Windows 8: Double-Checking Performance On Core i7-3770K

[Guest]

After giving Windows 8 our attention last week, we're following up with one more look at performance using a Core i7-3770K processor. Are there any aberrations to note, or does Intel's Ivy Bridge architecture demonstrate the same behavior as Bulldozer?

Windows 8: Double-Checking Performance On Core i7-3770K : Read more

 

[mayankleoboy1]

You are using winrar 3.98 , which isnt big on multithreading. Winrar4.2 is a huge change from the older versions, with quite aggressive multithreading. Please drop the old version and use the newer.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

most of these benchmarks are basically CPU bound. Can you do a mix test that does CPU + IO activity , like an Antivirus software ? or uncompressing 10GB+ rar/7z archives ?
That would test if Microsoft has made changes in the scheduler to balance throughput VS response time.

 

[Darkerson]

Well, at least things are on an overall even scale, unlike when vista came out and was decidely less snappy than XP. But with all the other modifications MS has made, such as the nice boost to start up and shut down speeds, its still "feels" faster than 7, even if it really isnt, overall. At any rate, I still dont feel this is "Vista 2" as a lot of people were making it out to be before launch.

 

[SteelCity1981]

Overall Windows 8 doesn't improve over Windows 7 as both OSes are evenly matched and trade off performance over each other in diff benchmarks and you would think a newer OS like Windows 8 that is suppose to use less resources then Windows 7 should have outperformed Windows 7 across the board and yet it doesn't.

 

[agnickolov]

Alas, you skipped the Visual Studio benchmark. It showed slight aberration in Win7's favor on the AMD platform, so I was curious if that remained true for Intel as well.

 

[SteelCity1981]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Just because it uses less ram, doesn't mean it just pulls extra performance out of it's ass.This isn't 2005. This is common knowledge by now.[/citation]

That has nothing to do with that. The less the host soruce uses from the system the better applications programs are to be able to utilize from the systems hardware more efficiently.

 

[manwell999]

Why bother doing performance comparisons if whenever the performance drops for the new version out comes the excuse "it will be fixed in the driver". What evidence is their to say this?

A double-check means check-check, not check-excuse. Conclusions are drawn from the data at hand, not from speculation on what might be in the future.

Otherwise cite the manufacturers acknowledgment that performance issues are going to be fixed and hold them to it.

 

[darkstar845]

Is there a way to customize windows 8 to make it look like the desktop picture in the first page?

 

[warmon6]

[citation][nom]darkstar845[/nom]Is there a way to customize windows 8 to make it look like the desktop picture in the first page?[/citation]

no. those are 2 different images (windows 7 and 8) that's been fused together.

now, if you want that start button on windows 8, you could look at this article and try one of the 2 solutions they give.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2012810/another-way-to-restore-the-windows-8-start-button-and-menu.html

 

[roflmaonow]

[citation][nom]warmon6[/nom]no. those are 2 different images (windows 7 and 8) that's been fused together.now, if you want that start button on windows 8, you could look at this article and try one of the 2 solutions they give.http://www.pcworld.com/article/201 [...] -menu.html[/citation]

I just tried out pokki, it's really good for free program. Thanks for the heads up. I do like Start8 more though.

 

[zyky]

When did everyone forget how to make proper graphs. Can we get everything in the same sort order instead of sticking the winner on top each time? It's much harder to compare at a glance how it is now.

 

[RazorBurn]

The Two features of windows 8 that persuaded me to upgrade are

1. Storage Spaces
2. Data Deduplication

jeffwouters.nl/index.php/2012/01/disk-deduplication-in-windows-8-explained-from-a-to-z/
http://blogs.technet.com/b/filecab/archive/2012/05/21/introduction-to-data-deduplication-in-windows-server-2012.aspx

Hope tom's will have a in depth look at Data Deduplication..

 

[warmon6]

[citation][nom]roflmaonow[/nom]I just tried out pokki, it's really good for free program. Thanks for the heads up. I do like Start8 more though.[/citation]

Np, while i haven't cared if there a start button or not (been trying it out since the dev preview which did have it), I know other people have cared.

I'm just showing options to those that want it back.

 

[SteelCity1981]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Lol, what?[/citation]

i'm sorry if that was over your head.

 

[nekromobo]

What about double checking battery life on laptops for both win7/8 and AMD/Intel camps?

Kinda would think that win8 be way better in reserving battery?

 

[maxinexus]

Where is the comparison of PC boot, resume, or shut down times?

 

[neiroatopelcc]

Please compare windows server 2012 as well. You'll need to install the Wireless feature and enable the windows audio service, then it's like windows 8, but with desktop as default ui
maybe consider desktop experience feature too if those things are needed

 

[clonazepam]

I hadn't seen this Fritz benchmark before. I just tried version 4.2. I'm using an i7-2600k at 4.6ghz, with 16GB RAM at 1866. Let's just say my results are less than half of what you got on the i7-3770k so I think I'm missing something. Maybe I have too much overhead in processes, etc, or something...

Edit: I closed about 40 processes, funny Chrome had 12 processes running taking over 2GB memory in total. Still, I managed to only get a score of 6006 lol...

 

[PreferLinux]

[citation][nom]zyky[/nom]When did everyone forget how to make proper graphs. Can we get everything in the same sort order instead of sticking the winner on top each time? It's much harder to compare at a glance how it is now.[/citation]
Worse, some graphs are in a particular (or is it random?) order, and some graphs have the winner on top. It is totally disgusting.

 

[clonazepam]

I believe it draws more attention to the graph's results. Read through an entire newspaper. Recall what you remember the next day, and most likely, it'll be discrepancies, typos, and misspellings. Another example is when you see a commercial, and each time its tweaked just slightly different so it sticks out like a sore thumb. ok done bs'ing...

 

[kinggremlin]

[citation][nom]maxinexus[/nom]Where is the comparison of PC boot, resume, or shut down times?[/citation]

How about who cares? Boot time is pretty irrelevant on current systems. Do you sit around all day rebooting your computer and shutting down? Half the people reading this review probably reboot less than once a week at home.

If Windows 7 took 3 or 4 minutes to boot, maybe such a test would be interesting. However, it doesn't, it takes well under a minute. 8 takes even less. On to more important performance measures.

 

[clonazepam]

^ thumbs up. It's totally irrelevant cuz who knows how many people have diff boot ROMs enabled. I use a raid config, etc

 

[atikkur]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Just because it uses less ram, doesn't mean it just pulls extra performance out of it's ass.This isn't 2005. This is common knowledge by now.[/citation]

infact, more ram used means more performance.. because data stored in ram can be executed instantly.

 

[kinggremlin]

[citation][nom]atikkur[/nom]infact, more ram used means more performance.. because data stored in ram can be executed instantly.[/citation]

No, it doesn't. You cannot make any prediction on performance based on RAM useage except that the more efficient program will likely run faster if it fits in RAM than the less efficient one if it doesn't fit in RAM.

What you are describing is completely misguided and not what everyone else is talking about.