| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Speed Test: Windows 7 May Not Be Much Faster Than Vista | |
|
||
| Time: 15:51 EST/20:51 GMT | News Source: PC World | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Improving performance is one of Microsoft's design goals with Windows 7, and many early reviewers (including ours) have said that the new OS seems peppier than Vista. But tests of the Windows 7 Release Candidate in our PC World Test Center found that while Windows 7 was slightly faster on our WorldBench 6 suite, the differences may be barely noticeable to users. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:32:23 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 5/7/2009 6:07:54 PM |
|
The implication here is that Vista is so slow. I just don't find that to be the case on standard hardware for the past couple years (modern CPU, 2 GB RAM or more). Look at the benchmarks taken at all but the earliest days of Vista (their own link as "proof" points to an article written in Dec. 2006), and you'll see that it performs well against XP. And as an aside--it was NOT SP1 that "cured" Vista's early performance differences in the benchmarks. There were a couple of important patches--particularly on the graphics side--that made a large difference in benchmarks, and those were PRE-SP1. The networking side was a bit different, but that is a more complicated story, depending on the host and the guest platform and many other variables. (ZIP file performance was horrible, though.)
Anyhow, I think the #1 performance difference between 7 and Vista is the WDDM 1.1 handling of video memory. This may show up rarely (if at all) in benchmarks, but given the number of apps and windows I run on a daily basis, I certainly appreciate it. |
| #2 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at 5/8/2009 9:19:44 AM |
|
bluvg, have you tested the latest drivers from Nvidia and ATi on their various cards and similarly, with chipset and other drivers designed for 7? - ASUS has published early drivers specific to the new OS. <I'm assuming you're referring to task scheduling for GPUs and changes in 1.1?>
Have you looked at any of the subs under the high-level shading language. The high-level shading language [HLSL], has new subs that better support double-precision floating-point computations. Do you know of any ISV's that have early examples in use? I've not seen lick one in performance increases in 7 over Vista x64. I've not yet seen either HW manufacturers or ISV's leverage WDDM 1.1 (shoot, very few leveraged 1.0 until very recently). Vista even boots faster on many platforms until they are updated with new BIOS (especially ASUS P6T where high end GPU's are in use with > 3 GB RAM). Vista x64 users with decent systems (any Core system with 2 GB RAM) are not going to be much impressed with Windows 7. Not saying 7 is 'bad' - I am saying Vista x64 is that good and it is going to be a couple of years before either is fully leveraged and just as XP was the best thing that happened to Windows 2000, 7 will be the best thing that has happened to Vista. |
| #3 By 2960 (72.196.201.130) at 5/8/2009 9:47:54 AM |
|
Ok, back the truck up :)
"Vista even boots faster on many platforms until they are updated with new BIOS (especially ASUS P6T where high end GPU's are in use with > 3 GB RAM). " I have a P6T Deluxe, with 9GB or RAM, and an ATI HD4870. What am I missing here :) TL |
| #4 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at 5/8/2009 10:16:03 AM |
|
TL, do you have the P6T Deluxe, or V2 and what RAM are you running and in what config.
For the P6T Deluxe, run: P6T Deluxe 1504 BIOS For the P6T Deluxe V2, run: P6T Deluxe V2 0406 BIOS The above BIOS revs properly support i7 based systems with >3 GB RAM and high end GPUs. TL, onlly the V2 has specific Windows 7 support. You'll feel a significant difference where you are using select GPUs with tested RAM. Like 40% increases in performance in certain cases ;) Also, what RAM config are you using? I would most strongly consider 12 GB in 3 channel mode (Corsair has a certified 12 GB set for X58 boards and the P6T in particular - CORSAIR XMS3 12GB (6 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model HX3X12G1600C9 G - Retail Package ). Also carefully test the voltage being delivered by your PCI-e headers on whatever PSU you are using and ensure they conform to the GPU manufacturer's specs. Higher end Nvidia cards have an LED indicator that reflect proper/improper power. |
| #5 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 5/8/2009 10:38:18 AM |
| #2: no, not the GPU scheduling, but the memory handling--in particular, how memory utilization stays flat as the the number of open windows increases. |
| #6 By 3 (86.1.33.75) at 5/8/2009 2:33:38 PM |
|
Agree with lloyd here - I've noticed no difference in speed on my Vista SP2 64bit install compared to Windows 7 RC1 I did notice slower boot time - again I'll hold off views on it until the RTM comes out and some driver improvements come - but the nvidia drivers and ati drivers are far better right now than they ever were for the launch of vista. Windows 7 looks fine, but speed wise there is no difference, in some places it seemed a little slower and for me some parts were confusing which I didn't expect compared to Vista (Which I like a lot)
For the first time I have to say I won't be rushing to upgrade to Windows 7 when its out as when using it (albeit for a short time) I didn't see anything that would improve my windows experience. That isn't a criticism as I like Vista as I said, it's just I guess I expected a bit more, but I'm sure I'll be told it is all behind the scenes. I just find Vista SP2 excellent for my use |
| #7 By 2960 (72.196.201.130) at 5/9/2009 8:55:30 AM |
|
I'm running the latest BIOS from ASUS, and I do believe it is 1504.
The RAM is Corsair XMS3. 3X2GB and 3X1GB. Set up in proper triple-channel configuration. 9GB total (obviously) :) Card is an ATI HD4870. I have the V1 board. Normally it would piss me off to see a V2 board released just weeks after a purchase, but in the case of the P6T the V2 is what suffers the loss. It's just a de-contented V1 with no technical improvements that I can find. |
| #8 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at 5/9/2009 10:57:27 AM |
| TL, the P6T Deluxe 1504 BIOS became available 5th May, 2009. The V1 board supports SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) on I/O ports backward compatible with SATA I/II - so one may use SaS drives, which are both faster and more reliable than SATA I/II drives, but more costly. If one is not going to run SaS drives, the V2 board is recommended. |
| #9 By 2960 (72.196.201.130) at 5/10/2009 9:58:56 AM |
| Correct, which is why I called the V2 board a de-contented V1 board. Other than that there are no known differences. |
| #10 By 23275 (24.196.4.141) at 5/10/2009 12:41:13 PM |
|
#9, TL, it is more complex than that. For example, The V2 maxes out at twice as much memory as the V1 (24GB) and the V2 has additional power phase circuits.
There's been a lot of engineering discussion around the appearance of the V2 and ASUS appears to have released little information about it. We spent several weeks assessing the boards and running our own tests, which focus a lot of attention on power and power management - most especially with the unlocks provided to the 920 and 940 close to their release and specific memory on and off the QVL. Finally, specific Windows 7 drivers and software have been published for the V2 and they do matter. Pushing a 7 box to 7.9 is very hard at this stage of development, but a goal just the same. |
| #11 By 446100 (212.95.54.179) at 12/24/2010 12:31:24 AM |
|
<a href=http://www.box.net/shared/9hgo7ub0yl>
buy ativan online no prescription </a> , <a href=http://www.box.net/shared/bf2gzd2o4c> buy celebrex generic </a> |
| #12 By 451272 (212.95.54.179) at 1/1/2011 9:20:36 AM |
| <a href=http://www.box.net/shared/cvry5x4gmv>buy tramadol online</a> |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:32:23 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
