Windows 7 RTM GUI 4.62x slower then XP SP3

[pcslookout]

Not true.

 

[corkyg]

That's a crock of cranberries - like much stuff on YouTube. I have two machines - one XP Pro/SP3 and the other Win 7 Ultimate. Win7 boots, loads and is ready to go while XP is still scratching its ass.

 

[Chiefcrowe]

agreed. I tested this out when i first installed it and win7 definitely loads a lot faster than xp.

Originally posted by: corkyg
That's a crock of cranberries - like much stuff on YouTube. I have two machines - one XP Pro/SP3 and the other Win 7 Ultimate. Win7 boots, loads and is ready to go while XP is still scratching its ass.

 

[Jeff7181]

I wonder how fast the Windows 3.1 GUI can resize windows on current hardware. Why do I care? I dunno... why does anyone care how fast Windows XP, Vista, or 7 resizes windows?

 

[sgrinavi]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I wonder how fast the Windows 3.1 GUI can resize windows on current hardware. Why do I care? I dunno... why does anyone care how fast Windows XP, Vista, or 7 resizes windows?

Kinda what I was thinking too..... I have never, once, had any reason to grab the corner of window, or a column, and rapidly move it back and forth. Just don't see any particular reason to do that. In fact, when I do resize a window I am not exactly moving at a pace that the GUI has trouble keeping up.

In all reality I find Windows 7 to be just as, if not more, responsive than XP with regard to stuff that matters, opening menus, starting programs, finding stuff.... you know, those things that we actually use a computer for?

 

[MBrown]

I can't believe people aren't going to get windows 7 because they can ranomly resize their windows as fast as XP. Who cares?

 

[Cogman]

nm, I saw that it is specifically in services that this bug enters in. However, I have NEVER had a need to resize services back and forth like the vid is doing (Who the heck does have a need like that?). Every other windows behaves just as fast if not faster then xp does.

So what did this moron find?

1. A more graphical gui requires more to process.. Um yeah, thats horrible!
2. A specific bug to a minor component that nobody is going to you.
3. A giant "Who the heck cares?" From the rest of the world.

Oh Noooss, it takes .0003 ms vs 0.00003ms to resize my windows, Thats just HORRIBLE!

Irrational MS hating must be fun.

 

[Modelworks]

Right click desktop, pick personalize, then change theme to windows 7 basic.
Then go to control panel, performance information and tools, adjust visual effects.
Click adjust for best performance.

Now you got your XP speed and look.

All that video shows is the animation code, not a flaw in the display driver implementation.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Right click desktop, pick personalize, then change theme to windows 7 basic.
Then go to control panel, performance information and tools, adjust visual effects.
Click adjust for best performance.

Now you got your XP speed and look.

All that video shows is the animation code, not a flaw in the display driver implementation.

Thank you!

 

[RebateMonger]

Whoops. I spent about four minutes watching the video, which is 4.52 times the amount of time that a faster 2D GUI would save me over the next five years. 😉

 

[VinDSL]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
[...] yeah, next time I want to rapidly move windows back and forth, rapidly resize windows back and forth, and rapidly scroll back and forth for no good reason, this video has convinced me to use Windows XP for such eminently useful things with real-world relevance.

Originally posted by: hans030390
Guess what? No one uses their computers like this.

Originally posted by: ViRGE
Of course people don't spend all day continually resizing windows, so the benefits of GPU accelerated compositing such as a resistance to tearing and quick scaling usually outweigh the costs.

Originally posted by: MBrown
I can't believe people aren't going to get windows 7 because they can ranomly resize their windows as fast as XP. Who cares?

Um...

It's obvious (to me) that the benchmark proggie was controlling the movement, to create a worst-case scenario, then recording the results in a graph -- not the user.

How would YOU measure the performance? Scrolling in Windows Explorer, frantically looking for a file, maybe?

Okay, here's another one for you to chew on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToFgYylqP_U (YouTube - same director - Windows 7 GUI slowness: file explorer)

 

[pctwo]

I'm more interested in video rendering speed. how does win7 perform in VMR9, EVR, etc.

I have a nvidia 7600GT and I get more hiccups and stutters playing back hi def video in win7 than in XP. Video playback is smoother in XP using either Haali, VMR9, or EVR (which isn't even native to XP). Using latest driver from nvidia.

 

[VinDSL]

BTW, maybe you guys aren't clicking (more info) on these channels, and you're missing his point(s). 😉

Example:

Windows Display Drivers Model used in both Vista and 7 doesn't include the necessary hardware accelerated 2D functions to make the graphics generated by GDI and GDI+ as fast as in Windows XP.

Microsoft chose software render because they found it too difficult to combine the new graphical engine with the old one. If you want to learn more about it read this: http://blogs.msdn.com/directx/...g-apis-in-windows.aspx

GDI has dozens of functions: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-u...145203%28VS.85%29.aspx

GDI hardware acceleration in Windows 7 using WDDM 1.1 drivers has only these functions hardware accelerated: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd434692.aspx

WDDM 1.1 drivers makes mandatory this new "partial" GDI hardware acceleration. So any driver which claims to be 1.1 is already accelerating as much as it ever will.

The example in the video is probably one of the applications where this problem is more easily spotted but there are many others which show the same behaviour in different degrees depending on how they call GDI functions.

Windows 7 has several integrated solutions to circumvent the lack of 2d graphical acceleration...the problem is those solutions require full rewrite of every single application's GUI in order to use the new Direct2D and DirectWrite, including the ones bundled with the OS (file explorer, dialogue boxes, management windows, etc...) and that's not going to happen in years, not from Microsoft itself, nor from 3rd party developers. I don't see Adobe porting their suite to Direct2D any time soon..and anyway, the system will always stay GDI/GDI+ based. I think they probably won't start GUI rewriting until the next major Windows version is released..

Meanwhile we will not see any better results in this area over time other than the ones related with the improvement in CPU speeds.

So this is all we get. Microsoft had to include this partial GDI acceleration, because those functions were way too slow in software mode, but it seems they thought the rest of them were not.....(which is not correct).

About the real world impact. I can clearly see the real world impact of this decision as soon as I boot Windows 7 and start working, but there are people who are not able to see the difference between a game running at 60 fps from the same game running a 30 fps or hearing the difference between a 128kb mp3 and a real CD Audio. I guess it all depends on how fast you are used to working with your computer, and whether Vista already seemed slow or not for you.

All I can say is, there is a real difference, a difference you can meter, and at least me and some other people are able to feel in every day Windows 7 use.

Probably many people are blinded by the novelty and don't want to accept there are some problems with the new and overrated Microsoft system.

[Emphasis added - VinDSL]

This is what you should be discussing... 🙂

 

[Modelworks]

LOL the guy is clueless.
I use CAD and animation apps all day long. They draw inside windows on the desktop. So I have 3d windows surround by 2d windows. If the display was as laggy as he claims I would be back to xp x64 faster than I could blink.
I turn off the animations and I am working just as good in windows 7 as I did in XP x64, no change in speed.

Adobe has already patched in full windows 7 acceleration, so not sure what this guy was smoking.

 

[VinDSL]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
LOL the guy is clueless[...]

I turn off the animations and I am working just as good in windows 7 as I did in XP x64, no change in speed.

At least he provided POC.

Where's yours? 😀

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Cogman
nm, I saw that it is specifically in services that this bug enters in. However, I have NEVER had a need to resize services back and forth like the vid is doing (Who the heck does have a need like that?). Every other windows behaves just as fast if not faster then xp does.

So what did this moron find?

1. A more graphical gui requires more to process.. Um yeah, thats horrible!
2. A specific bug to a minor component that nobody is going to you.
3. A giant "Who the heck cares?" From the rest of the world.

Oh Noooss, it takes .0003 ms vs 0.00003ms to resize my windows, Thats just HORRIBLE!

Irrational MS hating must be fun.

Exactly! It's called diminishing returns.