peter2004 :
Here is my question.
My last computer was an x2 4800+ with a 9800gtx+ super clocked edition.
When I was playing Killing Floor, I would get 170 fps.
This computer was stolen so I got another with an x2 7550 and, as I was low on money, a 9800GT.
The x2 7550 is the same clock speed as my old x2 4800+ but it scores higher in Vista.
My x2 4800+ would get 5.1 and this one gets 5.4.
Why is the new CPU faster than the old one at the same clock speed?
Now I only get 60FPS in Killing Floor.
Is this because of the CPU or is the 9800GT that slow compared to my old 9800GTX+ super clocked edition?
I was told the x2 7550 is a lot faster so does the 9800GT suck?
Now that I can understand what you posted...
Your new CPU
is faster clock for clock compared to your old x2 4800+.
This is because it has a newer, more efficient architecture.
Looking at your Vista performance score alone, however, does not tell you very much.
The reason being, it takes the lowest scoring component and sets that as your final score.
If you want to see what is really going on, look at the individual component scores (or run some real benchmarks).
Yes, your 9800GT is slower than your previous 9800GTX+.
Without looking up any benchmarks, I would put it in the 20-25% slower range.
This is not, however, enough to half your fps.
I would assume you have either vSync or Triple Buffering enabled.
Disabling these options, both in the game and in the nVidia control panel, should allow your FPS to rise.
Myself, I would leave vSync or Triple Buffering enabled.
As your display (probably) has a 60hz refresh rate, it is only capable of displaying 60 full frames per second.
When you try to display more fps than the refresh rate, your screen will start tearing as it updates only part of the view.
For a good overview on why you should leave one of these options enabled, take a look at the following article:
Triple Buffering: Why We Love It