Windows 7 Performance Review

From ZDNet

Published on March 17, 2009 By Island Dog In WinCustomize News

Windows 7 is generating a really nice “buzz” in the community, and one of the big strikes against Vista for many users was performance issues, and I know this is something that many consumers are taking a hard look at.

I was reading ZDNet this morning and came across an article that has some real-world performance tests on the latest beta of Windows 7.

“The scoring system that I use seems to have confused some readers. It’s actually very simple. We run each test for each OS in turn and the time taken to complete the task is noted (average of three runs). The fastest OS is given a score of 1, the runner ups 2, 3, 4, and respectively and the slowest OS scores a 6. The scores are added up and the OS with the lowest score (that is, the one that performed the best overall) at the end is the winner.”

Check out the full article at ZDNet, you just might be surprised.

Comments

The__Goo

on Mar 17, 2009

dead link?

The__Goo

on Mar 17, 2009

nevermind I had to log on to read it, so i guess you nee to be a registered user.. i assume

caseagainstfaith

on Mar 18, 2009

Well, the author of the article says he couldn't give raw numbers due to M$'s EULA, so, he could only rank them. So, if one OS was only negligibly faster than the others, it would get the same rank if it was significantly faster. Which makes it hard to make anything meaningful from the numbers. Also of note, they had in the tests some 32 and some 64 bit builds of Windows 7, but only 32 bit builds of XP and Vista. So it wasn't a completely fair test. Still, it was interesting that on every test, every build of Windows 7 came out faster than both Vista and XP. Sometimes a 32 bit build of 7 got the highest rank, sometimes a 64 bit. But they were always ahead of XP and Vista. I wonder if other testers will get the same results.

Wizard1956

on Mar 18, 2009

Good read.Looking at the numbers,it appears Windows7 will run the pants off of everything that came before it.

caseagainstfaith

on Mar 18, 2009

As I noted, given how the numbers are generated, without any reference to by how much one was faster than another, you can't really tell much from the numbers. If Windows 7 was twice as fast as XP, or .0001% faster than XP, the ranking would be exactly the same. Makes the numbers not that useful. Its a good sign, yes, but, way too vague to be terribly useful.

scorpNZ

on Mar 20, 2009

@ goo no you don't need to logon to zdnet to view articles,try the link again or copy/paste http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3857

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!