576292RobertSorry for commenting so late, I just found your nice blog. <br> <br>I have two related questions: <br> <br>1. In earlier versions of Windows, applications only needed to draw the visible part of their windows, which enhances performance for large windows that are only partially visible. Will this be changed with Windows Vista? <br> <br>2. I wrote an application that sometimes creates huge top level windows (e.g. 50000x50000 pixels) to reflect the zoom level selected by the user. These windows can hardly be buffered in memory. Will such windows still work in Windows Vista?http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#577253Mon, 17 Apr 2006 01:34:29 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:577253PhaeronHow much has the GDI software implementation been updated? StretchBlt() was always very slow when emulated by GDI in earlier versions of Windows, but it seems to have improved by an order of magnitude in Vista. <br> <br>http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#577950Tue, 18 Apr 2006 05:32:51 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:577950Nick KramerPhaeron -- That's interesting, we haven't intentionally done anything to StretchBlt() to make it faster, I guess it could be something we changed for unrelated reasons. &nbsp;We've optimized some of the clipping logic, so if your StretchBlt wasn't actually getting displayed, that might be it. &nbsp;Another possibility is that because the bitmap is now completely in main memory rather than video memory, there's less bus traffic.http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#577955Tue, 18 Apr 2006 05:44:03 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:577955Nick KramerRobert -- Thanks for the feedback. <br> <br>1. You should paint the region that Windows asks you to paint (GetUpdateRect et al). &nbsp;In earlier versions of Windows, you'll only be asked for parts of the window that are visible on the screen, but in Windows Vista we'll ask for the entire application. &nbsp;(That also means it's not usually worth doing a lot of work in your WM_PAINT to decide which parts of the hwnd need painting and which don't) <br> <br>2. I don't know. &nbsp;We handle windows that are bigger than the video card's maximum texture size, but we haven't done much testing at 50,000x50,000 pixels... <br>http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#582367Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:17:17 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:582367Nick on Windows Presentation Foundation (Avalon)This content will make it into the master compatibility document in the next month or so, but in the...http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#6631765Sat, 01 Dec 2007 19:09:35 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:6631765 Tim Anderson’s ITWriting - Tech writing blog » Vista vs XP performance: some informal tests <p>PingBack from <a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=430">http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?p=430</a></p> http://blogs.msdn.com/nickkramer/archive/2006/04/07/571162.aspx#6952451Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:12:41 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:6952451TheUndeadable entwickelt<p>Begonnen hat das neue Jahr 'suboptimal'. Eigentlich sollte die Speed-Runde II nach einer 24st&amp;#252;ndigen Pause p&amp;#252;nktlich um 18 Uhr fortgef&amp;#252;hrt werden, nur leider hatte ich den Termin verschlafen. Gestartet wurde das Spiel dann um 19 Uhr, aller</p>