Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Windows 7 BETA Beats XP & Vista In Performance Tests

  1. #1
    tweakwindows's Avatar
    tweakwindows is offline Microsoft MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    intowindows.com
    Posts
    1,285

    Thumbs up Windows 7 BETA Beats XP & Vista In Performance Tests

    Just read this fantastic test article at ZDnet and couldn't prevent myself from pa(o)sting here.

    Before I go any further I feel I need to make a point, and make it clear. The build I’m testing of Windows 7 (build 6.1.7000.0.081212-1400) is a beta build, and as a rule beta builds are usually more geared towards stability than performance. That said, the performance of this build should give us a clue as to how the OS is coming along.

    Rather than publish a series of benchmark results for the three operating systems (something which Microsoft frowns upon for beta builds, not to mention the fact that the final numbers only really matter for the release candidate and RTM builds), I’ve decided to put Windows 7, Vista and XP head-to-head in a series of real-world tests to find out which OS comes out top.









    The bottom line is that the more I use Windows 7 the more I like it. Sure, we’re looking at a beta build here and not the final code, so things could change between now and release (although realistically final code ends up being faster than beta code). Also I still have some nagging issues relating to the interface, and some concerns that the UAC changes will break applications and other code, especially installers, but overall Windows 7 beta 1 is a robust, solid bit of code.
    Source:ZDNet

  2. #2
    alsiladka's Avatar
    alsiladka is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Now this is some true bechmarking.
    I have been using Windows 7 for the past 3 4 days now. It is definitely faster than Vista, and when your get some tasks done involving navigating to different directories, gettine some jobs done, then you realise how faster Vista and 7 are over XP in real life scenarios.

  3. #3
    iMav's Avatar
    iMav is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    921

    Default

    Damn, I have Windows 7 Beta for almost 5 days now but no PC install it on.

  4. #4
    roraniel's Avatar
    roraniel is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Pinehurst, NC
    Posts
    860

    Default

    Give it to me!! lol

    Quote Originally Posted by iMav View Post
    Damn, I have Windows 7 Beta for almost 5 days now but no PC install it on.

  5. #5
    PC_Head is offline Beginner
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Ok thanx for the results but i would like to know a few more things about it. First, you score using the numbers 1, 2 and 3, is 1 bad, 2 ok and 3 the best? How is that worked out and also in the fisrt test you stated you are using 4G of Ram, would that mean you are testing the 64 bit versions? cause the 32 bit versions only show 3.25G of Ram. Just to let you know, i have tried Win 7 32 & 64, Vista-shit 32 & 64 and Win Xp (sp2)32 & 64 and for me, 64 xp blows them all away for what i use it for. Editing. I understand that 7 32 (64) is a Beta version and it is faster than Xp 32 & 64 but i found it to be very unstable, and the 64 bit version was just plain puss. Anyway thats my two cents worth.

  6. #6
    tweakwindows's Avatar
    tweakwindows is offline Microsoft MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    intowindows.com
    Posts
    1,285

    Default

    I understand that 7 32 (64) is a Beta version and it is faster than Xp 32 & 64 but i found it to be very unstable,
    I have no such bad problems except some small issues.

  7. #7
    seti is offline Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,923

    Default

    Thanks for your work again tweak very interesting results. I am sorry but I just do not understand where PC_head is coming from. I have used XP Pro, Vista Ultimate and 7 all on my 64 bit, with only 2gig of memory and have had no problems at all. Each one seems to been an improvement on the last and I've not had any stability problems with 7 at all with my system.

  8. #8
    rkonit's Avatar
    rkonit is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pilani, India
    Posts
    1,363

    Default

    Superb Windows 7 'll be beyond the expections.

  9. #9
    PC_Head is offline Beginner
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    30

    Default

    Thanks guys but still didnt answer my questions but thats ok. I use my pc for editing. Music, movie, photos and the rest.

  10. #10
    iMav's Avatar
    iMav is offline Gold Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PC_Head View Post
    Ok thanx for the results but i would like to know a few more things about it. First, you score using the numbers 1, 2 and 3, is 1 bad, 2 ok and 3 the best? How is that worked out and also in the fisrt test you stated you are using 4G of Ram, would that mean you are testing the 64 bit versions? cause the 32 bit versions only show 3.25G of Ram. Just to let you know, i have tried Win 7 32 & 64, Vista-shit 32 & 64 and Win Xp (sp2)32 & 64 and for me, 64 xp blows them all away for what i use it for. Editing. I understand that 7 32 (64) is a Beta version and it is faster than Xp 32 & 64 but i found it to be very unstable, and the 64 bit version was just plain puss. Anyway thats my two cents worth.
    32 bit CAN use 4GB & they DO.

    The charts mention that less is better.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22