Windows XP SP2/SP3 Server 2008 Comparison Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD

I'm feeling the same, often when some1 claims something to perform a lot better etc. when testing myself in benchmarks and games etc the results were far from impressive. :p:

This 20% is most likely a special scenario but I'm willing to bet run typical benchmarks and you'll witness probably a complete different story. Vista SP1 scores 500 points lower in 3DMark06 compared to XP SP3 for example, I doubt Win 2k8 would be much better either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 003

Sounds like we finally have a winner here! Can't wait for your comparison! Did you compare xp x64 to server 2008 x64, or the 32-bit versions?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 003

Now I'm confused, conflicting information... we need some reliable benches! :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

Great :up:

---

As I promised. I could have done much better but I do not have the time to do it. I have also included the Windows Server 2008 64 Bit as many of you wanted to.

First is the hardware used for the test, before I proceed I have to tell my system was and still acting a bit odd as I'm getting some kind of interference related to some unknown damaged hardware part. So the tests have been run many times to make sure is the real deal/result got.


http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...A/Hardware.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...A/DX64bit2.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...ww/DX64bit.jpg



Programs used:

• Aquamark
• Lightmark
• OpenGL Fur
• Sandra
  • Memory
    • Bandwidth
    • Latency
      • Linear
      • Random
  • Physical Disk
  • Processor Arithmetic
• Super PI
• 3DMark
  • 01
  • 03
  • 05
  • 06

Aquamark:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...g/Aquamark.jpg

The numbers have no much difference with the SP3 update, as the results are quite similar.

Lightmarks

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...Lightsmark.jpg

As we can see above SP3 leads the performance, SP2 comes quite closer and Windows server 2008 lags really bad on this benchmark.

OpenGL Fur

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...OpenGL.Fur.jpg

We can see here that OpenGL is the way to go for Server 2008 users as it is very competitive on this benchmark, no downsides were spotted so far.

Sandra Memory Bandwidth:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/....Bandwidth.jpg

Sandra Memory Latency Linear:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...ncy.Linear.jpg

Sandra Memory Latency Random:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...ncy.Random.jpg

Sandra Memory Physical Disks:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...ical.Disks.jpg

Sandra Memory Processor Arithmetic:

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...Arithmetic.jpg

The most of Sandra tests were quite normal, but one called me attention by the fact it showed a very poor performance, processor arithmetic is really the drawback here. I still have to find the why, in CPU tests ran on 3Dmark using Windows Server 2008 64 bit the processor was far superior than when it was running on XPSP2 or XPSP3.

Super PI

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...Dg/SuperPi.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...rk01.XPSP3.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...Q/3DMark01.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...rk03.LHSP1.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...w/3DMark03.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...g/3DMark05.jpg

http://o54ofa.blu.livefilestore.com/...g/3DMark06.jpg



Conclusions:

So Windows XP SP2 improved its 3D performance once upgraded/with SP3. The Windows Server 2008 ran much better once used the CPU as it contained 64 Bit extension, its weak point is definitely the 3D performance, its strong point was the CPU that has had a superior performance than XP. Although Windows Server 2008 it is highly recommended for DX10 games that are coming within few months. If you hate Vista this is a must have Operational System.

Windows XP got much better and stable but it will be soon not be utilized anymore as Microsoft said that DX10 will be vista and upwards. The real is when the money matters, nothing else comes ahead of it.

The tests will be updated as I get new parts/components. I still think Windows server 2008 64 Bits could have run much better than this. That is why I will be updating the results.

Metroid.

Awesome testing. :clap:

Thank-you!!!

Been using the SP3 for about a day. Noticed slightly faster boot-up too :up:

Nice test.

nicely done... :D

Nice testing, I think x64 played a part in 2008 doing worse all around.

Comparing all 3 under 32bit would likely even out some of those memory scores. Since xp32bit sp2 vs xp64bit sp2 even shows drops in memory scores testing with everest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gautam

Awesome testing. :clap:

---

My thoughts exactly, thanks for the information

Very nice :clap: :up:

I'm using now Vista for more than 1year, maybe i try again XP :shrug:

xp ftw !!!

2008=Vista SP1

But server versions have different priority settings. Their drawback is usually on foreground processes.

Metroid, if it's possible and you have the time, do you think you can add Windows XP x64 onto the comparison list for your next set of tests?

I use XP x64, and I really want to see how it stacks up to these versions of Windows.

If not, I understand, but I think it would be great to know.

Be cool to see the difference in scores on a Intel chipset board.... I.E. X38/48....

Great testing there Metroid...thanks for taking the time

thanks must have been time cosuming.....good job :cool:

I would love to see Vista 64bit SP1 vs. Server 2008 since people are aying that 2008 i faster in general, not only in games. Or has that rumour been debunked?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gautam

Awesome testing. :clap:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stocius

Thank-you!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnXioZ

Been using the SP3 for about a day. Noticed slightly faster boot-up too :up:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v_rr

Nice test.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StyM

nicely done... :D

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

My thoughts exactly, thanks for the information

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldenEye

Very nice :clap: :up:

I'm using now Vista for more than 1year, maybe i try again XP :shrug:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NapalmV5

xp ftw !!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herbal

Great testing there Metroid...thanks for taking the time

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragy2k

thanks must have been time cosuming.....good job :cool:

---

Thanks very much to all, next time will be much better, had no much time for a complete test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shintai

2008=Vista SP1

But server versions have different priority settings. Their drawback is usually on foreground processes.

---

True. We can see by the fact Windows Server 2008 was launched at almost the same time as SP1 for Vista came and also drivers are alike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MGreg

Nice testing, I think x64 played a part in 2008 doing worse all around.

Comparing all 3 under 32bit would likely even out some of those memory scores. Since xp32bit sp2 vs xp64bit sp2 even shows drops in memory scores testing with everest.

---

Very well reminded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ExodusC

Metroid, if it's possible and you have the time, do you think you can add Windows XP x64 onto the comparison list for your next set of tests?

I use XP x64, and I really want to see how it stacks up to these versions of Windows.

If not, I understand, but I think it would be great to know.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by screwtech02

Be cool to see the difference in scores on a Intel chipset board.... I.E. X38/48....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gambit_2K

I would love to see Vista 64bit SP1 vs. Server 2008 since people are aying that 2008 i faster in general, not only in games. Or has that rumour been debunked?

---

These tests were done exclusively for some questions that me and some performance crazy fellows had in mind. I intend to make new tests using 64 Bit versions of Vista, XP, Server x 32 Bit alike versions and see what is going on/the difference since we can not find accurate tests about it.

I'm waiting for the new velociraptor, Nehalen and Bloomfield. I'm sure these will be great performance breakers.

I need to study now. I have got some computer science exams next month, need time to put the lectures in mind.

Thanks,

Metroid.

Nice job on the testing:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Metroid

I intend to make new tests using 64 Bit versions of Vista, XP, Server x 32 Bit alike versions and see what is going on/the difference since we can not find accurate tests about it.

---

sounds good, can't wait.

awsome testing

edit: if you can, grab a copy of the ported dx10 for XP and then rerun the tests and see what difference it makes compared to your current results... you may have to google to find it

Insane work done. Windows XP SP3 is quite fast and reliable systems nowadays.

Thanks for the testing, although you perhaps didn't see quite as big gains as I did going from SP2 to this SP3 RC1 build 3264 as I also saw some mem performance improvement, it's still showing some gain in 3D performance.

I have 32bit build of Windows Server 2k8 and XP SP3 RC1 build 3264 installed at the moment, both nLite/vLite tweaked with all unnecessary services removed/stopped. The XP install is now like maybe 4~5 months old which is old to me as I usually format every 1 - 2 months but I've been so satisfied with this so have seen no reason to format and Server 2k8 is almost unused and installed recently though.

I could perhaps also do similiar comparision between this XP SP3 3264 build (and later compare it to final build) and vs Server 2k8 if I'm not too lazy or busy, got some stuff to do this weekend. I would then also be sure to include some game benchmarks as well in both GPU and CPU limited scenarios from Crysis, UT3 and TrackMania Nations Forever (and possibly others) for example.

I did a bit of testing recently (no XP/SP3)

XP SP2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3..._XP_600mhz.jpg

2008 Standard Edition

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...008_600MHz.jpg

64 bit Vista increases a lot when moving from 2GB to 4GB. This really should be ran with 32 bit or with 4GB on XP 64 SP3. GHZ can you run the same tests since both of your versions are 32bit?

Nice work. :clap: :up:

Anyone got any numbers on how Server 2k3 compares? I got a legit copy for free and I'm thinking about using it instead of XP SP2 if it is infact, "ligther" on system resources than XP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaK2000

64 bit Vista increases a lot when moving from 2GB to 4GB. This really should be ran with 32 bit or with 4GB on XP 64 SP3. GHZ can you run the same tests since both of your versions are 32bit?

---

it is @ 32bit