|07 May 2009||#1|
| || |
Why Windows 7 is Snappier than Vista
Because I've seen benchmarks coming out showing Windows 7 not to be much quicker than vista in raw power, I thought it would be important for people to see why why 7 is indeed snappier than vista. It's not a placebo effect.
Gizmodo - Why Windows 7 Is Snappier Than Vista - windows 7
Most people will tell you that Windows 7 is snappier than Vista, even though the raw numbers say otherwise. But it's not in your head. Windows 7 is more responsive than Vista. Here's why.
I meant to post this a few days ago, but it fits in really nicely with our benchmark testing to explain what's going on under Windows 7's hood. Microsoft obviously focused a lot on the user experience in Windows 7, so a lot of work went into improving desktop responsiveness—smoothing out the little snags or hangs up that made people feel like Vista was too slow. Which is apparently a hard thing to do, since a million different things can cause slowdown. But the most frequent cause of hangups is a bottleneck caused by one graphics device interface application—an app that taps your graphics card—waiting on another GDI app that's being all slow and crappy.
In Vista, this could happen because the way the GDI was designed, a single app could hold a system-wide global lock, so apps running simultaneously constantly jockey for the lock in order to render on the screen, and if one asshole app doesn't let go, it screws every other app waiting in line. So Microsoft re-designed the way this stuff is orchestrated, so multiple apps can "reliably" render at the same time, meaning less bottlenecks. Besides improving reliability, the redesign actually improved performance with multiple GDI apps running simultaneously on multi-core processors, so you'll see real benefits from going multi-core, which no doubt makes Intel's Craig Barrett happy.
Oh yes, they also reduced the memory footprint, but anybody running Windows 7 already noticed this. So yes, Windows 7 really is more responsive, even if run-of-the-mill benchmarks can't exactly measure how that is.
|My System Specs|
|07 May 2009||#2|
| || |
I'm not a great believer in benchmarks as such because imo you have to perform them on the same machine and I wonder if they performed the same tests on exactly the same system as they did vista.. It's a bit like asking one question to ten different psychologists, you'll get ten different answers. It's the same when they rate processors or gpu each and every one is in a different set up so it stands to reason results will vary.
But of course windows 7 is snappier and we know its not in the head because for those of us who have used both operating systems have probably used them on the same machine, well at least I have so any performance increase/decrease will be quantifiable because the hardware is exactly the same.
|My System Specs|
|Similar help and support threads for2: Why Windows 7 is Snappier than Vista|
|Kensington Trackball OK In Vista But Not In Win7 Vista Compatibility||Drivers|
|Remove Vista from Vista / Win7 Dual Boot - Separate Drives||Installation & Setup|
|Windows 7 seems snappier now that SP1 is installed||Windows Updates & Activation|
|Dual booting vista and windows 7, want to remove vista all together||Installation & Setup|
|Removing Vista from Dual-Boot System Vista + Windows 7||Installation & Setup|
|Just compared Vista with Windows 7 - Poor Vista||General Discussion|
|Windows Vista SP2 RTM + Windows Vista SP1 Blocker Tool||News|