bit-tech.net

Windows 8: Performance Benchmarks

Comments 76 to 100 of 129

Reply
Kojak 26th October 2012, 23:20 Quote
Ignore my last post, apparently no longer works :(
Dave Lister 27th October 2012, 00:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Lister
Just installed this on my HTPC and HATE the metro crap, and even when you get to the desktop there is no start button ! what a POS. Managed to find a program called ViStart which makes it more normal. This will definitely not be going on my main rig.

Why do you need a desktop on an HTPC?

Just for setting up of video folders mostly, but I also plug in a keyboard and mouse sometimes and do regular desktop things or play games, a lot of which need me to install nocd cracks. Anyway ViStart turned out to be rubbish and I switched to a better start menu program. Getting the hang of it now although it crashed while trying to load a steam game earlier and just a second ago my nvidia driver crashed and restarted, I guess MS will be patching things up when the error reports start flooding in though.
Bakes 27th October 2012, 01:09 Quote
The media benchmarks test is now totally synthetic. To give an idea of just how old it is, it would be like testing Windows 8 with an 8800gtx - it's really really old software. If you run the same applications with the latest version, the total time taken is considerably faster, due to massive optimisations (not claiming it'll show an improvement for windows 8, just that the benchmarks are pretty unrepresentative of current software).
lysaer 27th October 2012, 03:51 Quote
A lot of other sites benchmarking Win 8 show higher scores in most benchmarks and win 8 outperforming win 7.

The only real place I see win 8 currently showing weakness is games, but I think that to be more driver optimisation than anything.
Bogomip 27th October 2012, 11:02 Quote
Its new windows slower than old windows shocker... oh wait no :)
Pookeyhead 27th October 2012, 11:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Catastrophise much?

It is a comparison of a brand new OS with one that has had a few years of optimisation behind it. It will all work out. And Windows being as open as it is, for people who don't like Metro there are several good ol'fashioned Start Button plug-ins, for you old folk who don't like change. Everybody happy.

I'm sure you are right... and in time, when issues are resolved I'll re-assess the situation, but it's very annoying when a new OS is released that performs worse than the old one. I can't help but feel "Why are you showing me this? You expect me to buy it?".

I still think they need to offer an option for Metro. To do otherwise is just sending a message that MS are only really interested in pandering to those with mobile or touchscreen devices. This is a home/consumer OS if you ask me. I shouldn't have to install 3rd party plugins to get it to play nice with a desktop environment.
Bogomip 27th October 2012, 11:59 Quote
To be honest, do you even use your start menu anymore? I use the "launch program" box and the quick launch icons but thats it, it will be just as convenient I am sure if the quick launch is the desktop.

Like nexxo says, itll work out.

People need to get used to a new idea :)

edit: and im sure it was all apples idea and ms stole it, from when it does all work out :)
Nexxo 27th October 2012, 12:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogomip
edit: and im sure it was all apples idea and ms stole it, from when it does all work out :)

:) It's funny because it's true: people will say that!
KidMod-Southpaw 27th October 2012, 12:16 Quote
Well, I bought it! Now to spend the day installing and getting used to it! W00P!
wafflesomd 27th October 2012, 13:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead
I shouldn't have to install 3rd party plugins to get it to play nice with a desktop environment.

Well they could just remove all customization if that's what you want. There are a lot 3rd party applications I use to get windows to work the way I want.
ObsCure 27th October 2012, 14:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by x5pilot
Like it or not the vast majority of users will be using Win8 12 months from now.
Either through upgrade incentives, OEM bundle deals or the desire to have the current skill set exposure to the new OS (a trait of most IT guys I know)
Im a big Microsoft supported - they've kept me in business since the early 90s, however I wasnt a big fan of the new OS particularly in its beta form, however I know I'll be using it before long, at least at home and for games - especially when Nvidia release improved drivers.

And like with win Vista, I will make a decent profit downgrading said users PC's to windows 7 :D
timmehtimmeh 27th October 2012, 16:01 Quote
I am very happy with my new windows 8 install on my 2700k P67 2x256gb M4's system. I dont know what all the fuss about it running on 2560x1600 displays. I love it on my 30" dell.

Love the new file transfer handling, love the new UI, sure its taking getting used to but its not any worse than win 7. Its like a new toy for windows, love it :D
Krazeh 27th October 2012, 16:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead
I still think they need to offer an option for Metro. To do otherwise is just sending a message that MS are only really interested in pandering to those with mobile or touchscreen devices. This is a home/consumer OS if you ask me. I shouldn't have to install 3rd party plugins to get it to play nice with a desktop environment.

You don't need to. I've been using Windows 8 in preview and release versions for months now and I've had no need to install anything before it plays nice in a desktop environment.
pilsner72 27th October 2012, 16:23 Quote
Windows 8 is not bad at all, the only problem I have I can't run IL2 CLOD.
Ficky Pucker 27th October 2012, 18:50 Quote
reading peoples impressions on windows 8 i thought they were exaggerating, but there really is no reason to "update" from windows 7.

edit:not enough coffee :D
Dave Lister 27th October 2012, 19:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ficky Pucker
reading peoples impressions on windows 8 i thought they were exaggerating, but there really is no reason to "update" to windows 7.

Do you mean: no reason to "update" to windows 8 ? And no I cant really see any reason apart from SSD support (coming from XP or Vista)
I upgraded my htpc so I could learn the update drill before doing customers machines and also thinking it would have windows media centre but it hasn't :(
wafflesomd 27th October 2012, 22:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogomip
To be honest, do you even use your start menu anymore? I use the "launch program" box and the quick launch icons but thats it, it will be just as convenient I am sure if the quick launch is the desktop.

Like nexxo says, itll work out.

People need to get used to a new idea :)

edit: and im sure it was all apples idea and ms stole it, from when it does all work out :)

You know I never really payed much attention but I never use the start menu anymore.
RichCreedy 27th October 2012, 23:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wafflesomd
You know I never really payed much attention but I never use the start menu anymore.

and this is what telemetrics told Microsoft, which is one of the reasons it was removed, and replaced with the start screen, which lets face it, is a glorified full screen start menu, which I quite like actually
brummydad 27th October 2012, 23:35 Quote
I've upgraded a few of the families machines with win 8 and so far no complaints with the performance or doing the stuff they did regularly in win 7. I'm going to set up a spare machine, see how it goes and report back.
Neogumbercules 28th October 2012, 06:13 Quote
I'll probably install Windows 8 on my HTPC. Keeping 7 on my main rig though. Using a desktop from ~ 10ft away is almost impossible for me, even with the DPI settings cranked up. The Modern UI seems great for easy navigation from across the room on a TV.
Ergath 28th October 2012, 08:07 Quote
I've installed 8 on two machines now, an old school Dell laptop (original Core Duo) and a more modern i3 based Lenovo, and I have to say I love the interface and the fluidity of the new gui. My other half is non-techy, and she immediately found 8 much easier to use, and wasn't confused by the lack of Start etc. because she never used the start menu anyway, got confused if she had to go into the file system and so on. For people like her (ie most of the public) win 8 goes a long way to fixing the age-old problem of people being intimidated by their own computers.

For myself, I like 8 on my laptop, with a relatively small screen and where I generally want to do something straightforward, but I will probably stick with 7 for my gaming/graphics rig.

I think a lot of the comments here are missing the point of win 8 - it's not designed to impress pc enthusiasts, it's designed to simplify PCs (built in security software, simple OS reinstallation) and provide an easier interface for normal people.

A someone who's always been singularly unimpressed by tablets sure to the lack of basic functionality, I am pleased that proper computers can now be found in the sameform factor as gimped, overpriced iOS and Android devices. I also think that Win8 is a far better touch interface than either of the two established tablet OSes.
Yslen 28th October 2012, 15:11 Quote
Well, on my PC...

Image Editing;

Windows 7 - 1793
Windows 8 - 1884

Windows 8 is about 5% faster.

Video Encoding;

Windows 7 - 3018
Windows 8 - 2991

Windows 8 is about 0.9% slower.

Multitasking;

Windows 7 - 1708
Windows 8 - 1682

Windows 8 is about 1.5% slower.

Overall;

Windows 7 - 2173
Windows 8 - 2183

Windows 8 is about 0.5% faster.

Startup and shutdown times are definitely quicker with Windows 8 but I've not measured them as of yet. The general responsiveness of the UI seems better in Windows 8 too; IMO.

p.s. If my percentages are a bit ropey it's because I'm trying to play League of Legends at the same time. Sorry Xahl.
Pookeyhead 28th October 2012, 15:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wafflesomd
Well they could just remove all customization if that's what you want. There are a lot 3rd party applications I use to get windows to work the way I want.

That's not what I meant at all. I meant I shouldn't have to rely on third party apps to get it to do what I want in the first place. I've still to see a reasonable rationale for not having the ability to decide whether you want to boot to desktop, or Metro. Clearly there's a need for it, as Stardcock have released an app for it. Why are MS forcing me to do something I don't want to do?

I have a tablet or touch screen laptop, then I decide to boot into Metro. I have a desktop, then I may prefer to boot into the desktop. Wouldn't it just make sense to have that as an option?

Anyway... it's lack of performance that bothers me. Sure.. things may improve.. but I'll just wait until they do.
theshadow2001 28th October 2012, 15:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pookeyhead
I've still to see a reasonable rationale for not having the ability to decide whether you want to boot to desktop, or Metro.

You have to manually open a program either way so it becomes functionally irrelevant whether you boot to desktop and click on a pinned taskbar program or boot to the start screen and click on the tile.

If I didn't use a third party start menu I would boot to the start screen, it makes more sense that way.
maverik-sg1 28th October 2012, 20:32 Quote
It's neither a step forward or a step backward - I think win8 is suited to those with touchscreens and alike, it's not for me though.

I was given to understand that this OS was going to boost the AMD bulldozer/piledriver architecture somewhat, so I look forward to seeing the comparisons of this APU in a win7 Vs 8 shoot-out.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums