Order Now!
Windows 7 for XP ProfessionalsUpdating Support Skills from XP to Windows 7by Bink.nu's Raymond Comvalius
There are 88 guest(s) online.
There are 0 member(s) online.
With the initial performance characteristics of Windows Vista leaving much to be desired (see our previous post on the subject), many IT organizations have put off deploying the new OS until the first service pack (SP1) is released by Microsoft early next year. The thinking goes that SP1 will address all of these early performance issues and somehow bring Windows Vista on par with - or at least closer to - Windows XP in terms of runtime performance.
Unfortunately, this is simply not the case. Extensive testing by the exo.performance.network (www.xpnet.com) research staff shows that SP1 provides no measurable relief to users saddled with sub-par performance under Vista.
How We Tested
The above conclusion is based on an analysis of the RC0 (v.658) build of Service Pack 1 for Windows Vista. Testing was conducted on a dual-core Dell notebook with 1GB of RAM. The staff ran a variety of test scenarios against both "before" (RTM w/no updates) and "after" (RTM w/SP1 installed) configurations, using the DMS Clarity Studio testing framework to capture scenario scoring and metrics data for upload to the exo.repository.
Note: DMS Clarity Studio is available as a free download from the exo.performance.network (www.xpnet.com) site. Simply register for your free DMS Clarity Analysis Portal account to access these and other free tools from xpnet.
Full Story At Source
The conclusions that the writer has come to concerning the performance of Vista SP1 cannot be taken seriously. He conducted these tests on a laptop with 1GB of RAM. Vista will not run anywhere near it's potential without at least 2GB of RAM.
Also in one of the comments on this blog the writer makes the comment that "Vista runs 2 times slower than XP on the same hardware", that's just plain nonsense. The article has zero credibility.
now bink.nu is sourcing news from unreliable blogs? I'd wait for some real benchmarks done by some real sites that can atleast afford a domain name!
No real sites bother to test this. The last time I saw a performence test for a SP was when XP SP2 was out. And people said that made XP slower also. *shrug*
Actually, Vista runs considerably slower on some hardware than XP did... "HELLO!!!" New OS!! Simply requires more horsepower under the hood. Everyone knows that.
To provide any true signicant change in system performance, a reliable test bed must be used. You can't test Vista on one machine, then ramp up the hardware resources and then say "See!! it runs better now!?!"
As far as real sites go, a ton of people test performance values on all sorts of systems with different results..... in my book, if the service pack fixes the gaps in the code as promised, that in itself is an improvement in performance. And, that's all I expect from a service pack. To say you're going to get 40FPS more in FEAR or CRYSIS just because SP1 is installed, is ridiculous from the get go. The performance comes from the code running more prestine.
Since SP1 won't change the driver model as far as I know. You can't expect it to boost game fps numbers. It might due to better memory managment probably. Or some other CPU bound tasks/code running faster thus letting the CPU work on the game more.
But it'll always be the case that, in the video game world, only newer video card drivers will give you noticible performence gains over time.
I am running Beta 1, and my performance has been increased, but only on features like file transfer. I don't understand what these guys are attempting to report. The offical release of SP1 RC is still over a week away, so these guys are testing a special RC preview, which was only designed to fix a few issues before the real release of SP1 RC.
While I disagree with the report and their methods, I do appreciate BINK.NU bringing this to my attention so I defend against any customers pushing back because they saw this negative article.