Benchmarking Windows 7: Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger?
Table of contents
- 1. New Means Better, Right?
- 2. Test Settings
- 3. Benchmark Results: Crysis And Far Cry 2
- 4. Benchmark Results: Clear Sky And World In Conflict
While most Tom’s Hardware readers initially resisted the switch from Windows XP, responses to our own articles since last year suggested that many have given up the fight and moved to Vista.
Perhaps Microsoft’s end-of-life announcement for that venerable operating system had something to do with the rise in popularity of Windows Vista. Or maybe high-end users simply wanted to enjoy the newer features, such as its Aero visual enhancement, as well as Media Center, available to Home Premium and Ultimate buyers. However, a few of Vista’s nagging problems have persisted, including slow loading times, a ravenous appetite for RAM, and the need for even more RAM to minimize those slow loading times via SuperFetch.
Meanwhile, radically reduced prices for high-speed, high-capacity memory is most likely the reason behind the increased popularity of Vista among enthusiasts. New applications and games that required additional RAM arrived just in time to match the increase in mid-priced DRAM density, but a 64-bit operating system would be required to properly support capacities of 4GB or more. Vista was the first Windows OS to mainstream its 64-bit versions, and spotty driver support under 64-bit Windows XP has made Vista x64 the easier choice.
But for many of us, the compromise of using an OS that both supports and requires additional memory seems wasteful, especially when that added memory doesn’t give us back 100% of the responsiveness previously felt in the OS it replaced. Microsoft is finally ready to handle that concern with Windows 7, which is really an improved version of Vista.
Tom’s Hardware has already published articles explaining some of the more complex changes Microsoft incorporated into its latest operating system. However, hardware editors are more concerned with the simple matters of program performance and responsiveness. Thus, while we’ve heard a great many details of how Windows 7 improves such things as security, features, and “user experience,” we probably define “experience” differently than the software guys. When narrowing our focus to basic performance, how much better is Windows 7 than the OS it replaces? It's time to quantify the differences!
- windows ,
- 7 ,
- performance
Great review. I think it confirms what I thought: Windows 7 feels faster but it isn't (yet). I really don't care because using W7 is a delight to use. It's superbar had completely won me since the first day.
BTW compare Windows 7 rtm vs Windows XP rtm would be more interesting. I'm really sure Windows 7 is the best windows os in its first day.
Personally, I think it would have been better to test the applications that come with Windows 7, such as Explorer, WMP, the Sidebar, etc. for performance increases, no?
I would like to see the test done again with a ATI 5870
I would like to see the test done again with a ATI 5870
Since the gtx285 might not have the best drivers for windows 7 as to the 5870 which is made to be used on windows 7. imo
Fresh install of Win7-64 over XP home and not noticed any real performance changes while gaming so far, absolutely loving it.
I havnt tried windows 7 yet but does anybody know if the defrag tool is any better than vista? Like a progress bar at least and if its any quicker.
Hi Marney,
The defrag does seem to be more refined. I can't say whether it's any more effective / defrag's any better than before, but the interface is improved and now allows you to defrag all your drives at once (If memory serves I think it's multi-threaded but I haven't opened defrag in a few months so really can't be sure, this is all from memory.
These programs indicate that Windows 7 feels 7% to 10% faster than Windows Vista, and that’s enough to make us give the new OS the nod in spite of its lack of differentiation in most of our other test.
Oh, you've got to be kidding me! That's not a conclusion. It might very well be true, but the conclusion should be based on the preceding article.
Or to be clearer, you can't write a whole article showing no difference, then give Windows 7 the thumbs up for some other reason.
I did some beta testing when it first went public. Had all sorts of issues doubtless now fixed. However, what I saw, with a system that had 2Gb of memory, playing games, was that performance differences were marginal until memory handling came into play. I play Lord of the Rings Online, and XP, Vista and Win 7 were identical until the client had to handle many people in once place, at which time the Vista client slowed down, XP client and Win 7 client didn't. Sadly the issues I had stopped it being effective, so threw some money at the issue, and with 6Gb memory, Vista no longer slowed down.
I would be interested to see comparison of all 3 systems including XP.
XP SP3 v windows 7 retail plz
i think microsoft ignored working on efficent system long time ago even at the stage of windows 95. I tell why i state that now. It seems obvious that if you want to improve something, just like in nature it is, it is good if you look at what is realy used by users, what is not - to cut it, what anoys users, and what ideas they have to change it or revolutionize.
This is a good way to improve, ask day-to-day users about their expieriences and ideas, remove spare functions, evolve good ones. Microsoft does not do it at all, they create many new spare functions, exploiting hardware resources, they dont look back.
Now, meritum, expamples: >>>Clipboard
>>>Clipboard
because my commentary is a bit longer then it can be and as You see above my previous attempts to post it fully, failed, i give here a link for my full comentary: http://postsbereavedofspace.blogsp [...] tpwww.html (there is also link to important ditto on my link)
Boot time is quicker with 7, however resume from hibernate on x86 with 4GB ram is significantly quicker.
Why are people so bothered about boot time? Seriously! So it takes 3.1 seconds less to boot - marvellous! That's a whole 15.5 seconds of productivity over a working week - think of the difference that will make eh!
i hate the windows search; cannot find anything. i prefer the search companion.
yes whats the point in comparing vista to windows 7 - we all know windows 7 is just vista with a service pack (basically)...........what we all want to know is how windows 7 compares to XP! Thats the switch most of us will be making, xp to 7, and whether its worth it.