is it normal for e8400 (c0/m0 stepping) to score 5.7 in vista ultimate 64bit?

[opeeum69]

The e8400 I just bought is not overclocked, and it's at 3 ghz, ty

 

[Quiksilver]

Uhh... people actually use that pos program to evaluate performance?

 

[opeeum69]

this was my first time building, I just wanted to make sure I didn't do anything wrong during assembly, thought scoring a 5.7 might be a sign of something, hopefully nothing;

just seems that a somewhat late gen processor should score 5.9, so i'm collecting other people's experience

thanks

 

[Zenoth]

I don't think that Vista's performance evaluation only takes into account what the CPU can do, and even if it did, I don't think it'd be more precise than the CPU-focused tests in the 3DMark benchmarks. Anyhow, opeeum69, you shouldn't worry at all about what Vista says about your performance, instead try to see how your games and general applications run.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I think I was at 5.8 or 5.9 moving toward my desired OC setting. And I think that was with a 2GB RAM kit -- not 4GB.

What sort of RAM are you using?

 

[Adam8281]

My E8400 gets 5.7 too

 

[Hugh H]

Totally normal. My E8500 scores 5.7 @ stock speeds as well. When I overclocked to 3.8Ghz+, then it scored a 5.8.

A quad core (pretty much any Intel quad, not sure about AMD) would get the 5.9. Remember that it takes into consideration total CPU computing power, which quads have more of than duals. And, as you know, it does not matter that it does not get the "perfect" score under Vista if you are primarily a gamer.

 

[opeeum69]

guess I really shouldn't worry about the vista performance numbers, everything seems smooth so far anyways; I haven't done orthos yet, but that'll be the next thing I do. I'm on G.skill 4 gb ram pc2-6400 which is at 5-5-5-15 on 1.8-1.9v, I just plugged it in and it auto detected so I didn't try change any settings

thanks everyone for all the replies, more peace of mind for me just now

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The G.SKILL's should be enough RAM to contribute something positive to the score.

VISTA is new to me right now, and I'm just getting familiar with it. It is, at the moment, "experimental" and I'm stress-testing its hardware.

 

[GundamF91]

My Q9450 at 3.2Ghz gets 5.9 score. Is 6.0 the highest score? I wonder why it's not 10.0 as high score. I wouldn't really trust the Vista ratings. It has no statistical info at all. It's basically a feel good score for general users who don't want/or know how to run real benchmarks.

 

[imported_Scoop]

5.9 is highest. I think it's a lot easier to reach with a quadcore. I score a 5.7 with my system as well.

 

[Tweakin]

I scored 5.9 across the board when I had my Q6600 @ 3.0Ghz, and now I score 5.9 across the board except for the cpu...which is in my sig below.

Anyway, 5.7 is normal for any newer under 3.8Ghz non-quad chip.

 

[AmberClad]

It gives me a 5.8 with a 3.2GHz C2D. Everything else is 5.9.

Anyways, it's not a very useful test at all, because 5.9 is given to the top of the line hardware at the time of Vista's release. So a 8800GTS will get a 5.9...and so will a HD4870. Which makes it useless for comparison purposes.

Edit: And I think it's also scoring my CPU higher than it should be. A E8400 or E8500 should get the same or higher score than a E6600 OCed to 3.2Ghz.

 

[Bateluer]

My E8500 at stock gets 5.7 as well, but everything else in my system gets 5.9.

 

[imported_Champ]

i got a 5.8 in cpu and 5.9 in everything else

 

[khurios2000]

my BE-2400 got 5.1 in CPU score