Trending

Windows XP vs. Vista: The Benchmark Rundown

By

Test Setup

System Hardware
ProcessorIntel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (Conroe 65 nm, 2.93 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache)
MotherboardGigabyte GA-965P-DQ6Chipset : Intel P965, 82801HR (ICH8), BIOS : F8
Common Hardware
RAM2x 1024 MB DDR2-800 (CL 3.0-4-3-9)Corsair CM2X1024-6400C3 XMS6403v1.1
Graphics CardHIS Radeon X1900XTX IceQ3GPU : ATI X1900XTX (650 MHz)RAM : 512 MB GDDR3 (1550 MHz)
System Hard Drive1x 150 GB 10,000 RPM, 8 MB Cache, SATA/150Western Digital WD1500ADFD
Data Hard Drive1x 150 GB 10.000 RPM, 8 MB Cache, SATA/150Western Digital WD1500ADFD
DVD-ROMTeac DV-W50D
Software
Vista ATI GraphicCatalyst Suite 8.31.100.3.2.1
XP ATI GraphicCatalyst Suite 7.1.40211
Intel Chipset8.1.1.1010
DirectX VistaVersion : 10.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DirectX XPVersion : 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
OSWindows Vista Enterprise, Build 6000.16386.061101-2205

Benchmarks And Settings

Benchmarks and Settings
3D-Games
Call Of Duty 2Version : 1.3 RetailVideo Mode : 1280x960Anti Aliasing : 4xGraphics Card : mediumTimedemo demo2
FarCryVersion 1.33 build 13951280x1024 - 32 Bitquality options = High
F.E.A.RVersion : 1.0 RetailVideo Mode : 1280x920Computer : HighGraphics Card : HighOptions/Performance/Test settings
Unreal Tournament 2004Version : 32041280x1024, 32 Bit, Audio = offTHG8-assault-single
3DMark06Version 1.1.01280 x 1024 - 32 bitGraphics and CPU Default Benchmark
Video
AutoGKVersion : 2.4182 MB VOB MPEG2-source (704x576) 16:9
XviDVersion : 1.2.0 SMP Beta 08/12/06Encoding type : TwopassTarget size (mbytes) : 100
MainConcept H.264 Encoder v2Version : 2.12:19 min MPEG2-source 1920x1080 to H.264Profile : HighAudio : AACStream : Program
Audio
Lame MP3Version 3.97 Beta 2 (11-29-2005)Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 74 minwave to mp3160 kbps
OGGVersion 1.1.2 (Intel P4 MOD)Version 1.1.2 (Intel AMD MOD)Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 74 minwave to oggQuality : 5
Applications
SPECviewperf 9Version : 9.03All Tests
WinrarVersion 3.70 Beta 1 (Multi-Core)(303 MB, 47 Files, 2 Folders)Compression = BestDictionary = 4096 kB
Autodesk 3D Studio MaxVersion : 8.0Characters "Dragon_Charater_rig"rendering HTDV 1920x1080
Adobe Photoshop CS 2Version : 9.0.1VT-Runtime ScriptRendering from 5 Pictures (66 MB, 7 Filters)
CinebenchVersion 9.564 BitnCPU, 1 CPU
SunGardAdaptiv Credit Risk CalculationVersion 3.0
Synthetic
EverestVersion 3.5.761Cache & Memory Benchmark
PCMark05 ProVersion : 1.2.0CPU and Memory TestsWindows Media Player 10.00.00.3646Windows Media Encoder 9.00.00.2980
SiSoftware Sandra 2007Version 2007.5.11.17CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMediaMemory Test = Bandwidth BenchmarkMemory Latency Test = ns
16 Comments Comment from the forums
  • 15 August 2008 02:29
    I can't tell if you were using 32 bit or 64 bit Vista? I think it makes a big difference.
    Reply
  • 21 August 2008 12:59
    They were using 32 bit version
    Reply
  • 11 September 2008 14:41
    I herd that Vista has been so bad in a number of different ways that Microsoft have decided to give up all hope and have started building a new operating system witch will scrap Vista once on the market, is there any truth in this?
    Reply
  • 13 September 2008 03:44
    @crazyjew: They are in fact making a new Windows (codenamed "Vienna") but this is just a scheduled release - they can't make money if don't make a new OS every few years!

    Well of course "Vista feel faster and smoother". It manages to use about 4 to 5 times as much RAM as XP. That's QUINTUPLE the memory! This is hardly an achievement, considering.
    Reply
  • Vulcan64 14 September 2008 14:19
    i am running a AMD6 X2 5600+ with 3gig DDR2 800mhz ram and a Nvidia 8600GT. And i have rund Vista 32bit and 64bit service pack 1 and i can say vista sucks i have problems with some of my software(updated for vista) and games don't run or they run but very crappy. On Xp Service pack 2 every thing run 110% without any problems. So i say stick to Xp for now and Please dont run service pack 3 there is something wrong with it, i don't know what but me and some others have notice some problems with it(performance and networking).
    Reply
  • salem80 15 September 2008 05:35
    I think Vista are laggy software
    Reply
  • 25 September 2008 14:02
    Vulcan64,
    i recomment u to return to teh old and good and really fast DOS. Remember it? no f..ing graphics, no mouse, no sound, no multitasking, no security, nothing fancy. but teh OS didn't consumed almost any hw resources. you would love it :)
    Reply
  • 30 September 2008 16:30
    lmao people are you serious? You're going to wait for Windows to come out with a NEW OS?? why? Switch to MAC or Linux. At least they aren't just trying to scam everyone out of their money, they deliver results and even have better support options. Whatever brainwashed opinions you have that Windows is a good brand, it's not true.. please open your eyes and get over your Microsoft "Crush" and see them for who they are.
    Reply
  • 04 October 2008 04:48
    Can you do benchmark tests, with service pack 1, with actually address the issue of slow file operations.

    Vista, actually uses all spare memory for caching, unlike xp which didn't and thus you had unused ram, I would rather have memory been used rather idle.

    Reply
  • 10 October 2008 16:40
    Fetching applications is good, so you end up USING your ram (if I have 4Gb ram is because I WANT to use them) but the drawback is that booting and starting rarely used apps became *slow as hell*, and also waking up from standby because the os must read out from disk lots of useless memory. What if your usage pattern varies much? You won't benefit at all from superfetching. That is exacly what happened to me... I gave up vista after a month or so of usage: a day it took almost 20 minutes to boot and start vmware server and a virtual machine on a 2Gbram/duo core2 laptop: a collegue with a single core,1Gb older laptop and gentoo linux booted and started 2 istances of the same vm in less than 5 minutes!!!
    Reply