Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Building a 'High Performance' Windows 7 PC

18 Aug 2009   #31
spazzie

Windows XP Professional
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by zigzag3143 View Post
spazzie

Just wondering if you ran those subjective tests as pparks suggested.

Ken
I've completed the XP testing so far Ken, Windows 7 up next.

Even in 2009, Windows XP SP3 plus a slew of post SP hotfixes / updates such as IE8 continues to amaze and provides the user with a highly responsive computing experience.

I've yet to find likewise with Vista/Windows 7 given all the disk/ram contention / demands between the user and OS.

Quality testing takes time, so hopefully within the next few days I'll upload when time permits.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
18 Aug 2009   #32
jokky

Windows 7
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
I doubt you will ever get performance from a SSD drive in Windows 7 as the OS overheads cause contention between the users workload and the resources it wants to claim (basically everything).

One great example we use here at work to test Windows 7 readiness for the corporate environment is this:

Open Windows 7 Explorer and start a copy process of several large files in the background. While this is happening, ALT-TAB to your foreground apps and perform a few daily activities ... open up control panel, explorer, browse the web.

Note how unresponsive your own foreground applications become since Windows 7 will cause RAM contention as it aggressively uses all available RAM for its file operations.

In Windows XP this does not occur! Its just another reason to stay with XP unfortunately.
I've used W7 with a normal HDD and SSD and I've seen major performance gains with a Solid State Drive on W7. Booting W7 is considerably faster and opening Word 2007 takes 1 second (or less).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Aug 2009   #33
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
I doubt you will ever get performance from a SSD drive in Windows 7 as the OS overheads cause contention between the users workload and the resources it wants to claim (basically everything).
Huh...the performance of the SSD is basically no seek times. There can be a large gain...however many SSD drives suffer from a stuttering problem when running the OS...but that is the technology and not the OS.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
Open Windows 7 Explorer and start a copy process of several large files in the background. While this is happening, ALT-TAB to your foreground apps and perform a few daily activities ... open up control panel, explorer, browse the web.
Alright, I just tried this on my Windows 7 box. I started copying a couple of virtual machines. 4 files at approx 14GB. I was easily able to move all over the box to any running foreground app. Surfing the web was just fine. I have no idea why this has ground your corporate machines to a halt.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
Even in 2009, Windows XP SP3 plus a slew of post SP hotfixes / updates such as IE8 continues to amaze and provides the user with a highly responsive computing experience.
Well, I would hope that 8 years after release, with modern computing power having increased so dramatically, that Windows XP would be fast. To expect otherwise, would be just downright silly.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
Quality testing takes time, so hopefully within the next few days I'll upload when time permits.
I'm anxiously looking forward to these test results. I'm certainly hoping you weren't taking a shot at my testing procedures since I knocked them out rather rapidly.

Any chance, you could tell me the exact tests that you are performing on Windows XP..so that I could test similarly against my hardware to compare our results?
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

18 Aug 2009   #34
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
Well at this stage of my testing, XP is providing myself, the user with a superior computing experience.

I can click on the Word 2007 shortcut and it opens within 4 seconds (not sure how you got 20 seconds???).
Go back and read what I tested. No, better yet, I will provide it here for you.

Quote:
Test 4: Time to Open Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, Word and Access
Windows XP SP2: 20 seconds
Windows 7 Ultimate: 17 seconds
So, what I did was open the entire office suite in 20 seconds on XP and 17 seconds on Windows 7. So, I clicked on Excel, got an empty spreadsheet, hit minimize, clicked on PowerPoint, got a blank presentation screen, minimized it, clicked on Publisher, got a blank publishing document, minimized it, clicked on Word, got a blank document, minimized it, clicked on Access, got to the blank database window. I did ALL of that in 20 seconds on XP and even faster on Windows 7...at 17 seconds.


And as far as your comment,
Quote:
XP is providing myself, the user with a superior computing experience.
That isn't telling us anything whatsoever. Without some type of quantitative measure documenting exactly how one is performing over the other, these types of comments are simply not useful. Sorry.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #35
spazzie

Windows XP Professional
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
Huh...the performance of the SSD is basically no seek times. There can be a large gain...however many SSD drives suffer from a stuttering problem when running the OS...but that is the technology and not the OS.


Alright, I just tried this on my Windows 7 box. I started copying a couple of virtual machines. 4 files at approx 14GB. I was easily able to move all over the box to any running foreground app. Surfing the web was just fine. I have no idea why this has ground your corporate machines to a halt.

Well, I would hope that 8 years after release, with modern computing power having increased so dramatically, that Windows XP would be fast. To expect otherwise, would be just downright silly.

I'm anxiously looking forward to these test results. I'm certainly hoping you weren't taking a shot at my testing procedures since I knocked them out rather rapidly.

Any chance, you could tell me the exact tests that you are performing on Windows XP..so that I could test similarly against my hardware to compare our results?
I'll post my Windows XP Professional results first because I'll need to rebuild the PC to a Windows 7 box (or I may dual boot) and then test.

I'm using your initial testing plus a few others. Due to differences in machine specs, everyone's experience will be their own unique experience so it will be difficult to gauge a baseline.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #36
zigzag3143

Win 8 Release candidate 8400
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
I'll post my Windows XP Professional results first because I'll need to rebuild the PC to a Windows 7 box (or I may dual boot) and then test.

I'm using your initial testing plus a few others. Due to differences in machine specs, everyone's experience will be their own unique experience so it will be difficult to gauge a baseline.

Spazzie

My experience will be very similar to yours as I just put win 7 7100 on a dell 8400 with ati, 756 ram and a tiny 40 gig HD
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #37
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by spazzie View Post
Due to differences in machine specs, everyone's experience will be their own unique experience so it will be difficult to gauge a baseline.
This is a very true statement. However, you can walk away with some generalities that are going to be applicable.

For example, if you load Windows XP to a very low end box (256MB RAM, celeron processor, 40GB IDE hard drive, crappy onboard video), and find that apps load pretty slow, the machine boots rather slow and overall performance is pretty bad....obviously you aren't going to want to install anything more robust or else things are just going to get slower.

At this point, you options are to deal with the older OS and the lack of newer functionality, or upgrade the hardware. And the choice on which is more appropriate isn't always an easy decision either and sometimes it's more obvious. For example, once Microsoft no longer provides critical security updates for Windows XP..you wouldn't really want to run a business and jeopardize your clients, revenue or employees by sticking with it. To do so, would make you look rather foolish in the event of a problem. Fortunately, Microsoft supports their OS's for an insanely long period of time...therefore this hardware would almost certainly be retired prior to losing complete support for the product. And efficiency and functionality gains from a modern $500 PC, would easily cover the cost.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #38
chev65

Windows 7 Ult, Windows 8.1 Pro,
 
 

The way I see it, the topic in this thread has NOTHING to do with Win7 versus XP so it appears to me like somebody let somebody else change the topic of this thread to something it was never meant to be. Otherwise known as trolling.

In my opinion the person who changed the topic to his own rediculous and very incorrectly informed agenda should be warned against doing this and then banned if they don't stop.

Or maybe I'm reading the rules incorrectly but I do not see how building a high performance Windows7 PC has anything to with Windows XP.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #39
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by chev65 View Post
...In my opinion the person who changed the topic to his own rediculous and very incorrectly informed agenda should be warned against doing this and then banned if they don't stop...
pparks and zag are trying very hard to educate the spazzie. spazzie continues to pop into any discussion of Win7 performance, design, use, et cetera, and begins to mechanically spew misinformation regarding Windows memory management. I admire my peers tenacity and do not envy their chosen mission. For those familiar with this ongoing struggle, at times, it seems as if spazzie is about to make progress. And then slips. This slippage may be related to molecular half-life, it may be rooted in a lack of capacity, or it may be simple trollage.

As it permeates across multiple threads, I am certain that forum management has reviewed this issue. Having wondered why the struggle is allowed to continue, I conclude that the powers that be have an interest in at least two things: How far and how deep will zag and pparks endeavor (we all benefit from their harvest), and how civil will the struggle remain. Sometimes, I think spazzie is, in reality, one of the management team. This not an unreasonable assumption, as it is difficult to remain so uninformed in the presence of so much advanced knowledge.

Every class has a worst student, and even that one deserves the opportunity to advance to their full potential. Every help desk has a best and worst tech.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Aug 2009   #40
pparks1

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Yes, the topic did get a little off track. The original thread was about building a high performance PC...and there was commentary during the thread that even a high end PC might not perform as well as it should with modern day operating systems. So, it's a bit of a troll like post, but not entirely.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Building a 'High Performance' Windows 7 PC




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Building a High-end to Mid-end PC
I am planning on building a new PC during the summer, I need a computer that can play games, surf the web play videos and run programs. My Budget is below $1000-$800.:D
Hardware & Devices
Intel 520 SSD, low performance, high performance, then low again...?
I just now installed an Intel 520 240GB SSD. Measuring the performance, got strange results. First it did not at all perform close to my expectations and Intels promises:...
Hardware & Devices
Windows 7 high RAM usage and low performance
i have a problem but i bought a new Dell laptop with the following specifications Dell inspiron 15R core i7 3.1GHz Turbo, 6MB cache 16GB DDR3 RAM Geforce Gt525 1GB Graphics now the problem is that when the system is ideal it takes around 2.5 GB RAM usage even there is no running...
Performance & Maintenance
Anyone with experience building high end workstations?
I got a call today from a potential customer who wants a machine that can run Autodesk Inventor without bogging down, but he doesn't want to pay 20K+ for a workstation from HP or Dell.. After hearing what he's currently using for hardware (enough to make almost any gamer start drooling), I had...
Hardware & Devices
Help! Building My First High-End Custom Desktop
Hey guys, I'm building my first desktop, and was wanted to ask if all of these parts will work together, and will this be a successful gaming computer? Here's my list: List has been edited based on advice you guys gave me: Motherboard: Gigabyte Intel Core i7/ Core i5/ Core i3/ LGA 1156/...
Hardware & Devices
Windows 7 power plan Balanced or High Performance?
so i was running tuneup utilities and its giving me recommendations to optimize my comp. it has the option of setting my power plan to be balanced or for high performance, what does the majority use? if i go with high performance does it really kill that of power, resources etc that much?
Performance & Maintenance


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:35.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App