Windows 7 Benchmarks vs Vista and XP
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 3.8.2009
Tip: Click here to update all your PC's outdated driversNow that Windows 7 has RTMed and companies have had some time to refine their drivers, Windows 7 benchmarks will become a more accurate representation of its true performance
ZDNet seems to be the first to put out benchmarks comparing Windows 7, Vista SP2, and XP SP3. They’ve put three machines together with one in the mobile, low-range, and high-range category. The 64-bit edition of the operating systems are being used and they are all updated with the latest service pack.
For the most part, Windows 7 outperforms its predecessors significantly. Startup and shutdown times are generally faster at a noticeable margin. PCMark Vantage scores produced similar results with Windows 7 beating Vista in all aspects except for games on the “mobile” setup in the games category. Superfetch now starts much later than in Vista after startup to reduce stress on the hard-drive just after startup. Superfetch also uses less cache than in Vista. All-in-all, Windows 7 performs better than its predecessors but improvements on high-end setups are much more significant than on the low-end setups. ZDNet says that “…the low-end Intel Atom-based system is not really suitable for Windows 7. High-end systems with quad-core processors also benefit from Windows 7, because many of the operating system functions exploit the computing power of multi-core chips.”
source:
windows7center.com
>> Click Here to Run a Free Scan for PC Errors <<
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
Benchmarks: Windows 7 RTM versus Vista, XP || Windows 7, Vista, XP – There Will Be Blood || Windows XP LogonUI Changer - Change Windows XP Logon Background || Windows 7 Transformation Pack for Vista and XP || Windows 7 Less Energy Hungry than XP, Vista
Comments(23)
on my core2duo e8400 geforce 8800gt, vista 64 is fast,win7 is fast,win xp very fast.i
like em all.on my p4 3.0ghz,2 gig ram, vista is slow, win 7 is slow and xp plays games
faster.
i can play games on win 95 faster the xp.....dude get over it xp = dead
windows 7 is a memory hog same as its predecessor vista caching apps you rarely if ever
use. great use of my ram not!
if windows 7 outperforms windows vista in almost everything there comes a question why
wasn't vista so good in the first place??
well i can play in dos4gw faster too... :d
"windows 7 is a memory hog same as its predecessor vista caching apps you rarely if ever
use. great use of my ram not!"
superfetch uses free cycles from you cpu to
load applications it thinks you'll use. it runs at a lower priority, so if something
needs the cpu, it stops. so there's no downside from a cpu point.
as for ram
usage, yes, it stores files you may or may not use in ram. however, the second your free
ram is consumed, the cached info is discarded in nanoseconds. if you go to load the
program that's cached, it loads faster.
there is absolutely no downside to
using superfetch. flipping out about "bloat" from cached programs just illustrates your
own ignorance. sure, you can "brag" about running your system with 17 processes and
400mb of used ram and resting cpu utilization of 1-3%, but why have all that hardware
sitting around doing nothing? you can call it cutting out bloat, but really, you're just
proving you don't understand what exactly all those little numbers actually mean.
i'd rather put my hardware to use to improve my computing experience rather than
brag about how my "1337 rig" does nothing to utilize all the hardware i paid to put in
it.
the ram managmant in vista is dynamic, yes it loads tonns of "junk" into youre ram
while the system is idel, but it dumps all of it instandly if an application needs it.
this is a clever system, i mean what are you doing with 4gb ram that are
unused,... loading programs into ram that you migt use just acellerates the startup, there
is no "loss" of space, because windows can free the space instantly when it is needed.
it's weird,we often see people here saying what i chose for "subject" here,"over my
dead body i will use winseven "! and somethings worse.
i think microsoft should
invest on the de-mistification and bad pub vista really left behind. and furthermore it's
incredible that about 6 months ago i could see almost everyone here "praise the lord,for
winseven"! i mean,wtf...
peace \/
when xp came out everyone complained how slow it was.
when vista came out everyone
complained how slow it was.
when windows 7 came out everyone complained how slow it
was.
when (insert os name here) came out everyone complained how slow it was.
bottom line is that i have tested vista against 7 on my new pc, and vista does use more
ram than 7. it does not matter whether its right after the first boot or second, or
minutes.
windows xp is faster than windows 7
xp_guy will be bitching when he's left behind and nobody makes software for his os
anymore. wake up or buy a real pc.
give the numbers or hit the bricks. no personal experience bs give hard facts and
numbers that prove xp is faster than 7 otherwise troll elsewhere.
from most of the comments above it's pretty obvious that they either haven't tried 7 or
they have some weird configuration problems. windows 7 is the operating system for current
up to date hardware, simple as, it is quicker in every aspect than any of its
predecessors. some 64 bit linux distro's may give it a run for its money but xp and vista
ceratinly don't.
get yourself a new machine. if you can't stop bitching about win7 slow on your system.
hello !!! of course it will be slow you guys have a slow puter period. c'mon ...wake up
and smell the coffee.
on my laptop with 2gb ram 7 goes faster and uses less ram. with open browser, office apps
it is still about 1gb free ram.
under another pc, with 4gb ram i cannot see any
difference (i mean speed and mem usage) between vista and seven.
cant compare vista & windows 7 to xp and the rest.different code base from the ground up.
i still use xp_
i think xp is best for gaming_
yeah,i think too..xp is the best for gaming..
i am using windows 7 with ( music , graphic design , internet , and programming ) ,,,
and i am using windows xp for games specially the big games
i am very
comfort with this choice
the only reason i can see anyone complaining about windows 7 and mem usage is because
they only have a gig or 2 of ram. come one, buy some more ram or an up to date computer...
with ths prices today, no one shuld be concerned with the amout of ram being used!!! i
have 4 gigs and there always 2 gigs free for 90% of the time. if the os needs more, it
will free it up. most of the people using xp and complaining about compatibility of vista
or windows 7 should not even be running either of these as their equipment is outdated.
buy something current and you will see your ignorance. i would never ever go back to xp.
vista is much better and windows 7 is pretty much the same as vista with a lot of tweaks.
people who complain about windows 7 are told one of the following : they don't know how
to use their computer; their equipment is outdated; they should follow the trend; ...
maybe microsoft should be the one heeding this kind of advice. after all, if linux,
pcbsd or netbsd allow me to do my job on an old pc, how come windows needs more ?
it's time for microsoft to get out of the operating system business, seeing that for
the last 25 years, they've been unable to produce an os that doesn't rely on antivirus,
antispyware, third party defragmenter, etc.
the so-called elite users should
stop trying to explain what is nothing but gross incompetence on the part of microsoft.
now, i'm going back to my ubuntu installation that works great.
i'll stay with xp! i tried win 7 7600 and my opinion is that 7 it's much slower, ram
eating crap with only one thing that's awesome and that's interface.
comp.
spec. e8400, 2gb ram, 260gtx
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Windows 7 RTM 7600.16385.090713-1255 HERE !
whatever
By joe shablotnik on 03.08.2009 - 22:08