Windows Performance Rating

[Travis King]

My new Ati Radeon x1600 Pro according to a website is supposed to get around
a 5.9 for graphics and a 5 for game graphics for the PCI-Express x16
version. Since mine is AGP, I'd assume that will be down just a bit. I
just did more benchmarking to my processor (Sempron 64 2800+) tonight to see
where it stands now with comparisons. The benchmarking indicates that it is
now just above an Athlon 64 3200+ 2GHz (socket 939). (PC-2100 RAM but the
Sempron is OC'd to 2GHz.) I doubt that it's actually that high in
real-world performance, but that's a good step up anyway.

Now for my question:
Does the Windows Performance Rating rate your system based on the
specifications and models of your components or does it base your score upon
benchmarking/testing the components out to actually see their real
performance?

 

[mamamia]

My new Ati Radeon x1600 Pro according to a website is supposed to get around
a 5.9 for graphics and a 5 for game graphics for the PCI-Express x16
version. Since mine is AGP, I'd assume that will be down just a bit. I
just did more benchmarking to my processor (Sempron 64 2800+) tonight to see
where it stands now with comparisons. The benchmarking indicates that it is
now just above an Athlon 64 3200+ 2GHz (socket 939). (PC-2100 RAM but the
Sempron is OC'd to 2GHz.) I doubt that it's actually that high in
real-world performance, but that's a good step up anyway.

Now for my question:
Does the Windows Performance Rating rate your system based on the
specifications and models of your components or does it base your score upon
benchmarking/testing the components out to actually see their real
performance?

Hi Travis, finally fixed my networking again so that I could get back
online, and I saw your message in the xp general group. Truth be told,
my 9800 pro is kinda slow with glass (which I found surprising). My
machine gets an overall performance rating of 2. I think my video card
gets a rating of 4.9. I'd boot back into Vista and check, but I don't
care to knock my networking out again, LOL. I've actually turned off
all of the eye candy and went for the classic look so it would run
better. But I'm sure you will get better performance on your card.
post back and let us know.

--
AMD64 3200 CPU
1 gig ram
dual 120gb sata HDDs
AGP 8X ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb
Soundblaster Audigy 2

Triple Boot (all 32 bit):
Fedora Core 4
Vista 5308
XP SP2

 

[Travis King]

You're using version 5308, though. Later versions have had some good
improvements in performance. (But then I'll guess you can't get the later
versions.)

 

[mamamia]

You're using version 5308, though. Later versions have had some good
improvements in performance. (But then I'll guess you can't get the later
versions.)

That would be correct. I'm on a Technet plus subscription, so I'm
probably waiting for the public beta now. Glad to hear they improved.
Another odd thing that seems to happen to me in Vista 5308 is when I
right-click the start menu and select explore, my explorer window never
pops up, and the explore.exe process pegs my cpu cycles.


--
AMD64 3200 CPU
1 gig ram
dual 120gb sata HDDs
AGP 8X ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb
Soundblaster Audigy 2

Triple Boot (all 32 bit):
Fedora Core 4
Vista 5308
XP SP2

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

Be Very Carefull with Build 5308 CTP, I had two Hard Disk Drive's go bad in
only one week (I wish Microsoft would give MSDN and Tech Net Plus Tester's
Build 5381, it looks like we will have to wait until Monday, May 22nd, 2006,
for Beta 2 to come out, however, to get a New Build).

 

[Jeff Warren]

It tests the components - typically on the first boot in later builds.
Starting with 5365 performance got better, however I do feel the drivers are
not optimized - if I install Windows XP drivers (non-WDDM) the performance
of the interface is much more responsive and scrolling is smoother.

I have an ATI 9700 PRO AGP card. Performance leaves a little to be desired
on this system when running Glass. Other than that the card works excellent
in Windows XP.

I hope and expect that the drivers that are provided with Vista are just
baseline drivers, and that new drivers optimized from the manufacturer will
drastically improve UI performance.

Jeff W.

 

[Zack Whittaker]

Currently I believe it bases itself on graphics card, Internet connection,
hard drive space, RAM memory, but I do believe that in later builds, could
include such things as security measures like "have you got an AV
installed".

But that's to come )

--
Zack Whittaker
» ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
» MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
» Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
that up!

--: Original message follows :--

 

[RA]

If you think Vista killed your hard drives, you shouldn't be testing this
software.

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

I have currently stopped using Windows Vista build 5308 CTP and I am
currently running Windows XP X64 Edition, and everything is working fine now
(except for a Few Minor Problems with the X64 Version of IE 7 Beta 2, that
is).

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

P.S. I will resume my Windows Vista Beta Testing when Beta 2 comes out,
however. In the meantime, I just can't stop reading the Posts here, or else
I might miss the "Windows Vista Beta 2 is now Available Announcement," (when
it is Announced, that is).

 

[Peter Foldes]

Another P.S. What is the problem Kevin? The mind does not work in a normal fashion?

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

I personally think that you Illegally Downloaded Builds 5342, 5365, and
5381, because I certainly would not want someone like you in my Beta! Got
any Proof that you are actually in the Beta?

Another P.S. What is the problem Kevin? The mind does not work in a normal
fashion?

 

[Jason]

Kevin, you have no right asking for proof. You opted out of the beta
program and what proof someone may have could be under NDA. Please do not
accuse people of this.

--
Jason

Applied but still waiting to be accepted for the Vista Beta Testing group.
Can't wait to be able to play and help make it even better.

http://www.orderpcs4free.com/?r=878

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

My 5365 x64 install is not connected to the internet and it rated it without
any problems - 2.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

 

[- Bobb -]

Any updates on this on latest Beta 2 release ?
I'm just checking x86 and x64 installs and I see that although my
CPU is rated a 3.5
Mem = 5.1
Disk = 3.7
Video = 3.2
Graphic mem = 2.7

I have a Overall rating of 2 ????
Lower than any of the items listed - what's that all about ?

Bobb

 

[Mark D. VandenBerg]

The score given is not an average. It is the lowest rated component rounded
down to the next whole number. So if your lowest scoring component is your
USB-powered Lava Lamp and it rates a 2.8, your system score is a 2.

 

[Marc Nutty]

Hmmmm lol, bit of a harsh way of doing it lol.

In reply to another post aswel, I do believe that the ratings are from
results of a test, not just because your graphics card is a ATi x9999 iwth
512mb ram lol.

Also, it says its supposed to help with purchasing the correct software. If
your PR is only 2, it will still prob be able to run a program with 3 or 4,
but technically MS are saying that its not gurrenteed, however, it is
virtually guarentteed to work if its a 1 rating program lol.

 

[John Barnes]

Your rating is the lowet whole number presented. As has been posted here
many times, it is the weakest link theory

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

btw, I was just reading on ZDNews that the tool has been renamed Windows
Experience Advisor and has been considerably modified. It may not appear
until RC1, though.