Web Images Groups Books Scholar Blogs Gmail more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
Windows 7 Performance Index
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  14 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
mac  
View profile  
 More options Nov 7, 8:59 pm
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "mac" <a...@noemail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 04:29:22 -0500
Local: Sat, Nov 7 2009 8:59 pm
Subject: Windows 7 Performance Index
I have a new PC I just built that is being rated "unfairly" by Windows 7:
Here are the details:
Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 945  -> rated 7.3
Memory:  4 GIG DDR3 RAM  -> rated 7.5
Graphics (Desktop  Performance for Aero) -> rated 4.2
Gaming Graphics: ( NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 1 MB Memory)-> 6.2
Primary Hard Disk: (1 TB Seagate SATA) -> rated 5.9  (cleaned and
defragmented)
The motherboard is  Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P

I don't understand how the Graphics for Aero is is so much lower that the
Graphics for gaming?  Also, how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?   Any
thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

Thanks, Mac


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B)  
View profile  
 More options Nov 7, 9:14 pm
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Man-wai Chang to The Door (+MS=32B)" <toylet.toy...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:44:53 +0800
Local: Sat, Nov 7 2009 9:14 pm
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

> I don't understand how the Graphics for Aero is is so much lower that
> the Graphics for gaming?  Also, how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?  
> Any thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

Don't be bothered by this as long as everything works in reality. It's
just a benchmark!

--
   @~@   Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
  / v \  Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10)  Linux 2.6.31-14-generic
   ^ ^   17:44:02 up 7 days 23:25 2 users load average: 1.05 1.04 1.00
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
TVeblen  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 1:33 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "TVeblen" <killtherob...@hal.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:03:10 -0500
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 1:33 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:Z5bJm.2393$rE5.1507@newsfe08.iad...
>I have a new PC I just built that is being rated "unfairly" by Windows 7:
> Here are the details:
> Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 945  -> rated 7.3
> Memory:  4 GIG DDR3 RAM  -> rated 7.5
> Graphics (Desktop  Performance for Aero) -> rated 4.2
> Gaming Graphics: ( NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 1 MB Memory)-> 6.2
> Primary Hard Disk: (1 TB Seagate SATA) -> rated 5.9  (cleaned and
> defragmented)
> The motherboard is  Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P

> I don't understand how the Graphics for Aero is is so much lower that the
> Graphics for gaming?  Also, how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?   Any
> thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

It says the maximum score for W7 Performance is 7.9. The utility is not
rating your equipment for quality or functionality - it is rating it in
terms of it's effect on Windows OS performance. So most likely that Graphics
for Aero device is a resource hog, or has memory leaks, or behaves in some
way that slows the performance of W7. I would think that a better driver for
W7 would improve that score.
As for the HDD I suspect the utility is measuring the actual transfer rate
which has more to do with the motherboard's bus than the actual hard drive -
the bottleneck.

    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Sleepy  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 2:23 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Sleepy" <nos...@here.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 14:53:31 -0000
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 2:23 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:Z5bJm.2393$rE5.1507@newsfe08.iad...

> I have a new PC I just built that is being rated "unfairly" by Windows 7:
> Here are the details:
> Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 945  -> rated 7.3
> Memory:  4 GIG DDR3 RAM  -> rated 7.5
> Graphics (Desktop  Performance for Aero) -> rated 4.2
> Gaming Graphics: ( NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 1 MB Memory)-> 6.2
> Primary Hard Disk: (1 TB Seagate SATA) -> rated 5.9  (cleaned and
> defragmented)
> The motherboard is  Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P

> I don't understand how the Graphics for Aero is is so much lower that the
> Graphics for gaming?  Also, how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?   Any
> thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

> Thanks, Mac

Actually I think a 6.2 rating for that card is too high.
Its a Low end budget gaming card and its probably given that 6.2 rating
because it has 1GB of VRAM.
Incidentally the card isnt fast enough to run present games at High enough
settings to warrant 1GB - on a budget card 512mb is ample.
That may sound harsh but Im just being straight with you. Treat that 4.2 as
a gaming score.

    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
mac  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 2:27 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "mac" <a...@noemail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:57:46 -0500
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 2:27 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
Thank you all for the explanations - they make perfect sense.   I use this
computer as a Home computer - not as a gaming computer - I just thought I
would get a better rating.  Maybe in the future I'll invest in a better
video card...

Thanks, mac

"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:Z5bJm.2393$rE5.1507@newsfe08.iad...


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Ian D  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 3:14 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Ian D" <tau...@nowhereatall.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:44:28 -0500
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 3:14 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:VVfJm.3841$Sw5.2769@newsfe16.iad...
> Thank you all for the explanations - they make perfect sense.   I use this
> computer as a Home computer - not as a gaming computer - I just thought I
> would get a better rating.  Maybe in the future I'll invest in a better
> video card...

> Thanks, mac

Also, I think the highest you'll get for a SATA HD is 5.9.  I have a
1TB WD Caviar Black on a Core i7 system, and all it gets is 5.9,
and that's limiting my overall score to 5.9. The most I have seen
on any system in a store is 5.9.  To exceed that, you will need an
SSD.


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
mac  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 3:43 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "mac" <a...@noemail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:13:26 -0500
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 3:43 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
What puzzles me the most is why the Graphics for Gaming (6.2) so much higher
that the Graphics for Aero (4.2).  I would have thought that the Aero
graphics would be less demanding than Gaming Graphics...

mac


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Tony Neville  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 10:24 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Tony Neville" <gu...@bowl.org.nz>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:54:08 +1300
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 10:24 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:Z5bJm.2393$rE5.1507@newsfe08.iad...

> I have a new PC I just built that is being rated "unfairly" by Windows 7:
> Here are the details:
> Processor: AMD Phenom II X4 945  -> rated 7.3
> Memory:  4 GIG DDR3 RAM  -> rated 7.5
> Graphics (Desktop  Performance for Aero) -> rated 4.2
> Gaming Graphics: ( NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT 1 MB Memory)-> 6.2
> Primary Hard Disk: (1 TB Seagate SATA) -> rated 5.9  (cleaned and
> defragmented)
> The motherboard is  Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P

> I don't understand how the Graphics for Aero is is so much lower that the
> Graphics for gaming?

Yeah...  given that your GPU's gaming performance is so high, then one would
think handling an Aero desktop would be a comparatively remedial task.  It
make no sense to me either.  My scores came out even.

 > Also, how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?   Any

> thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

I've have 3 WD caviar black SATA2 HDDs configured for RAID 0.  The array
averages 263MB/s in HD Tune (default settings) but scores only 6.1!  There
must be quite a few wickedly fast storage devices floating around.

Tony.


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Paul  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 11:19 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: Paul <nos...@needed.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:49:29 -0500
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 11:19 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

Maybe they're saving the perfect score, for this one. It is four SSDs
RAIDed together, into a single plugin card.

http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/solid_state_drives/ocz_z_drive_...

    Paul


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Tony Neville  
View profile  
 More options Nov 8, 1:12 pm
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Tony Neville" <gu...@bowl.org.nz>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:42:58 +1300
Local: Sun, Nov 8 2009 1:12 pm
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
"Paul" <nos...@needed.com> wrote in message

news:hd512c$ula$1@news.eternal-september.org...

Ha!  -->
http://hothardware.com/Articles/OCZ-ZDrive-m84-PCIExpress-SSD-Review/...

The Z-Drive is like a Formula One race car.   You almost have to push it to
perform everyday tasks.

Tony.


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Doug Eilertson  
View profile  
 More options Nov 10, 12:36 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "Doug Eilertson" <jpmor...@embarqmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:06:53 -0500
Local: Tues, Nov 10 2009 12:36 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
Is the Seagate HD a SATA II (3.0GBs) or a SATA(1.5GBs)?

"mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote in message

news:Z5bJm.2393$rE5.1507@newsfe08.iad...


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
mac  
View profile  
 More options Nov 10, 12:18 pm
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "mac" <a...@noemail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:48:35 -0500
Local: Tues, Nov 10 2009 12:18 pm
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
Integrated SATA 3Gb/s with RAID function

http://www.gigabyte.us/Products/Motherboard/Products_Spec.aspx?ClassV...

"Doug Eilertson" <jpmor...@embarqmail.com> wrote in message

news:OtUJm.10858$ZF3.2107@newsfe13.iad...


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Spindle Prep  
View profile  
 More options Nov 11, 9:07 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: Spindle Prep <sp...@noemail.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:37:51 +0100
Local: Wed, Nov 11 2009 9:07 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index

On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 04:29:22 -0500, "mac" <a...@noemail.com> wrote:
>Primary Hard Disk: (1 TB Seagate SATA) -> rated 5.9  (cleaned and
>defragmented)  how a SATA hard drive be rated so low?   Any
>thoughts about any tweaking I can do to improve some of these ratings?

5.9 isn't that bad. OTOH, just because a disc is SATA doesn't translate into fast performance.  Doesn't confuse the speed of the interface with the speed at which data is read from or written to the platter.

If you want a fast hard disc, get a Western Digital Black.


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
JAD  
View profile  
 More options Nov 12, 4:41 am
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
From: "JAD" <notto...@spamer.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:11:41 -0800
Local: Thurs, Nov 12 2009 4:41 am
Subject: Re: Windows 7 Performance Index
I give it an overall rating of 2.2....are you really going to put any stock in
that?....ratings are a good way of getting YOU to BUY NEW HARDWARE,,,,,the world needs
your money!


    Reply    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google