Vista CPU score?

[nanaki333]

What's everyone's Vista score? I'm running the 64bit and I have 5.9s accross the board, except the CPU. I have an E6700 at 3.2 and it rates the score at 5.6. At stock speeds, it still rates the score at 5.6.

Does Vista just read what the processor's original speed is and base your score off that?

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: nanaki333
What's everyone's Vista score? I'm running the 64bit and I have 5.9s accross the board, except the CPU. I have an E6700 at 3.2 and it rates the score at 5.6. At stock speeds, it still rates the score at 5.6.

Does Vista just read what the processor's original speed is and base your score off that?

Nope, it retests if you telll it to. If you didn't see an improvement in score then the OC didn't provide enough benefit to bump you up (5.9 across the board here )

 

[nanaki333]

what speed you running at? i went from 2.6 to 3.2 and it didn't change when i retested it.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: nanaki333
what speed you running at? i went from 2.6 to 3.2 and it didn't change when i retested it.

8 cores at 2.66

 

[kelleybp]

I have a s939 amd x2 4400+ at 2.6, which translates to the same specs as an FX-60 at stock speeds. My CPU score is a 5.2 - the lowest score in my system.

 

[lxskllr]

5.7

 

[Shawn]

My E6300 scores a 5.2.

 

[jkresh]

5.7

 

[fierydemise]

4.8 on stock E6300

 

[bucwylde23]

E6300= 5.0

 

[evilharp]

X2 4200+ (939 stock speed) = 4.9

 

[lavaheadache]

e6600@3.37 = 5.7

 

[Arkaign]

Vista scores are almost arbitrary. I think it's ludicrous how low their ceiling is, considering how much further hardware performance is going to increase over the life of Vista. Think about it, we'll see systems in a couple of years with 16GB of DDR3, 8 and 16 cores, SSDs, and they will just be 5.9s or 6.0s.

Why couldn't they just tack on a number that was a culmination of fp/integer/cache/fsb/etc, and put it on the end.

Oh well, at least it's something, and we can always keep installing 3rd party benchmarks, I just think the built-in ones are somewhat lame.

 

[dguy6789]

Microsoft has stated that they will up the score ceiling over time.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Microsoft has stated that they will up the score ceiling over time.

Ah, interesting. Well, I stand corrected

Still, wonder why they started out with such a low ceiling?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Plus why base your overall score SOLELY on the lowest score you get? For instance I use an older 250GB WD SE16 SATA2 HDD and it gets a 5.3 which is my lowest score. Now, I get 5.8-5.9 in every other category...why do I get an overall 5.3 just because I don't need a uber fast HDD? Photoshop runs fast still, games are good...i don't see why MS even bothered.

 

[Puffnstuff]

My e6400 @ 2.7 is a 5.6 on that score. Vista ultimate is very snappy for me.

 

[Stumps]

5.6

see sig

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus why base your overall score SOLELY on the lowest score you get? For instance I use an older 250GB WD SE16 SATA2 HDD and it gets a 5.3 which is my lowest score. Now, I get 5.8-5.9 in every other category...why do I get an overall 5.3 just because I don't need a uber fast HDD? Photoshop runs fast still, games are good...i don't see why MS even bothered.

The score isn't for us. It's for people who go buy Dells and get shafted with a crippled system with a high-end CPU and integrated video.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: aka1nas

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Plus why base your overall score SOLELY on the lowest score you get? For instance I use an older 250GB WD SE16 SATA2 HDD and it gets a 5.3 which is my lowest score. Now, I get 5.8-5.9 in every other category...why do I get an overall 5.3 just because I don't need a uber fast HDD? Photoshop runs fast still, games are good...i don't see why MS even bothered.

The score isn't for us. It's for people who go buy Dells and get shafted with a crippled system with a high-end CPU and integrated video.

Yeah...it's for morons who don't know a GB from a Mhz.

 

[bobsmith1492]

The scale is extremely compressed. The difference between my friends' Athlon XP 2200 and my C2D@2.8 is like 3.something to 5.something. I think they tried to compress the entire range from PI up to the latest and greatest while still leaving room for new CPUs to fit into the scale from 1-10.

 

[pcgeek11]

What I would like to know is What exactly does this score do for you besides Nothing?

" It's for people who go buy Dells and get shafted with a crippled system with a high-end CPU and integrated video. "

How is it getting shafted when Dell Clearly has the system components listed in a pick and choose type interface when you buy the system? Everybody doesn't need an Nvidia 8800 with 512 MB Ram to run Excel or Word.

The score means nothing to anyone, unless you just like to see an arbitrary number.. You have no idea what is done to derive the number...

Just my opinion. Which is worth the same as the Vista Score Number.

pcgeek11

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: pcgeek11
What I would like to know is What exactly does this score do for you besides Nothing?

" It's for people who go buy Dells and get shafted with a crippled system with a high-end CPU and integrated video. "

How is it getting shafted when Dell Clearly has the system components listed in a pick and choose type interface when you buy the system? Everybody doesn't need an Nvidia 8800 with 512 MB Ram to run Excel or Word.

The score means nothing to anyone, unless you just like to see an arbitrary number.. You have no idea what is done to derive the number...

Just my opinion. Which is worth the same as the Vista Score Number.

pcgeek11

It could be useful to non tech people who are having performance issues. They can run the analysis and if a score comes out low, take those results to a computer shop to find out how to boost performance. I agree though, I don't find it particularly useful.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: pcgeek11
What I would like to know is What exactly does this score do for you besides Nothing?

:roll:

The score number is used as the minimum base for certain software. For example, if you look in the Games Explorer you'll see that Supreme Commander recommends a '4'. If nothing else it allows 'Games for Windows' to specify a minimium requirement which is simpler than (P42.66 of better, 512meg, agp video 4x, etc).... Most people can compare the number on the box they want to buy to their score and know if it will work or not...

 

[pcgeek11]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Originally posted by: pcgeek11
What I would like to know is What exactly does this score do for you besides Nothing?

:roll:

The score number is used as the minimum base for certain software. For example, if you look in the Games Explorer you'll see that Supreme Commander recommends a '4'. If nothing else it allows 'Games for Windows' to specify a minimium requirement which is simpler than (P42.66 of better, 512meg, agp video 4x, etc).... Most people can compare the number on the box they want to buy to their score and know if it will work or not...

:roll: Sums it up pretty well I guess.

pcgeek11