Windows 7 - What's your experience index?

[rickvtv6]

HA! i decided to install the chipset driver instead of just leaving it to whatever it auto installed, then disable command queuing and bam! i knew my 1tb ns had it in it!

maybe ill save my cash on that raptor for now...

[Warboy]

Why don't you guys use the detailed WEI?

[KELL5]

Why don't you guys use the detailed WEI?

with winsat you can run the individual tests seperately, but it doesn't effect your WEI.

even if you use formal, it makes no difference.

I've been trying to find a way of making WEI use another HDD other than specified....but to no avail. Perhaps someone else has the answer?

[ewitte]

I'll be installing this on a G.SKILL 64GB SSD drive when it gets here.

[rickvtv6]

Why don't you guys use the detailed WEI?

how do you access it in 7?

[KELL5]

^^ open a cmd prmpt window under administator. (this also works for vista)

you can then use commands listed here http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../cc770542.aspx to run individual tests.

For example...

winsat disk -seq -read -drive * (where * is replaced with drive letter you wanna test)

...... this will test the sequential read rate (in MB/s) of the desired HDD.

Makes no difference to your WEI though, since this would appear to have to run as a script but I'm not exactly sure.

[Warboy]

^^ open a cmd prmpt window under administator. (this also works for vista)

you can then use commands listed here http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../cc770542.aspx to run individual tests.

For example...

winsat disk -seq -read -drive * (where * is replaced with drive letter you wanna test)

...... this will test the sequential read rate (in MB/s) of the desired HDD.

Makes no difference to your WEI though, since this would appear to have to run as a script but I'm not exactly sure.

That's not it, just look at my pic. Basically do your tests in normal WEI, Then click Print, and don't pick a printer. It will show what my pic shows.

[jcool]

What nobody got to 7.9 yet? Not even 7? Seems to be something wrong with the benching scheme then. I think I'd get a 7.9 on CPU/Ram and maybe GFX.. HDD not so much, it's just an ordinary VR cause I had to send back my SSDs due to some issues I was having

[Baam]

Got the gaming graphics a little higher with different drivers.

[orangekiwii]

i have no issues with drivers and windows 7 yet... COMPATIBILITY MODE FTW!!!

As for the experience... i get 5.9

7.5 processor (q9550)

5.9 ram - 4 gb 1066 mhz

7.9 aero - 8800 gts 640

5.9 3d graphics - 8800 gts 640

5.9 hard drive - 320 gb 7200.11 seagate barracuda


I'm quite surprised at my ram rating and my hdd rating... ram I have RIDICULOUSLY low timings... like 4 3 3 10 on 1066 mhz so i'm not sure it actually does any tests on ram performance

on HDD... I get well over 100 mb/s read and write average so i'd think i'd get a higher score than people with slower 1 tb drivers.... so this literally just goes to show this rating system is RETARDED

[rickvtv6]

i have no issues with drivers and windows 7 yet... COMPATIBILITY MODE FTW!!!

As for the experience... i get 5.9

7.5 processor (q9550)

5.9 ram - 4 gb 1066 mhz

7.9 aero - 8800 gts 640

5.9 3d graphics - 8800 gts 640

5.9 hard drive - 320 gb 7200.11 seagate barracuda


I'm quite surprised at my ram rating and my hdd rating... ram I have RIDICULOUSLY low timings... like 4 3 3 10 on 1066 mhz so i'm not sure it actually does any tests on ram performance

on HDD... I get well over 100 mb/s read and write average so i'd think i'd get a higher score than people with slower 1 tb drivers.... so this literally just goes to show this rating system is RETARDED

theres nothing wrong with a single 1tb drive, see my rating, see my sustained read? ive seen cheap 1tb drives do better than mine and mine is not a cheap drive.

as for ram, you gotta rememer windows 7 is to overtake vista, there is no sp2 (as far as ive read) due for vista as this is to take ova. my ddr3 super talent (same chips as the corsair's 1800mhz) is at stock spec 1800mhz 8-8-8-24 t2 2x2gb and it gets 5.5, look at the new x58 boards, they have tripple channel ddr3 and ddr3 is at 2000mhz now thats a realistic value of 1000mhz, mine is 900, yours is 533mhz. so remember that they have included the latest and greatest technology to be slammed into windows 7 like ram drives and ssd drives, tri, quad sli and crossfire setups (some new x58's support both sli and xfire which is awsome to see!) they have simply made room for future upcoming technology unlike vista that didnt take much effort to max out at 5.9 wei.



so dont expect life in the seventh window to be so sleazy.

just my 7 cents.

[KELL5]

on HDD... I get well over 100 mb/s read and write average so i'd think i'd get a higher score than people with slower 1 tb drivers.... so this literally just goes to show this rating system is RETARDED

yeah man you're right, everyone who scores a 5.9 in vista should automatically get 7.9 in 7

[rickvtv6]

the other thing i dont get with wei is that i have a quad sli setup, (basically 4 cards,2 cards on one pci-e slot in a metal housing) but windows will onky recognize 1279 or 512mb? shouldnt it be approx 2048 or it still only recognizes 1 card? i think its funny that nvidia rate the gtx280 and 9800gx2 the same gaming performance, just about every reveiew i read the gtx280 was ripping the gx2 a new 'a' hole, but is it true drivers are still not working with windows and software as they should or are they just pulling on there willies hoping for the best?

should i be running a psu greater than 850watt with the gear in my sig also with leadtek hdtv tuner, 6 case fans and the asus xonar d2x instead of the xfi listed? i seem to have alot of probs o.cing especially with win7 and the new p08 bios??

[orangekiwii]

I don't really care either way I think all this just proves that WEI doesn't really mean anything

individual benchmark scores tell a lot more but since most of the population doesn't know what that is, WEI will do

[rickvtv6]

im surprised they didnt make a community ranking to see what other ppl have got with showing the setups like futuremark's benching tools. that would be good to see then you could get an idea on what would get 7.9 across the spectrum.

wei has simply made more room and tolerance for ppl with alot of money down the track :-?

[rge]

Mine with single intel SSD x25m. My graphics score is low as only 1 ultra, probably need crossfire/sli with modern gpu for highest score. I have not had any problems with drivers on windows 7 yet either. Got 5.1 surround sound to work on my XiFi gamer, installed drivers using vista compatibility mode..then used creative panel to designate speakers front vs side, etc..had to unplug speakers and plug in one at time then click side for side speaker, etc.... then used windows control panel sound to set up as 5.1 using configure. But initially only 2 of my speakers worked, windows doesnt seem to do it correctly on its own.

[STi489]

7.7 here but uninstalled windows 7 because couldn't find activation loader....so no screenshot

[rickvtv6]

man thats some impressive scores! i remember saying something about ssd drives becoming the way of the future as i heard 1tb drives are soo big and slow? lol

rge: if your i7 is at 4.2ghz i wonder what speed it would need to hit 7.9? also, how much RAM have you installed on your setup?

[Warboy]

Mine with single intel SSD x25m. My graphics score is low as only 1 ultra, probably need crossfire/sli with modern gpu for highest score. I have not had any problems with drivers on windows 7 yet either. Got 5.1 surround sound to work on my XiFi gamer, installed drivers using vista compatibility mode..then used creative panel to designate speakers front vs side, etc..had to unplug speakers and plug in one at time then click side for side speaker, etc.... then used windows control panel sound to set up as 5.1 using configure. But initially only 2 of my speakers worked, windows doesnt seem to do it correctly on its own.

Why does yours look different then everyone else's?

[rickvtv6]

Why does yours look different then everyone else's?

if you look at Hoboclese post on page 2 it looks like the same sort of select and screenshot typa thing, but that shot deff looks different, bolder text, colour is enriched way too much to the point it is flooding the curves of pictures and text so its not so fine, even the grey in the background is way too dark, i cant even get mine to that affect using nvidia control panel?

[rge]

Anyone with core i7 at 4.2ghz will get similar processor score. EDIT: in fact cpu OC is nearly irrelevant. AT 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.44 I get 7.7 for processor score. AT stock 2.93 I get 7.4, at 3.5 I get 7.5. The processor benchmark is as worthless as the memory one. Next time I am benching at 4.6 in cold running arena chess, I will try that, at best it will be 7.8. I guess you need a core i7 at 5+ for 7.9, or maybe 7.9 is for skulltrail.

With 3gb mem I get 5.5 score for memory, whether mem is at 1600 8,8,8 or 2000 8,8,8. With 6b at 1600mhz 8,8,8 I get 7.9 score. Weight seems to be on amount of RAM only, useless benchmark if you ask me.

Desktop performance is mix of processor/gpu, primarily cpu I think.

Gaming low because I have single gpu. With top line multi gpu would get 7.9.

Intel SSD gets 7.1 in disk performance, just like anyone with similar SSD would. Weight is primarily on access time, write speed irrelevant as I can cripple write speed by disabling cache and get same score. Again useless benchmark, imo.

For wargamer, I reran and took full size pics. The previous pic, like all my pics has been resized to 80% (being polite and using less bandwidth, but makes text blurry) and autoprocess to clear text back up. Attached is straight pics. I can understand being suspicious of benchmarks that are ridiculously high or dont make sense, but mine is neither. Unless you are just complaining of my pic quality, in which case you have way too much time.

[rickvtv6]

Anyone with core i7 at 4.2ghz will get similar processor score. EDIT: in fact cpu OC is nearly irrelevant. AT 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.44 I get 7.7 for processor score. AT stock 2.93 I get 7.4, at 3.5 I get 7.5. The processor benchmark is as worthless as the memory one. Next time I am benching at 4.6 in cold running arena chess, I will try that, at best it will be 7.8. I guess you need a core i7 at 5+ for 7.9, or maybe 7.9 is for skulltrail.

With 3gb mem I get 5.5 score for memory, whether mem is at 1600 8,8,8 or 2000 8,8,8. With 6b at 1600mhz 8,8,8 I get 7.9 score. Weight seems to be on amount of RAM only, useless benchmark if you ask me.

Desktop performance is mix of processor/gpu, primarily cpu I think.

Gaming low because I have single gpu. With top line multi gpu would get 7.9.

Intel SSD gets 7.1 in disk performance, just like anyone with similar SSD would. Weight is primarily on access time, write speed irrelevant as I can cripple write speed by disabling cache and get same score. Again useless benchmark, imo.

For wargamer, I reran and took full size pics. The previous pic, like all my pics has been resized to 80% (being polite and using less bandwidth, but makes text blurry) and autoprocess to clear text back up. Attached is straight pics. I can understand being suspicious of benchmarks that are ridiculously high or dont make sense, but mine is neither. Unless you are just complaining of my pic quality, in which case you have way too much time.

maybe the i7 965 o.ced would be able to do it?? shouldnt they show 8 cores for the i7 or it doesnt recognize the hyper threads and only the 4 realistic cores?

i dont have a picture editor so i cant really resize my pics as i only use my laptop for net surfing.

they deff made way for the triple channel ddr3 then if 6gb gets you 7.9

how is it you have over 2500mb of graphics mem? i have quad sli and it only shows around 1200mb?

still thats some nice scores!

[rge]

i7 have 4 cores and 8 threads. All software specifying cores should say 4 and if specifying threads should say 8.

WEI is reading graphics memory based on my ultra 8800 (768) and shared system memory from my ram, ie more ram, the higher WEI "graphics memory"...dont ask me why.

Though a screwy benchmark, it does point out my weakest point correctly, but I am probably going to hold on to my ultra until last quarter of this year to see what new comes out...nothing out there really makes me want to upgrade.

[ewitte]

5.9

Processor 7.5 - Q9550 @ 3.8Ghz
Memory 5.9 - 4GB stock or below DDR2-667
Graphics 7.9 - 8800GTX
Gaming 6.0 - 8800GTX
Primary Hard drive 6.3 - G.SKILL 64GB SSD

[rickvtv6]

i7 have 4 cores and 8 threads. All software specifying cores should say 4 and if specifying threads should say 8.

WEI is reading graphics memory based on my ultra 8800 (768) and shared system memory from my ram, ie more ram, the higher WEI "graphics memory"...dont ask me why.

Though a screwy benchmark, it does point out my weakest point correctly, but I am probably going to hold on to my ultra until last quarter of this year to see what new comes out...nothing out there really makes me want to upgrade.

there is the gtx295 or just wait for the upcoming gtx350, if specs are right it will whoop ass. and by the looks of the setup your spinnin price wont be an issue? id expect the gtx350 to be over $1000aud as the gtx295 is just under that here now.