Post your vista performance index

[Drew]

So if you read my other thread you'll know I got a new computer. I've been forced into Vista, unfortunately, but I just found this feature thought it would be fun.

Right click on "computer" and click properties. You should see a numeric score there in the middle, click on "Windows Experience Index" then post your score.



Processor 5.9
Memory 5.4
Graphics 4.1
Gaming graphics 3.5
Primary hard disk 5.9

[mgoddess]

Processor (Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E7200 @ 2.53GHz): 5.4
Memory (2.00 GB): 5.9
Graphics (NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT): 5.9
Gaming graphics (1279 MB Total available graphics memory): 5.5
Primary hard disk (36GB Free - 75GB Total): 5.0

Base Score: 5.0 (stupid hard disk being PATA)

[Nieninque]

Yes, we get it. You have a new computer.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Drew]

Thanks Debbie Downer.

[Bobmuhthol]

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU P8600 @ 2.40GHz 5.3
Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 5.9
Graphics ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450 4.5
Gaming graphics 1533 MB Total available graphics memory 4.4
Primary hard disk 9GB Free (147GB Total) 5.2

HP Elitebook 6930p. Business laptop, can't be blamed for shitty video.

[CrystalTears]

At least yours is better than Drew's crappy Dell onboard video.

[Hips]

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz 5.9 5.9

Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 5.9
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 5.9
Gaming graphics 2302 MB Total available graphics memory 5.9
Primary hard disk 294GB Free (466GB Total) 5.9

[Kranar]

Processor 5.9
Memory 5.9
Graphics 5.9
Gaming graphics 5.9
Primary hard disk 5.9

[Sean of the Thread]

Bah shuttup you're rich.


My index is uhm 0

Since I have a 6 year old computer running XP.

Damned rich people.

Correction. Damned smart people who can get rich.

[The Ponzzz]

Processor 4.8
Memory 4.7
Graphics 4.8
Gaming graphics 4.8
Primary hard disk 4.8

Not bad for a laptop that is now 2 years old.

[Parkbandit]

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz 5.9 3.5
Determined by lowest subscore

Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 5.3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 3.5
Gaming graphics 1919 MB Total available graphics memory 4.3
Primary hard disk 119GB Free (289GB Total) 5.7

[Bobmuhthol]

How the fuck is a GeForce 8800 GT a 3.5 when a mid-range laptop card is 4.5? Vista is an idiot.

[Keller]

I was forced to re-image my work computer with Vista by the 31st. I finally did it.

It sucks.

So much.

I can't.

Take it.

[CrystalTears]

I refuse to use Vista. They would have to stop supporting XP for me to do that.

[Bobmuhthol]

Pussies. It's the only way to get DirectX10, muthafuckas.

[Renian]

Pussies. It's the only way to get DirectX10, muthafuckas.

http://www.techmixer.com/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp/

[Drew]

PB and I both have 4 gigs of ram and score 5.4 and 5.3. Mgoddess has 2 gigs and scores 5.9. I wonder if Vista values the speed of your ram more than the amount?

[The Ponzzz]

I have 3GBs of ram and I got a 4.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<I wonder if Vista values the speed of your ram more than the amount?>>

Speed + RAM = performance. One isn't more important than the other; the composite performance rating is what matters.

But I'm speculating here. That's how I'd do it, and that's how processors are scored (performance rating instead of just clock speed for obvious reasons).

[Drew]

Maybe it's time for me to upgrade from SDRAM...

[Bobmuhthol]

There's no way you're using SDR. Maybe DDR vs. DDR2, but SDR has been dead for years.

[Keller]

I refuse to use Vista. They would have to stop supporting XP for me to do that.

We had an inter-group deadline of October 31. The firm-wide deadline was Dec 31. The last thing I needed was an e-mail going out to my boss that I had missed the firm deadline, let alone his deadline.

I did lower the visual affects specs to improve performance. Now it looks like I am running Windows 95.

[Sean]

I got Vista a year ago when I bought a new out out of the box desktop for the 1st time in ages. I haven't had anything to complain about since I upgraded. I'll post my performance index when I get home.

[Drew]

There's no way you're using SDR. Maybe DDR vs. DDR2, but SDR has been dead for years.


Haha, yes I know, just a bit of joke for the computer savvy out there.

[Danical]

I can't stop watching that rap battle translation. So much win and lulz.

[Sean]

Processor AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5000+ 5.2
Memory (RAM) 3.00 GB 5.9
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 8300 GS 3.6
Gaming graphics 1535 MB Total available graphics memory 4.5
Primary hard disk 5GB Free (363GB Total) 5.6

[Sean of the Thread]

I can't stop watching that rap battle translation. So much win and lulz.


Link for the retarded?

[Drew]

I can't stop watching that rap battle translation. So much win and lulz.

I've watched it about 30 times.

[Drew]

Link for the retarded?

Click anywhere in my sig.

[Sean of the Thread]

Ah thanks. Rofl.

[Sean of the Thread]

Well shit this almost made me cry out of compassion. Seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHpw6CzprNY

[AestheticDeath]

I was going to post mine but it would not let me copy/paste. Oh well.

[Sean of the Thread]

I was going to post mine but it would not let me copy/paste. Oh well.


/fail

[AestheticDeath]

nvrmnd, i found it

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz 5.9
Memory (RAM) 3.00 GB 5.4
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 8300 GS 3.4
Gaming graphics 1406 MB Total available graphics memory 4.3
Primary hard disk 203GB Free (283GB Total) 5.8

[Tilnam]

No idea how vista comes up with these numbers... I have an 8800 and to think that I have the same score as someone with a GTX card?

I have a monster hard drive, and to think I have the same score as someone with a regular 250gb hard drive?

Yeah, these scores mean little.


But yeah, I have a 5.9 for everything.

[Kranar]

No idea how vista comes up with these numbers... I have an 8800 and to think that I have the same score as someone with a GTX card?

I have a monster hard drive, and to think I have the same score as someone with a regular 250gb hard drive?

Yeah, these scores mean little.


But yeah, I have a 5.9 for everything.

This was just intended as a guideline for developers to use when specifying system recommendations so that they could say that their program requires a video card rating of 3.3, and RAM rating of 4.0 as opposed to the rediculousness it's quickly becoming like requirements of "nVidia 8800 or better or ATI Radeon or better and an Intel Core 2 Duo at 3 GHz but if you have an Intel Core 2 Duo Quad Core then you can squeeze by with 2.5 GHz, that is unless you're an AMD user in which case the Phenom running at 2 GHz will outdo them all" etc etc...

If you have 5.9s across the board, then you have the highest score currently available and will be able to run any commercial software for Windows Vista that's worth selling.

[Inspire]

Processor AMD Turion(tm) 64 X2 Mobile Technology TL-58 4.7
Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 5.4
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 7150M / nForce 630M 3.3
Gaming graphics 1071 MB Total available graphics memory 2.5
Primary hard disk 88GB Free (141GB Total) 5.4


HP Laptop, 17" screen!


I'm wondering though am I screwed with the graphics the way they are or is it possible to upgrade?

My laptop does get really hot when I play WoW.

[TheRunt]

Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 3.00GHz 4.8
Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB 4.4
Graphics SiS Mirage 3 Graphics 3.2
Gaming graphics 320 MB Total available graphics memory 3.1
Primary hard disk 25GB Free (70GB Total) 5.7

Need a decent video card :(

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I want a new computer :(

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU @ 2.40GHz 5.9
Memory (RAM) 3.00 GB 5.4
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 7350 LE 3.6
Gaming graphics 1407 MB Total available graphics memory 3.2
Primary hard disk 137GB Free (289GB Total) 5.7

3.2 Determined by lowest subscore

My nephew bought me some super boxed set of WoW, so I guess I will prob need to upgrade (or at least that's what I'm telling myself).

[SHAFT]

What's vista?

[Bobmuhthol]

SHM, you just need a real video card. Don't replace a computer that has a goddamn Core 2 Quad.

[Sean of the Thread]

or just give me the core 2 quad

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

SHM, you just need a real video card. Don't replace a computer that has a goddamn Core 2 Quad.

Recommend a good, reasonably priced one? I don't know shit about video cards. If it means anything, I've got a 24" panel monitor and plan on getting a second one to sit next to it... so I'd like one that supports dual monitors.

I've been reading about two video cards linked together being better than a top of the line card, but like I said, I know shit about em. I just want a nice card that'll last a few years and support games/two monitors. Price I know can get up there, and I don't want to dump a grand on a card that in a year will be worthless.

[Drew]

Every aftermarket card can do dual monitors SHM.

[Bobmuhthol]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121291

Good luck not getting laid with this thing. It's impossible.

[Celephais]

They have said that in the future they plan on raising the cap above 5.9, but there's no point in it right now.

I get a 5.6 for 4gb of DDR2-1066 (and yes, I am running it at 1066 with good timings). Don't spend more than $150 on a video card, it's not worth the price premium to get the top of the line cards (for anyone asking for advice on them).

[Bobmuhthol]

Except for the indisputable fact that a $150 video card is both not going to be good for very long and is not going to run games on high settings at a high resolution.

[Celephais]

Except for the indisputable fact that a $150 video card is both not going to be good for very long and is not going to run games on high settings at a high resolution.
And anyone who cares about high resolutions at high settings wouldn't need to ask for advice on which card to buy. Most games that are out now will run perfectly fine on a $150 card, and a $250 card will provide something pathetic like a 5% performance increase. By the time the card isn't "good" anymore, a $100 card will be better than the $250 card of yore, so if you put that $100 away and buy an upgrade later, you're better off.

The premium cards are only worthwhile to people who like to brag about their e-peen or developers interested in graphics/HPC.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<And anyone who cares about high resolutions at high settings wouldn't need to ask for advice on which card to buy.>>

Right, because everyone with money who likes to buy computer shit knows what they're doing. Oh wait, SHM just asked for video card advice and specifically mentioned $1,000 as a cap for just a video card.

<<Most games that are out now will run perfectly fine on a $150 card, and a $250 card will provide something pathetic like a 5% performance increase.>>

I don't think a 10-15 average FPS improvement is a "5% performance increase."

<<By the time the card isn't "good" anymore, a $100 card will be better than the $250 card of yore, so if you put that $100 away and buy an upgrade later, you're better off.>>

But that's perpetually true. Using that logic, it was never worth buying a computer until right now, and soon it will have been a wasted investment. There's a cost associated with owning the technology at the time that you own it, and you can't rationalize that -- it will always be there, thanks to economics.

<<The premium cards are only worthwhile to people who like to brag about their e-peen>>

Or people who like getting 50 FPS instead of 35.

[Drew]

150 dollar memory card if enough for anyone. - Bill Gates




Also 640k of RAM is enough too.

[Bobmuhthol]

http://benchmarkreviews.com/images/reviews/video_cards/ZOTAC_ZT-98XES2P-FSP/Crysis_1600x1200_16xQ-AA.jpg

9800 GTX is a $150 card, 9800 GX2 is a $250 card, roughly.

[Drew]

Or you could just turn the resolution down a little bit.

[Celephais]

He said he didn't want to spend a grand. Just because you can tell the difference between 35 fps and 50 fps doesn't make it worth the money. I like to overspend on my GPU as well, and I regret it every time because I buy high end and then a week later another chipset is announced and I realize I could have spent half the money on the model with one less active TPC, gotten comperable performance and upgrade to the new chipset sooner.

[Bobmuhthol]

If I'm on a high-resolution monitor, it's because I want to play my games in a high resolution. No one is complaining about the price of these cards or their inability to play games, but people are definitely looking for cards that will give them great performance.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<He said he didn't want to spend a grand.>>

Right, that's what a cap is. Under that amount. But he didn't say "fuck, man, I don't want something for like $250 that's so expensive!!!"

<<Just because you can tell the difference between 35 fps and 50 fps doesn't make it worth the money.>>

That's exactly what it means when you want the 50 FPS and are willing to pay the money to get it.

[Celephais]

Obviously it comes down to your budget, if you're willing to allocate $100 a year to your GPU budget, your better off buying a new $100 GPU every year instead of a $250 GPU every two and a half years.

[Bobmuhthol]

That I agree with.

[Celephais]

Right, that's what a cap is.
If I said "I don't want to spend $1,000,000 on a car" that doesn't mean I'm willing to spend $250,000. It's an arbitrary number, he didn't mention a cap.

[Celephais]

That I agree with.
We get in arguements about symantics way too frequently... I hate backing down. $150 is my baseline recomendation... also SHM mentioned WoW, if that's all he cares about he'd be fine w/ a $75 card, even at 1920x1200

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Actually, I think Bob nailed it with his recommend if that's a good card. I have seen cards in the 6-800 dollar range and honestly wonder what you get for that, much less 1k. The $250 card was honestly about what I was thinking of spending, and I'll take his recommendation that it's a good one.

I'm sure there are merits to both your arguments, just wanted to say thanks Alex.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

We get in arguements about symantics way too frequently... I hate backing down. $150 is my baseline recomendation... also SHM mentioned WoW, if that's all he cares about he'd be fine w/ a $75 card, even at 1920x1200

I did mention WoW, but I also play a desktop games where at times the graphics suck ass/stutter/etc, unless I turn down the settings. I'd like to keep the settings higher if possible. (For instance Oblivion is one that chokes on my computer unless I turn the settings fairly low).

[Bobmuhthol]

As always, just make sure you have the necessary hardware to be able to take on a new card before you buy it.

[Celephais]

As always, just make sure you have the necessary hardware to be able to take on a new card before you buy it.
As Bob said, particuarly your power supply. You'll want to make sure you have the additional power connections or else the card will underclock itself and your $250 card will run like the $150 card :)

[Celephais]

Actually, I think Bob nailed it with his recommend if that's a good card.
I'm partial to nVidia products, I'm biased though, nVidia has a good HPC record in CUDA as opposed to AMD's CTM (Did AMD continue to develop CTM, or did it die w/ ATI ... which sucks because they theoretically have better performance, but they haven't done as well wooing the developers).

This would be my recomendation:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121285

Performs about the same as the 4870 (better in some benchs worse in others). And doubles as a PhysX card.

[Ashliana]

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/847/ashcompca8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

It's a Q6600 overclocked to 3.2GHz, 8800GT slightly overclocked, 4GB of XMS2 Corsair slightly overclocked, 150GB raptor that is tragically filled up almost all the way, while the terabyte drive is dying and I'm preparing to send it back to Seagate.

[Drew]

I have an old 500 watt power source (circa 2002), could I pop that sucker in my new comp or am I missing some improvements between now and then on PSUs?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121291

Good luck not getting laid with this thing. It's impossible.

Ok, so I bought a second 24" monitor (Samsung 24" HDTV monitor if that matters, paired with my old Dell 24" 2405FPW). I pulled my PC and looked at the power supply, it's 300W Max, and 350 Max continuous. How the hell do I tell if I'll need a new power supply or not? I don't know from the spec pages on the graphics card what it draws (or what my old one drew for that matter - it's a GeForce 7350LE).

Confirmed I have the space for a new card, and they are PCI Express x16, but this card says PCI Express 2.0 x16 - is there a difference?

I hate not knowing fuckall about my own computer anymore :/

[Celephais]

You need a new power supply if you're getting a higher end GPU.

The card supports PCI Express 2.0 x16 ... it will still work on a previous version of the spec, at a slower speed... but it won't be noticable.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Wahoo! Installed my vid card and powersupply today.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y216/imagedream/Misc/Perf.jpg

[Drew]

Nice upgrade.

[Drew]

Defibrillator bump, got a new graphics card and PSU too!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v24/backwardhatclub/vistaperformance.jpg

[Warriorbird]

This is like an actual e-peen comparison thread.