Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Share your win7 Performance Score Here


  • Please log in to reply
104 replies to this topic

#1
medhunter

medhunter

    Emergency physician

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined 21-December 03
It is lovely to have such a feature in windows 7

Performance scores can vary so much in eveery category. No info on how they measure the score precisely

SO, I 'd rather like to share performance score here with you

What do u think?
The Best Has Not Come Yet


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
nitroshift

nitroshift

    Beware of programmers with screwdrivers!

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined 29-November 05
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
It was there in Vista too, but the max score was 5.9 as opposite to 7.9 in 7.

Please read the rules, folks!


#3
medhunter

medhunter

    Emergency physician

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 189 posts
  • Joined 21-December 03
oh , I see. I kinda skipped Vista . ran from XP to 7 .

Yet I haven't known ur score yet

Please Share Your score. with this rig(in your sig.) I expect a rather high score
The Best Has Not Come Yet

#4
Social-Zero

Social-Zero
  • Member
  • 8 posts
  • Joined 25-February 04
on my Dell XPS M1710 Notebook I get a 4.5 score.

6.9 on graphics which is the highest score I get

and 4.5 on my processor which is the lowest.

Running Windows 7 beta 1 build 7000 and the notebook has 4GB of ram and a Nvidia Geforce 7900 GTX 512MB

The processor's only 2.0 though, I guess that's doing it ;)

#5
nitroshift

nitroshift

    Beware of programmers with screwdrivers!

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined 29-November 05
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

oh , I see. I kinda skipped Vista . ran from XP to 7 .

Yet I haven't known ur score yet

Please Share Your score. with this rig(in your sig.) I expect a rather high score


I'm running 7 on a crappy laptop (1.73 Celeron / 1GB RAM / onboard SiS 3D grahpics) and got 2.9 :D On the rig in my signature I'm running Vista Business x64 with a 5.9 score :)

Please read the rules, folks!


#6
gunsmokingman

gunsmokingman

    MSFN Master

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,421 posts
  • Joined 02-August 03
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
The rating system is not working correct on Win 7

New Computer
My Quad Core at 2.5 and 8 GB Ram it gets a 2 on Win 7
Posted Image
Old Computer
My Single Core P4 at 2.5 and 2 GB Ram it gets a 3.4 Win 7
Posted Image


GunSmokingMan



#7
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
If it's your hard drive score, you can go to the "policies" tab of it's device properties and disable the write back caching, it will result in a much higher HDD winsat score. Vista's winsat didn't take into account the write-flush policy, and Win7's winsat does. Hence, certain drives that perform poorly on the write-flush portion of the test will score (very) low compared to their score in Vista.

Show us the whole break-out and it'll make more sense. For example, this old Dell of Mine running Win7 scores as follows:

Posted Image

Note that under Vista this machine scored higher in every category - memory and HDD, for instance, both got a 5.9, but now they do not with the winsat changes.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#8
puntoMX

puntoMX

    n00b of Masters and Vice Versa

  • Super Moderator
  • 4,852 posts
  • Joined 28-June 04
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

... disable the write back caching, it will result in a much higher HDD winsat score.

Good to know, I was wondering why I only got 3.5 while on Vista 5.9 :).

#9
gunsmokingman

gunsmokingman

    MSFN Master

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,421 posts
  • Joined 02-August 03
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
cluberti I did what you suggested and it improved the disk score from 2 to 3.


GunSmokingMan



#10
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Correct - you will still likely have a "slow" disk (especially if you score 2.0 or under on the initial test), but it will perform "better" - 3.0 will be fine for everyday use, but will be slow if you hit the disk hard.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#11
Smiley89

Smiley89

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Joined 27-May 07
Actually my Hard Disk is the one which got the lowest score - 3.0. I didn't understand why in Vista scored 5.5, but now that I read it's OK.

But I can't complain, since I got a very good general score.

Posted Image

I have a ATI Radeon X1950 Pro and I got this score. A friend of mine has an X1950 XTX and the score is 0.1 lower in poth GPU scores. How is this possible? Both the cards are 512 MB, not overclocked, and my friend has a more powerful PC (not only the GPU). Is something related to monitor resolution? I have a 1280x1024 monitor, he has a 1600x1050 one.

@cluberti, you're using the default Windows graphic drivers. If you install the latest Catalyst for Vista, the GPU scores better. If you already know this, that's OK. ;)
My DeviantArt page - Windows XP themes: [link]

#12
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Yes, I'm aware, this machine is used to test WDDM drivers from WU, so that's why it's running it. And whilst the catalyst updates from ATI are better, there's nothing wrong with the WU driver either, really.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#13
Smiley89

Smiley89

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Joined 27-May 07
Ok, now I understand ;)

Do you have any ideas about the graphic cards' scores I described in my previous post?

Edited by Smiley89, 27 January 2009 - 11:33 AM.

My DeviantArt page - Windows XP themes: [link]

#14
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Resolution will affect it, as will system bus throughput and bandwidth capabilities to/from the graphics card.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#15
XP_NO

XP_NO

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 67 posts
  • Joined 14-December 08
a question about the write back cache;

On my laptop it increased the Performance Score on the harddisk from 2 in a 5.

But in real life; does it increase harddisk performance?
In other words; why did they put in the write back cache when it is decreasing performance?

#16
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

But in real life; does it increase harddisk performance?

Yes, when it works it does, quite a bit. What happens is that the drive tells the OS driver that the write is completed once the entire file copy is either on disk or in cache, rather than ENTIRELY written to the disk - it will go back and flush the cache to the disk at a later point when it thinks the drive is idle and won't affect performance. This can drastically improve HDD utilization and performance, and make the system more responsive and hopefully faster. When it doesn't work, however, it can cause the system to be slower, so this was tested for in Win7's winsat because it does matter.

In other words; why did they put in the write back cache when it is decreasing performance?

What winsat is testing is the actual performance of the drive during load whilst write-back caching is enabled, and what the score is saying is that, in fact, the drive you have performs FAR better with write-back caching disabled. The reasons for this could simply be that the spindle(s) is/are too slow, or a poor hard disk controller on the system board, or the algorithm for write-back in the HDD firmware is not optimal, etc. A lot of times it's that the hard disk controller does a poor job of handling out-of-order flushes, or that it's actually slow to write (but not read) thus negating any benefit a write-back cache would give, etc. Note that this phenomenon is seen more often on laptop drives/chipsets and older desktop IDE/PATA drives rather than newer drives and chipsets, so keep that in mind.

But, this is much more a "real world" test than Vista's was, so the number is more accurate with the write-back test - your drive really is performing that much better under a "real-world" test with the caching disabled.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#17
XP_NO

XP_NO

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 67 posts
  • Joined 14-December 08
Thanks for your clear explanation Cluberti.

I defenately will keep the write back cache disabled then ;)

So, then the performance of my laptop tested by the Win7 Performance Score: 4.5

Memory is the issue here....

#18
cluberti

cluberti

    Gustatus similis pullus

  • Supervisor
  • 11,252 posts
  • Joined 09-September 01
  • OS:Windows 8.1 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
Also note that there is a very good blog post on the E7 blog about the WEI changes, and it does go into detail about the HDD test changes. A good read overall.
MCTS Windows Internals, MCITP Server 2008 EA, MCTS MDT/BDD, MCSE/MCSA Server 2003, Server 2012, Windows 8
--------------------
Please read the rules before posting!
Please consider donating to MSFN to keep it up and running!

#19
Smiley89

Smiley89

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Joined 27-May 07
Thanks for the answer about the graphic card. :thumbup
My DeviantArt page - Windows XP themes: [link]

#20
Access Denied

Access Denied

    Access Denied

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 239 posts
  • Joined 19-March 04

The rating system is not working correct on Win 7

New Computer
My Quad Core at 2.5 and 8 GB Ram it gets a 2 on Win 7
Posted Image
Old Computer
My Single Core P4 at 2.5 and 2 GB Ram it gets a 3.4 Win 7
Posted Image


My P4 3.0 with HT gets a 3.4 also.

Posted Image

Edited by accessdenied042, 28 January 2009 - 03:00 PM.

Q9650 w/ P5Q PRO
4 GB DDR2 OCZ 1200

#21
cavveman

cavveman
  • Member
  • 4 posts
  • Joined 28-January 09
This is my stats. Pretty good actually. But I guess it will change when the sharp version of win7 comes out.

Posted Image

#22
cbosdell

cbosdell

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 15 posts
  • Joined 28-August 06

This is my stats. Pretty good actually. But I guess it will change when the sharp version of win7 comes out.


My score is the same as yours except my CPU and ram get a 7.3. (Overclocked Q9300 to 3.2Ghz and running 8GB of ram :whistle: )

It's nice to finally have a 6 but I feel like for the money I spent on this system it should have been 7 average. :angry:

#23
kartel

kartel

    Cartel Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 545 posts
  • Joined 18-October 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Posted Image
ASUS Sabertooth 990FX (BIOS 1208) AMD Phenom II X6 1090T G.Skill F3-10666CL7-4GBXH 16GB Sapphire Radeon HD 6970 2GB GDDR5 HT Omega Claro Plus Windows 7 x64 ADSL 6Mbps APC Back UPS XS1000 CPU validated GPU validated

#24
gunsmokingman

gunsmokingman

    MSFN Master

  • Super Moderator
  • 2,421 posts
  • Joined 02-August 03
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
I get a crap 3 on win7 and yet cavveman get an 6 with almost the same specs.Posted Image


GunSmokingMan



#25
Access Denied

Access Denied

    Access Denied

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 239 posts
  • Joined 19-March 04
Put a Raptor in that pupppy, or better yet, RAID two (or four) of them on a 3ware card and you'll get a 7 on your hard disk, lol
Q9650 w/ P5Q PRO
4 GB DDR2 OCZ 1200




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users