Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

ATI 5870 gets a 6.0 in gaming and graphics in Windows?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
December 7, 2009 9:14:23 PM

Id say thats normal, 7.9 is the highest rating you can get. Also windows experience is not a real way to measure performance, many will tell you to get a real benchmark or record some FPS in games to get a measure of performance.
December 7, 2009 9:18:21 PM

I think that index is derived from shared system memory with the card or something does your 5870 run just about every game near perfect at your resolution assuming your res is 1920x1200 or less then i would say it's not a problem

Cuz my 8gig machine has a 7.0 when i put in my 8800gts 640mb and a 7.9 when i put in my GTX 260 so the score isn't much to think about. They might have also made it include estimation based on your resolution.
Related resources
December 7, 2009 10:17:29 PM

The 5870 should definately show up as 7.9, its waaaaay faster than a 260 or other single gpu card. Im guessing its a driver problem.
December 7, 2009 10:20:29 PM

Windows experience doesn't mean anything...how is gaming performance?
December 7, 2009 10:35:04 PM

Although Windows Experience Index is not the best tool to measure performance, my single HD4850 with 512 MB of ram scores 7.3 @ 675 MHz core and 993 MHz memory.

Your 5870 should score way more! Try refreshing maybe or update.
December 7, 2009 11:01:39 PM

Holy hell no that isn't a normal score! I got 7.7 with my stock-clocked 5850.
December 8, 2009 12:04:34 AM

5850 should be 7.9 lol something about how the hell this score is done should be looked into very conflicting scores.
a b U Graphics card
December 8, 2009 3:00:56 AM

I got 7.7 with my stock 4890, and a 7.4 with my 3870. Trust me, the improvement in games was much more than 4%. Don't worry about Microsoft's index. It's only made to help clueless people know what they're getting when they buy a computer.
a b U Graphics card
December 8, 2009 3:16:24 AM

I've got 6.8 on a stock clock 9800GT.
Yours is wayyy lower than what it should show.

Update the scores or update the drivers.
December 8, 2009 2:17:42 PM

I've run the same test today and can confirm that my 5870 is also scoring 6.0 on both graphics scores in Windows index. This must be due to one of the Win 7 updates as my graphics driver hasn't been updated and my games are running sweet as usual. Saying that take Windows Index with a pinch of salt if you're noticing no performance difference, it should work out soon enough with either a 'fixed' driver update from ATi or an update from Microsoft themselves.
a b U Graphics card
December 8, 2009 2:31:31 PM

I don't understand all of you claiming it "should be higher." How is it even computed, if you all know that it "should' be higher then please tell me what you base this on, other than how your card got score x? We can compare benchmarks with each other.. but it is rediculous to claim random BS marks mean anything at all (I'm sorry, did I mean MS marks?).

Run a game, if it performs poorly then we have something to talk about. If your FPS is fine then ignore the pointless microsoft numbers. They are just a very VERY rough outline. They are also tiered, with random hard caps such as "If card has feature x limit score to y."

Though I'd like to now exactly what the score is computed from.
December 8, 2009 6:55:23 PM

daedalus685 said:
I don't understand all of you claiming it "should be higher." How is it even computed, if you all know that it "should' be higher then please tell me what you base this on, other than how your card got score x? We can compare benchmarks with each other.. but it is rediculous to claim random BS marks mean anything at all (I'm sorry, did I mean MS marks?).

Run a game, if it performs poorly then we have something to talk about. If your FPS is fine then ignore the pointless microsoft numbers. They are just a very VERY rough outline. They are also tiered, with random hard caps such as "If card has feature x limit score to y."

Though I'd like to now exactly what the score is computed from.


There's just no way his card is within an acceptable range of what it should be scoring. True, how Microsoft calculates this number is pretty fuzzy... but when everyone else is reporting high 7s, it's just an indication of a problem... maybe it's not apparent in the games he currently plays, but I'd wager that his card is underperforming. I mainly play TF2... and if my card were performing at 50% I wouldn't know it... but I'd still have that problem... and at some point I move on to another game and it bites me in the butt. I think the OP has a legitimate concern for wanting to know more about this.
December 8, 2009 7:01:24 PM

My 4890 used to show up as 7.5 since last week when i updated my ATI drivers the windows experience index has been showing it as a 6.0, i believe thats the problem for whatever reason the drivers made windows think its worse.
December 8, 2009 7:02:33 PM

Raistlin117 said:
Right now, my windows experience assessment says that I got a 6.0 for graphics and gaming out of 7.9. Is this normal?


My 5870 is getting a 7.8 for graphics and gaming in W7 64bit. I'd say 6.0 is kinda screwy...
a b U Graphics card
December 8, 2009 7:37:54 PM

rodney_ws said:
There's just no way his card is within an acceptable range of what it should be scoring. True, how Microsoft calculates this number is pretty fuzzy... but when everyone else is reporting high 7s, it's just an indication of a problem... maybe it's not apparent in the games he currently plays, but I'd wager that his card is underperforming. I mainly play TF2... and if my card were performing at 50% I wouldn't know it... but I'd still have that problem... and at some point I move on to another game and it bites me in the butt. I think the OP has a legitimate concern for wanting to know more about this.

That is unscientific garbage.

You are telling them the sky is falling because an arbitrary number doesn't fit with less than a dozen other folks.

The MS numbers are a scale to give you an idea; they are NOT a performance representation in any regard.

This is not a 3dmark program where the flops and FPS are converted to a score. There are hundreds of things at play here. The scores are capped based on dx version, based on detected specs, and any number of things I have no hard numbers on.

Unless you can tell me "this is the equation they use" you cannot go around saying it is good or bad, as there is no way to be sure. We know what fps is, we know roughly how a 3dmark score is calculated, and we don't know the same for this.

If the games get good performance there is no problem, if one wants to be sure then run a bench mark. There are far too many things that can change the index score for anyone to care about it. Perhaps a driver release will come along to make it higher, but as it doesn’t actually represent anything what does it matter if it is one or nine? It is simply a guide line, how much is based on performance vs feature compatibility?

The stdev is huge on the performance index, which is normal for something like this. The OP's deviation is well within normal for the performance index. To give him/her the impression that it is a huge problem is ridiculous without more information. It may mistakenly cap a score one day, an update may change how it is calculated the next. This is no basis to formulate a conclusion. This is not like a benchmark where we know version numbers, exactly how the scoring is done, etc. Unless that is known one cannot compare his score to anyone else’s.

The op asked if it was a problem, the answer is that it probably isn't but he should run some benchmarks of games he cares about to be sure. Which is what I said to do in my first post.

If one is concerned about performance, use a performance benchmark and we can use that to say if there is a problem or not. Using the index is akin to using what might be evenly spaced lines your buddy wrote on a paper to measure how long something is (without units) while a Vernier is sitting on the table.

As MS and driver updates come along all the time that (I’d guess artificially) raise and lower the score it is simply not something to worry about. Provided it is not so low that aero features won’t turn on there is no problem. If it is that bothersome to you you are free to look for updates to change it, but there is no point making it into a big deal and giving someoen who may not understand teh situation teh idea it is an indication sometihng is seriously wrong with his rig. I’d suspect it is an issue with Microsoft. Besides, it would not be hard to hack the system and give yourself whatever arbitrary number makes you feel safest at night.

I just wish some logical reservation was used for things like this.

Would it surprise you that much of the index scoring was being done without clocking the cards up to 3d clocks? Given that this happened all of the time in beta I’d guess that it happens still, from time to time. I suppose ATI could release a driver to force 3d clocks whenever index is open. I could never prove if it was just detecting the current clocks and saying “hey, these are lower than they should be, cap the score at x” or actually running tests while in desktop mode. At any rate, you can always remove the power play features from the bios to get 1337 windows scores..

Some measurements are more useful than others. When one form has an inherant uncertainty of more than +/-20% why would we use it for anything but what it is meant for, a very rough idea. I can get a pretty good idea how much gas is left in my tank based on how logn I figure I've been driving, but it doesnt mean I don't use the fuel gage and my trip meter.

The OP has a legitimate concern, his score is on the low end of the normal deviations from this system. That is step one, "I think there is a problem." But what he is being told as step two is that there IS a problem. When he should be running some benchmarks and posting system information. The logical thing to do when you get a hunch that is based on a very inaccurate, non precise measurement is to measure again with something you are confident in.
December 9, 2009 12:37:49 PM

I said "I think the OP has a legitimate concern for wanting to know more about this." and you twist that into "the sky is falling" Back away from the Koolaid bud! I'm clear on statistics and I feel very confident saying that the values reported by the OP fall well outside of 1 standard deviation (probably closer to 2) based purely on observations on this forum... so I totally disagree that he's "on the low end of the normal deviation" He might be having a WEI problem (lord knows Microsoft isn't perfect and WEI is kinda a new thing for them) or he could have a legitimate problem with his card/driver. If my WEI score didn't look right I'd investigate further... that's all I was suggesting.
a b U Graphics card
December 9, 2009 2:23:54 PM

Yes I realise what you were saying. I should have known better than to quote your post directly, I'm sorry for that. I know you are not exactly claiming the sky is falling... my bad for laying on too much hyperbolae. I merely think you, and many others, are taking WEI far too seriously.

However, people use this system for more than it is supposed to be used for. It is a nice indication that something might (I stress might) be wrong. But there is no need to tell one that something "is" wrong until one actually does the correct tests. Many of the posts are stating that his computer must be broken based only on the WEI score, which is ridiculous given that no one here has any idea how it is calculated, or if that calculation remains constant on different versions of the OS.

There are just too many variables in WEI for it to matter. I simply get sick of this kind of measurement being used to rationalize problems; it should only be something that might make you run a second test. It is in no way something that any conclusion can be drawn.

As for the "normal" WEI for a 5870, as I don't know if it takes into account other parts of the system, etc. I can't say what normal is. But the most common complaint on Newegg about the 5000 is that "My WEI went down." Certainly this could be a driver problem... or any hundred other things. I don't know. But I would be comfortable in saying that in almost all of these situations there is nothing wrong, and the score is just being tallied wrong (if not wrong.. then strangely). I certainly don't have an ample sample size, but newegg has more than this post, and it seems there is far more variation. Besides that, there was onyl one person in this post that responded with thier own 5870 score.. how can you derive any deviation from a sample of 2? Every opther psot was a collectino of shoulds based on unsimilar rigs. Which is the basis of my "unscientific" comment. A sample of two with no rig info to determine if CPU has any bearing on WEI doesn't realyl help all that much.

By the way, Kool-Aid references are usually to imply that one is brainwashed by the team. It probably makes more sense to say that I need to take off the foil hat as it were. I am aware I went overboard a tad... But it really is an issue when conclusions are drawn from the wrong data. I don't want the OP thinking that just because his score is lower there is something wrong with his card. They need to understand that it doesn’t mean anything/much and they need to run other tests to have any idea if something is actually wrong.

Anyway, I appologize for getting carried away. I hate WEI (and many other 'colloquial' measurements) for the same reasons I currently hate records being kept in anything but ISO date and 24h time.. I can understand how both may seem rediculous to many. Irritations come and go...
January 4, 2010 3:11:47 PM

I found this thread because of strange ratings on my new computer. I'd received my new machine with an I7 975 processor, 12GB memory, an Intel SSD and an ATI Radeon HD 5870 but no operating system. I'd ordered Ultimate separately to get better pricing but it arrived after the computer. So I borrowed a work copy of Windows 7 Enterprise for 3 days until my Ultimate arrived.

Under Enterprise, the 5870 received a 7.5 rating. Under Ultimate, it received a 6.0 rating. I'd installed the same drivers from the same CDs yet received different ratings. I downloaded new drivers but retained the 6.0 rating. Also of interest was the Intel SSD - under Enterprise, it received a 5.7 yet under Ultimate, it received a 7.4. Now this is just too screwy!

My games, thus far, perform flawlessly and I honestly can't tell the difference between Enterprise and Ultimate. I was worried (and still am a little) that the card isn't performing as well as it did originally. After reading this thread, however, I guess I'll let it drop it but I liked the "warm and fuzzy feeling" of the 7.5 over the 6.0 and yes, my work machine running a far inferior (and much cheaper) card gets a 7.1...

...so either Microsoft is screwed up, my card isn't configured properly, or both!

Cheers, -Lark
a c 216 U Graphics card
a b 4 Gaming
January 4, 2010 3:28:26 PM

The first time I ran that performance rating, I also got something around 6.0, and was monitorying ATI Overdrive which showed the core clock at 157MHz and Memory at 300MHz the whole time.

I ran it again with ATI tools? (I forget name as it's no longer installed) and set the clocks to 850 and 1200 respectively and it scored 7.9.

The test doesn't force the card out of idle timings, and as a result really messes with your score.
January 5, 2010 1:37:14 AM

Bystander, thank you! You are exactly correct. The clocks had been lowered somewhere along the way. I set them back up while monitering the temperature, and pow! I now get a 7.8 - so while the card was performing well, I guess it was performing below its potential. If I really wanted to know what happened, I'd put Enterprise back on and compare the default clock rates... but I won't.

Now the fan is running at 21% and the temperature is only 50C so I guess I'm set! So while Windows ratings may be "screwy", they proved useful in finding these too-low clock rates.

Thanks again, -Lark
January 15, 2010 4:20:23 PM

Had the same problem with my 5870. Decided to reload my os (win 7 ultimate 64-bit) and the score went from 6.0 to 7.8. didn't reload it because of this issue. Was tired of not having enough space on my ssd(80G).
January 15, 2010 4:43:20 PM

The drivers for the 5870 underclock the gpu when its not in use, i had this same problem i readjusted the clock settings manually and mine went from 6.1 to a 7.8.
January 26, 2010 2:53:26 PM

Well my brand new Dell XPS 9000 had the same issues. So I updated the driver the newest off the ATI website...and WEI stayed at 6. So I called Dell and said...what the heck is going on! They pointed me to a brand new BIOS update that just came out for the XPS 9000. Updated the bios...reinstalled the drivers. And Shazam! My WEI index for all graphics categories is now 7.8.

Hope that helps.....
April 1, 2010 5:23:18 PM

Dude. Chill out.

He's simply saying the following: "The score I'm receiving for my high end video card (ATI5870), is LOWER than the scores of people running, older... less powerful video cards (NV280). Why is that?"

We're all aware of the fact that the WEI is inaccurate. The point is, it's inaccurate for EVERYONE, not just people with high end graphics cards.

Perhaps is machine his running fine, but it still sucks when you blow $450 on a graphics card, and your WEI score (inaccurate or not) goes up .4 points, or even drops.

Good god dude, why don't you have a freak out, and then try to impress us with your enlightening two page explanation of why we shouldn't care what our score is.
April 1, 2010 6:20:30 PM

Alll of this text for a windows 7 index score?

Really?
a b U Graphics card
April 1, 2010 6:32:31 PM

neebux said:
Dude. Chill out.

He's simply saying the following: "The score I'm receiving for my high end video card (ATI5870), is LOWER than the scores of people running, older... less powerful video cards (NV280). Why is that?"

We're all aware of the fact that the WEI is inaccurate. The point is, it's inaccurate for EVERYONE, not just people with high end graphics cards.

Perhaps is machine his running fine, but it still sucks when you blow $450 on a graphics card, and your WEI score (inaccurate or not) goes up .4 points, or even drops.

Good god dude, why don't you have a freak out, and then try to impress us with your enlightening two page explanation of why we shouldn't care what our score is.


hey buddy :hello: 

This thread is 3 months old, if you would like to keep commenting on this topic feel free to start your own thread ;) 
a b U Graphics card
April 1, 2010 6:33:06 PM

This topic has been closed by OvrClkr
!