Vista RC1 Assessment tool :mad:

[YottaHertz]

Hey guys!

I just installed Vista RC1. The System Assessment tool just rated my system as a 4.2.... WTF?!?!

Sys Specs
----------------------------------------

A64 4000+ @ stock
1GB PC4000 RAM 2.5-3-3-5-1T (with just Windows running the memory usage is 55%)
7800GT @ stock
2 x 80GB IDE HDD's -- RAID 0
1 x 250GB SATA HDD


Anyways, it's fairly stable -- I managed to blue screen it a couple of times but nothing *major* and it looks *AWESOME*!!!


I REALLY need to get a dual-core.... maybe I'll get an X2 4400+....
I also need more RAM....


What did you guys get for your systems?

[originel]

I got a 4.8 (down from a 5.1 in Beta 2...however that happened)

A64 X2 3800+ at stock
BFG 7600GT at stock (BFG stock anyways, which is OCed some)
2x512MB PC3200
1 120GB SATA drive (for the OS)
1 360GB SATA drive (for data)

Were you running the 32-bit of 64-bit version of Vista? Also, do you have a single 1GB stick of RAM? If so that is probably your problem. If you put in two sticks of identical RAM you can run it in dual channel mode, which should give you a performance boost. I don't think that the lack of dual-core is the problem, since I'm fairly certain the performance test is single-threaded.

[cmptrgydv]

What’s wrong with that rating, I have same processor and my rating is 4.3,
Every thing else is above 5.1, your right need dual core, I was thinking the same thing,

[cmptrgydv]

hey!!! original, that 4.8 is that what your CPU rating is, or something else in the system

[originel]

hey!!! original, that 4.8 is that what your CPU rating is, or something else in the system

That's memory actually...it's the bottleneck in my system. Everything else was above 5.

[cmptrgydv]

what did your CPU rate, I have a clawhammer 4000 it got 4.3

[originel]

I don't remember exactly...anywhere between a 5.1 and a 5.5

EDIT: Oh and I have a Manchester core.

[YottaHertz]

I got a 4.8 (down from a 5.1 in Beta 2...however that happened)

A64 X2 3800+ at stock
BFG 7600GT at stock (BFG stock anyways, which is OCed some)
2x512MB PC3200
1 120GB SATA drive (for the OS)
1 360GB SATA drive (for data)

Were you running the 32-bit of 64-bit version of Vista? Also, do you have a single 1GB stick of RAM? If so that is probably your problem. If you put in two sticks of identical RAM you can run it in dual channel mode, which should give you a performance boost. I don't think that the lack of dual-core is the problem, since I'm fairly certain the performance test is single-threaded.

Running 32-bit Vista. Also, got 2 x 512MB sticks... so, I running dual channel.... I'm pretty sure it's the CPU... though... I kinda expected it to do better...

EDIT: It is the CPU --> CPU: 4.2 everything else above 5.5....

[originel]

I haven't run the tests in the 32-bit version, I've only used the 64-bit version, so there may be some disparity there.

[Ultima]

I just downloaded RC1 as well, was gonna try it on my dual P3 1Ghz, should run it just fine, but I think I'd get a 2.1 or something.

Gonna reinstall my main rig soon, gonna try Vista on it 1st, I wonder what I'd get for my opty @ 3.0 with 1Gb @ dual channel.
Just my good old 800XL as card.

[cmptrgydv]

Well the dual cores are getting a lot better rating,
But I would sure like to see the performance difference, in vista, between dual and single core,
I was looking at an X2 4800, waiting for an opportunity to upgrade, now I might be building
A system for someone, guess who is getting this 4000,
This thing is not as responsive as XP is, just a little less snappy, but if I turn off the aero,
And set it to standard look, it runs about the same as XP does, so we will just have to wait,
For a lot better drivers for video cards, or maybe this aero is just suppose to have that floating start like it does,

[originel]

What graphics card do you have cmptrgydv?

IN my experience Aero is faster...at least anything rendering related. Paging may be a bit slower, but that's to be expected, but the actual movement of windows and such is much snappier for me...almost OS X like.

[cmptrgydv]

Oh!!! Man please don’t tell me it’s my video card, I just got this thing about 6 months ago,
It is a X850XT with 256 of ram, I think, yes 256 DDR3, PCI-E,

[originel]

Hmmm...who knows then...I've got a 7600GT, which I think is only marignally faster than the x850xt, if at all.

I haven't tried the 32-bit version though, so there is always the chance that that is throwing things off.

[vicarious george]

I think that Vista is noticeably faster than XP. Also, my CPU and Memory useage average about 25% at idle.

For the system rating, I got a 4.1 w/ the following:
* 3700+ SD
* 2GB DDR400
* X800GTO2

It must like the dual core CPU's much better...

<----- BTW, completely off-topic, but does anything cool happen at 500 posts?

[originel]

<----- BTW, completely off-topic, but does anything cool happen at 500 posts?

I'm pretty certain that the next thing is Senior member at 1000 posts. So get busy posting!

It must like the dual core CPU's much better...

I'm beginning to think so too.

[vicarious george]

<----- 500th post!!!

[cmptrgydv]

Well getting to 500 posts has it’s ups and downs,
The up side is, you get to try for 1000 next,
The down side is if you are married or have a girlfriend,
She’s going to complain that your spending way to much time on the computer,
And not enough time with her, but from the rest of us 500 cool,
I am using 64bit, maybe it’s all in my head, I hear that a lot,

[kennzo]

if im not wrong Vista rates A64 processor's so bad because of their efective speed even if the code+ show's what he can really do. Something similar i've seen with an Conroe 6300. Because of his speed he had problems in starting a game (call of juarez). after he managed start the game ... no problem.

[originel]

if im not wrong Vista rates A64 processor's so bad because of their efective speed even if the code+ show's what he can really do. Something similar i've seen with an Conroe 6300. Because of his speed he had problems in starting a game (call of juarez). after he managed start the game ... no problem.

No offense, but I think you are wrong. Clock speed won't show up in benchmarks since the IPC is so much higher that the amount of IPS is higher. Besides...my A64 was rated very well.