Memory & Performance *** in Vista


I have a question regarding the RAM and the performance *** feature in Vista. I've just upgraded my memory from 1GB (553Mhz) to 2GB (667Mhz). My laptop does detect the memory correctly. And the difference in term of speed is slightly discernable. However the score in the performance *** remains unchanged, it's 4.5. And I do refresh many times. I wonder why the score is the same, when I double the RAM, and with higher speed. Do you have any idea what's going wrong ? Or the performance *** in Vista is not reliable.

My cousin has a desktop PC, his memory is 2GB too, but the score is 5.9.
12 answers Last reply
More about memory performance vista
  1. Kinda hard to say everything they base it on, but more ram will increase your score but not guarantee a 5.9. I'm guessing its a lot of little things. And the bump from 553 to 667 wasn't enough to create a significant boost in productivity.

    I had 2GB (1066MHz, under clocked by the board to 800) and my memory score was 5.2, I added 2GB of the same type and at 4GB I got a 5.4. I over clocked the RAM (actually ran it at 1066) I ended up with a 5.6.

    They probably look at what the best that is available and make that 5.9 and scale things down from there. They are supposed to periodically update the program, so I am guessing that over time you score will go down even if your performance doesn't.
  2. The performance number is the lowest value that ANY of the catagories reported. Your memory score would have gone up but the orverall score is the same because it was not the memory that had the lowest value
  3. Ok, just wondering but what is your FSB? Because you might be limited by your FSB despite having extra RAM.
  4. The biggest factor in the WEI is actually the GPU. I sell an HP with a Q6600 and 3GB of RAM that only scores a 3.3 because of the Nvidia 7300 GPU used in it.
  5. My FSB is 667MHz. Laptop C2D 2GHz.

    Before the upgrade:
    Memory: 1GB - 533 MHz
    RAM score (not overall): 4.5

    Memory: 2GB - 667 MHz
    RAM score: 4.5

    You know, I spend some bucks, that would be nice if I could see any improvment. Right now, I'm bit disappointed that the score is still the same. And my cousin, having the same amount of memory, has a score of 5.9.

    Btw, I do go to BIOS and run "CPU meter software" to check whether the PC detects it correctly, and it does.
  6. don't get too hung up on that score. just like any other benchmark it is just a simple test. the real question is do the SW titles you run now run better and load faster. that is what you should be expecting from adding more ram.

  7. Quote:
    You know, I spend some bucks, that would be nice if I could see any improvment. Right now, I'm bit disappointed that the score is still the same. And my cousin, having the same amount of memory, has a score of 5.9.

    You did get an improvement. That 4.5 is just an arbitrary number with a very limited meaning.

    Your laptop most likely has a 5400 rpm drive as well as a less than "high end" graphics card, so that 4.5 isn't going to increase because it's based on the most limiting component on your system. Your brother's desktop could have a Raptor and an 8800 for all we know, so of course he gets 5.9.
  8. Dollars to donuts your DDR2-533 was CAS4 and your DDR2-667 is CAS5. Same thing happened to me on my laptop. I don't use Vista so I don't have the scores you have. But every performance benchmark I ran showed no RAM speed improvement. Probably from the increase in CAS latency. However I was about to shrink my swapfile to 512MB and my computer performs SOOO much faster now.
  9. Hi,

    Had 5.6 on memory, 2 gig running on 5-5-5-18 at 1.9 volts. I manually changed settings to 4-4-4-12 at 2.1 volts ( according to manufacturers specs). Result: 5.9
  10. Had 2x1GB running at unlinked 800 MHz at 4-4-4-12 2T and was scoring 5.4 I think. Switched to 4x1 GB and had to drop down to 711 MHz, score didn't change. I then set it to Sync Mode (1:1) at 667 MHz with my FSB overclock and tightened timings to 3-3-3-9 2T and score whent up. Just swapped out my E6700@3.33 GHz for a Q6600@3.0 GHz (which, incidentally, outscored the OC'd E6700's 5.6 with 5.9 at stock settings) and with 4x1GB at 1:1 667 MHz 3-3-3-8 2T and I'm now scoring the full 5.9.

    Basically, I think it depends on a lot of things other than just rated speed (MHz) and amount of RAM. I defintely found that running 1:1 was better for my WEI score than an unlinked divider, though I don't recall tightening the timings making much of an impact (though I may already have been at 5.9 anyways when I did that).

  11. i figured it out why vista gives you wrong memory reading, it bases your memory score on your fsb strapping. i have 4gb 1066 memory if i run 400mhz fsb strap the memory is detected as 5.9, if i run it stock 266 memory still at 1066 its detected as 5.6
  12. The Vista score means nothing anyway.
Ask a new question

Read More

Memory Performance Windows Vista