Windows 7 Upgrade Versus Clean Install

[johnrr6]

I found this article while contemplating whether to upgrade in place my Vista 64 Ultimate main workstation, or bite the bullet and do a clean install. If you are like me----and your main workstation is customized with a ton of software that took you days to "get right". Then a "clean install" is an option that means an entire weekend to get back to operating efficiency. And that's after hours of additional fussing with this or that little issue as you reinstall applications and settings for each. I frankly don't look forward to a clean install. But there may be a viable alternative! Contrary to popular belief----a Windows 7 upgrade in place does NOT alter existing system files. MIcrosoft began (in Vista) the technique of imaging a brand new operating system onto an upgraded computer, so you actually start with a "clean" operating system even though you have done an "Upgrade". This technique was highly successful in Vista and performance differences between a "clean install" and and "upgraded install" were absolutley minimal as this ExtremeTech article demonstrates: Vista Performance Shootout: Upgrade Vs. Clean Installation - OS, Software & Networking by ExtremeTech

Does the same technique work for Windows 7??? Would the common user be better off to just upgrade in place with minimum performace differences in the end?? The article is not conclusive----but gives you pause for thought. There seems to be a decent sized performance gain for a "clean install" but addmittedly, the testers used a Vista workstation that was totally bogged down with junk. At the end of the article they do add that they believed if you stated with an OS that was running well, had been maintained and updated-----with normal maintenance, then you would probably notice NO difference in performance if you did an upgrade in place (which is exactly what the ExtremeTech article concluded with the Vista "upgrade in place". Food for thought as each of us will have to choose as we move forward into Microsoft's next OS.

Read the full article from TuneUp Blog here: Windows 7 Performance Check: Upgrade Install vs. Clean Install » TuneUp Blog about Windows

[CrowdAds]

[Belgareon]

I went with the upgrade option from vista 32 -> Windows 7 32-bit. As you pointed out, making a brand new install takes time and makes you have to deal with stuff you don't really want to deal with, such as optimizing programs, installing all drivers all over etc. I thought the upgrade went really smoothly and I wouldn't have done it differently today. Very easy to install and no problems at all. I really didn't notice any performance loss at all. You could always make an upgrade and see how it works out, if you for some reason wouldnt be satisfied with it, you can always make a new "clean" install.

good luck!

[johnrr6]

Thanks Belgareon----that is exactly my plan----if I'm not happy well shucks----I'll just wipe the thing and start over----nothing lost.....

and possibly a TON of time gained!

[fvbounty]

The only thing I heard about doing a in place upgrade it took many, many hours to do it, can't remember the article, I'll try and find it!

[Belgareon]

Originally Posted by fvbounty

The only thing I heard about doing a in place upgrade it took many, many hours to do it, can't remember the article, I'll try and find it!

Yes! That is true. It took a few hours to complete, that was a little bit annoying, however the upgrade needs very little attention from the user. Click "next" a couple of times in the beginning of the upgrade process and the computer does the rest. So while upgrading you can go make dinner, eat it and then watch a TV-show or something. Thing is, you don't have to be at the computer all the time while doing this.