Convince me !

[Dzomlija]

I don't use the built in compression features (besides NTFS compression) if I can help it, because the performance and lack of features is horrific. I've already found that out by messing around with archives. I immediately installed 7-zip and WinRAR and now much happier. So, I think my test is valid (no doubt most people will be using these same tools).

LOL, neither do I. I use WinZip 11.2.

I just feel that an accurate benchmark comparing Windows XP to Windows 7 should be performed using the built-in tools and features, as far as can be done.

The one area that cannot be tested using built-in features is video encodiing to DivX, as Windows XP does not support DivX at all without the aid of 3rd-party codecs, and Windows 7 only supports DivX playback OOB.

I don't have any accurate benchmark results to give, and I have no intention of tarnishing my rig by installing XP on it for the sake of a benchmark test.

But since you appear to have both XP and Windows 7 on your machine, try this: Download and install Handbrake to both XP and Windows 7, then convert the same video file to xVid using the same settings. Chances are high that the conversion on Windows 7 will go much quicker. My record so far is a 02:15:00 movie converting in 00:57:00, using 2-pass encoding. I haven't used XP on any of my own machines for nearly 3 years, so the best I can do is say that I remember doing similar tasks in about 8 hours!

 

[sup3rsprt]

I will try it.

Is this program multicore aware and does it use its own built-in codecs? I hope it tells how long it took once finished.

 

[Dzomlija]

I will try it.

Is this program multicore aware and does it use its own built-in codecs? I hope it tells how long it took once finished.

I usually look at the ETA times, but it doesn't log it output. And yes: It IS multicore aware

 

[sup3rsprt]

but it doesn't log it output.

Shoot, then I don't think I can expect to get any reliable results. The ETA started at like 47 minutes, but then it goes up and down (it depends on the framerate). And I didn't start my stopwatch when I started encoding 20 minutes ago.

EDIT - scratch that. I can go by the file creation and last modified dates to see how long each one took. Will report back when it's done

 

[DJG]

EDIT - scratch that. I can go by the file creation and last modified dates to see how long each one took. Will report back when it's done

That's how I time my image backups .

BTW, what are your system specs, so we can reference them vs. benchmarks?

 

[ten]

I've done some benchmarks of my own. I'll let the images speak for themselves.







Microsoft Office 2007 full install
XP............................................................Windows 7

 

[sup3rsprt]

I did a DVD to AVI conversion on a HP Pentium dual core laptop with 1GB RAM and a 120GB hard drive.

It took 57 minutes on both XP and Win7.

These results do not surprise me, as a video conversion is a CPU test after all. If CPU was slower in Win7 operating system, I would be very worried.

However my test does illustrate that there are virtually no multicore improvements for Win7 in this case.

OK, enough benchmarks for me today

 

[DJG]

sup3rsprt, thanks for the info!

I will say that in your experiences with 32 vs. 64 bit, your results make sense because you only have 1GB of memory. I would actually expect 64-bit to be a bit slower. But with 4GB or more memory you will encounter very different results.

As always, one needs to tailor things to one's specific situation. Everybody's digital metabolism is different! There are no absolutes in this business, other than absolute crazyness as in my case ...

DJ

 

[Shak 10]

Hi everyone, and let's not waste any time, I'm an avid & Fanatical Win XP 4 Life dude !
Vista home,pren,ultimate,hack,slash,jedi was all fail.
they gave us a huge RAM sucker with a candy skin and a few pre-available widgets and other obnoxious gadgets separated over a dozen packages.

And now we have a new challenger, Win Seven ! but i'm also specktical.

I'm gonna get a new HP G60t soon (P8900 2.4Ghz,4GO Ram), and the first thing i might do if i'm not tempted to test win 7 is to kill vista for a good ol' clean xp that works with everything and eats only a little ram
So tell me guys, how would this win 7 Beat a 64 Bit XP !?:huh:

Shouldn't be a matter of convincing, Windows seven is the future XP is the past. Vista was not a bad OS it's the second most used os in the world and had good sales = not a failure it improved on XP in a lot of ways. Seven is a better and a safer OS than XP already to work on and its only in escrow now. If you feel your happy with what u got then stay with it, but if you wanna sample Seven i guarrante u wont be dissapointed.

 

[DJG]

Shouldn't be a matter of convincing, Windows seven is the future XP is the past. Vista was not a bad OS and had good sales = not a failure it improved on XP in a lot of ways. Seven is a better and a safer OS than XP already to work and its only in escrow now. If you feel your happy with what u got then stay with it, but if you wanna sample Seven i guarrante u wont be dissapointed.

+1
I migrated from XP x64 to the Windows 7 beta and have not looked back, other than to grin. I still have my XP image from February and it's in my external backup set, but I can't even think about going back.

 

[Lebon14]

Then could you please explain to me why Cinebench R10 CPU benchmark finishes 4 seconds faster in Windows XP? (btw, my laptop is Pentium dual core and the power options are set to High Performance).

Where are the multicore improvements, because I don't see it.

Look, I'm sick and tired of seeing you say "WinXP is faster than Win7". XP needs to DIE in a long and painful death.

Also, a Pentium Dual-core is like... I'm pretty sure you could finish that sentence. Get a decent Core 2 Duo with added 1GB of RAM and you shall see the light.

---
Back on topic.
For myself, I haven't been able to spot exact real sped up between Vista and Seven (YES I am a Vista fanboy and a growing XP hater). I love both Vista and Seven.

But I can see that the boot is faster than Vistas. I can't say about XP coz I happily ditched it last year (still have the licence though).

I like the Aero Snap feature. Very useful. Library can be very useful (depends how you setup your stuff).

 

[PhreePhly]

Look, I'm sick and tired of seeing you say "WinXP is faster than Win7". XP needs to DIE in a long and painful death.

Also, a Pentium Dual-core is like... I'm pretty sure you could finish that sentence. Get a decent Core 2 Duo with added 1GB of RAM and you shall see the light.

---
Back on topic.
For myself, I haven't been able to spot exact real sped up between Vista and Seven (YES I am a Vista fanboy and a growing XP hater). I love both Vista and Seven.

But I can see that the boot is faster than Vistas. I can't say about XP coz I happily ditched it last year (still have the licence though).

I like the Aero Snap feature. Very useful. Library can be very useful (depends how you setup your stuff).

Well, XP is already on the way to EOL. It will receive security updates until 2014, but SP3 was it for any useful system up grades. As far as XP being faster, given today's hardware, that's probably true. Heck, I've run Windows 3.11 in a VM, and it was faster than anything I remember back in the day, but the more important issues are in regards to interaction with newer hardware, support and especially security.

XP is is nowhere as secure as Vista/Win 7. This is a fact. Vista/Win 7 have finally started the process of modernizing Window's graphical API. GDI/GDI+ are one ther way out and soon Windows will use the modern GPU properly. Vista was a good start and Win 7 is cleaning that up. With the MinWin process, the kernel is becoming far more efficient, which means that is can perform better with less memory resources.

The GUI is becoming more modern. XP's Luna was fine for its release, but it's now long in the tooth and time to go. Vendors are going to stop supporting XP. That is a fact. It may take a year or two, but new hardware will not come with an XP driver. Writing drivers cost money and vendors are trying to cut costs.

To the OP, I can't convince you. You've made your mind up already. Vista and Win 7 will not likely be faster than XP for many jobs. Just like Win 2000 was faster than XP for many things, but the march of progress is not going to stop for you. At one point you are going to upgrade, it may not even be a MS OS that you move to, but XP is dead.

PhreePhly

 

[ten]

Look, I'm sick and tired of seeing you say "WinXP is faster than Win7".

I would get used to people saying that.

XP needs to DIE in a long and painful death.

It's just software folks. No need to get that worked up over it.

Get a decent Core 2 Duo with added 1GB of RAM and you shall see the light.

So basically, upgrade your hardware so you can get the same performance you are getting now.

 

[Barman58]

Just one thing to add when considering benchmarking between XP and Windows 7.

• XP is a mature OS in release form with mature hardware drivers which have been tweaked and tuned over several years.

• Windows 7 is still pre-release software with the majority of drivers available being first generation, the only true test will be when the release version of window 7 is available, (with all debug code removed), and with more advanced drivers

Microsoft themselves have warned against running comparative benchmarks until the OS is fully released, So I am expecting an improvement on release, and of course as we are approaching the final release each interim build is being reported as showing speed increases

 

[r00o9huy]

Just one thing to add when considering benchmarking between XP and Windows 7.

• XP is a mature OS in release form with mature hardware drivers which have been tweaked and tuned over several years.

• Windows 7 is still pre-release software with the majority of drivers available being first generation, the only true test will be when the release version of window 7 is available, (with all debug code removed), and with more advanced drivers

Microsoft themselves have warned against running comparative benchmarks until the OS is fully released, So I am expecting an improvement on release, and of course as we are approaching the final release each interim build is being reported as showing speed increases

+1

Here we compare Windows XP SP3 (8 Years ongoing development since released)

vs

Windows 7 (not even released)

 

[Mercurial]

Also Imagine it having almost every feature in vista yet. its almost same as xp in terms of speed.

If you try to put E.G windows search or vista start menu on XP and ect. it will be slow as first vista release lol.

 

[smarteyeball]

We're all fans of XP,

lol, are we?

It's all a moot point really. XP has had it's day and it's now time to let it go.

I'm more than happy to trade a few seconds here and a little more resources there in exchange for a vast amount of increased functionality across the board.

 

[ppp]

Did anyone notice he's comparing XP x64 to Win7 x64? I call troll. Anyone who says XP x64 is anything other than A. Dui Pyle is just flat out lying.

 

[FreakyFerret]

None of the benchmarks and results people have posted in this thread are valid. All of them are missing necessary detailing of settings, drivers used, etc. One guy mentioned he uses NTFS compression. Did he use this in XP as well? What effect does XP versus 7's NTFS compression have if any even? Also what build of 7 was being used? Beta? RC? 7200? I would expect the latest builds to outperform the beta version. I would not consider a benchmark of the RC to even be worthwhile considering how old it is now.

If you want to say X is faster than Y, then you need to detail all of it.

 

[dmex]

Did anyone notice he's comparing XP x64 to Win7 x64? I call troll. Anyone who says XP x64 is anything other than A. Dui Pyle is just flat out lying.

I noticed He didn't comment on the various Video links I posted for him two days ago that answered all his questions :huh:

And your right, anyone who has used XP X64 for awhile knows it absolutely sucks, everyone at my company hates it with the same passion for hating WinME

I'm inclined to close the thread before it starts attracting more birds of the same feather that somehow flock together :sarc: