Windows 7 Experience Index

Mac Daddy · May 3, 2009, 06:19 PM

This might have been better in the benching section but we don't have many threads in here yet. I thought it might be a good idea to have seperate threads for the Vista and Windows 7 expeience index scores.

Just ran this on my main system at the settings I usually run it at for normal use. The HD4870 is set to the factory O/C by Overdrive I don't need to O/C it for normal use and gaming.

swimtech · May 3, 2009, 06:51 PM

It seems that as long as you have a single non-raid SATA drive of any type, the overall score won't get above 5.9.

Tyrsonswood · May 3, 2009, 07:22 PM

Experience index wouldn't even run on this old HP....... matter of fact it corrupted the drivers trying to.

Mac Daddy · May 4, 2009, 12:34 AM

Ouch that's not cool man

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimtech

It seems that as long as you have a single non-raid SATA drive of any type, the overall score won't get above 5.9.

Seems so !!

OldBuzzard · May 4, 2009, 12:49 AM

With my system (see specs):

7.3 for the Processor
7.3 for the RAM
6.2 for the Graphics
6.2 for the Gaming Graphics
5.9 for the Primary haerd disk.
Giving me a BASE SCORE of 5.9

I would have thought that my HDD score would have been higher, but maybe the RAID comment has some validity.

OR, maybe they are 'suppressing' HDD scores in anticipation of the fast SSDs that are on the horizon, and they want to have 'room' in the scoring to accomodate them when they arrive.

Mac Daddy · May 4, 2009, 12:54 AM

Could be you are running some nice drives there and I am running a WD 640G SATA II (black) I expected a bit better than 5.9. Perhaps you guys are right on RAID and SSD.

Judas · May 5, 2009, 05:36 AM

I'll have to find it.. but i had a win7 index when i had the i920 and 4 seagate 7200.11's 32mb 500gb in raid 0. The score was 6.1 but the HD's scored 6.3, the HD4870 scored 6.1 the rest was usually all 7.2/7.4's

Initially though my hd score was in the sub 4.9's.... apparently there was a glitch with win7 7000 or something and performance of the drives in raid was significantly reduced. I would have thought 4 of those drives in raid 0 would have peaked over 7.0 though at the very least.....

OldBuzzard · May 5, 2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

... apparently there was a glitch with win7 7000 or something and performance of the drives in raid was significantly reduced. I would have thought 4 of those drives in raid 0 would have peaked over 7.0 though at the very least.....

More that in just RAID.

If I remember correctly, in the 7000 build on this same system, my HDD score was something like 2.9....I was like, WTF!?!?!?!?

Judas · May 5, 2009, 04:57 PM

After digging it up.. yes i scored 2.3 for the HD result in the 7000 build with the 4 drives in raid 0 .... lol

**MIG-31** · May 6, 2009, 11:32 AM

Not bad for me,Just the memory lets it down a little. Score of 5.9.

Mac Daddy · May 6, 2009, 12:00 PM

Not to shabby Mig

**MIG-31** · May 6, 2009, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac Daddy

Not to shabby Mig

Im not dissapointed with the results,I just thought with 8 Gig of memory (OCZ Sli Ready) memory would of been a touch higher than vistas score.

Mac Daddy · May 7, 2009, 12:47 AM

Well on the memory perhaps it is speed and not the amount for the Index. I went back to my 4G of OCZ ReaperX PC2-8500 for this build.

OldBuzzard · May 7, 2009, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MIG-31

Im not dissapointed with the results,I just thought with 8 Gig of memory (OCZ Sli Ready) memory would of been a touch higher than vistas score.

Yeah, that does look a bit odd. I got 7.3 using: 8 GB CORSAIR XMS2 DHX DDR2 800

It's good RAM, but not the fastest out there. How does that compare, spec wise, with your OCZ?

**MIG-31** · May 7, 2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBuzzard

Yeah, that does look a bit odd. I got 7.3 using: 8 GB CORSAIR XMS2 DHX DDR2 800

It's good RAM, but not the fastest out there. How does that compare, spec wise, with your OCZ?

Mine is 8G (4x2GB Dual Channel) OCZ Sli-Ready PC2-6400..As for what the timmings are i don't know..I have not looked at the bios set up for a while.

EDIT: This is my set.

drwho · May 9, 2009, 03:54 AM

Well, I'm up and running. Kinda playing around with things and when trying the Experience Index it would run for about a third of the way through and then a message pops up saying it cannot complete and tells me to close it.

FireElements · May 9, 2009, 04:52 AM

I'm running two drives in RAID 0 yet still only getting 5.9. My RAM score seemed pretty high though.

Zardon · May 9, 2009, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MIG-31

Im not dissapointed with the results,I just thought with 8 Gig of memory (OCZ Sli Ready) memory would of been a touch higher than vistas score.

I really wouldnt rate the experience index as being accurate, either on Vista or Win 7. Its just a basic indication.

**MIG-31** · May 9, 2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zardon

I really wouldnt rate the experience index as being accurate, either on Vista or Win 7. Its just a basic indication.

Perhaps that may be the case,But under vista the scores maxed out under all the tests.

Mac Daddy · May 9, 2009, 01:54 PM

Yes they have strengthened the testing which really isn't a bad thing. I treat this as I do Everest benchmarks and tests to compare results within themselves on system changes.

Judas · May 9, 2009, 04:28 PM

remember.... as far as i understand... or what i've seen.. even with 1gb of ram... vista/win7 seems to rate your memory performance about the same..

so it doesn't seem to matter at ALL how much you have... it's about it's individual performance figures that dictate the measurement. This is why some case less memory has larger numbers in the rating.. as they have typically tighter timings and such....

this is why it's kinda absurd as it doesn't matter how fast your ram is in the end, if your out of ram, your going to be running slow as all get out.

swimtech · May 18, 2009, 03:00 AM

How low can you go?

Just finished configuring the RC on the old Athlon system - upgrade installation from Vista SP1 32bit. The only software I added was the Catalyst 9.3 suite (for my legacy 9600XT), even though Win7 installed a basic driver for it. All the other hardware is seen and working too, even the Envy 24 audio codec card and old Logitech webcam - I consider myself very fortunate though the upgrade install from Vista probably helped me along those lines...

Memory - 1.9 1.25Gigs PC 100 SDRam across all 3 slots
Processor - 1.9 Athlon 1.2Ghz (200Mhz)
Graphics - 2.9 for Aero
Gaming gfx - 4.4 9600XT stock - how about that?
Hard disk - 3.9 250G WD IDE

The machine feels like it runs smoother than XP but does take about a minute and a half to boot and present all the taskbar icons, starting from the OS selection screen (still has XP SP3 on the other partition). That gaming graphics score really surprised me. It was a 3.9 with the basic Win7 installation driver.

Judas · May 18, 2009, 06:44 AM

The slowest so far is a Win7 32bit 7100 rc build installed on a Intel Pentium 3 600mhz with 512mb of ram and a ATI Radeon 9600np.

It ran exceptionally well, actually a small performance boost when Aero is running

May 3, 2009, 06:19 PM	#1
Mac Daddy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 7,950 Rep Power: 80 System Specs	Windows 7 Experience Index This might have been better in the benching section but we don't have many threads in here yet. I thought it might be a good idea to have seperate threads for the Vista and Windows 7 expeience index scores. Just ran this on my main system at the settings I usually run it at for normal use. The HD4870 is set to the factory O/C by Overdrive I don't need to O/C it for normal use and gaming. Attached Thumbnails __________________ "My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen

May 3, 2009, 06:51 PM	#2
swimtech HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 4,040 Rep Power: 124 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index It seems that as long as you have a single non-raid SATA drive of any type, the overall score won't get above 5.9. __________________ It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it.

May 4, 2009, 12:49 AM	#5
OldBuzzard DH's oldest Geek Join Date: May 2003 Location: Oberlin, OH Posts: 2,783 Rep Power: 145 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index With my system (see specs): 7.3 for the Processor 7.3 for the RAM 6.2 for the Graphics 6.2 for the Gaming Graphics 5.9 for the Primary haerd disk. Giving me a BASE SCORE of 5.9 I would have thought that my HDD score would have been higher, but maybe the RAID comment has some validity. OR, maybe they are 'suppressing' HDD scores in anticipation of the fast SSDs that are on the horizon, and they want to have 'room' in the scoring to accomodate them when they arrive. __________________ When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

May 4, 2009, 12:54 AM	Thread Starter #6
Mac Daddy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 7,950 Rep Power: 80 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Could be you are running some nice drives there and I am running a WD 640G SATA II (black) I expected a bit better than 5.9. Perhaps you guys are right on RAID and SSD. __________________ "My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen

May 6, 2009, 11:32 AM	#10
MIG-31 HardwareHeaven News Mod Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Nottingham,UK Posts: 56,854 Rep Power: 471 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Not bad for me,Just the memory lets it down a little. Score of 5.9. Attached Thumbnails __________________ Please Post Your News Submissions Here

May 6, 2009, 12:00 PM	Thread Starter #11
Mac Daddy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 7,950 Rep Power: 80 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Not to shabby Mig __________________ "My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen

May 7, 2009, 12:47 AM	Thread Starter #13
Mac Daddy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 7,950 Rep Power: 80 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Well on the memory perhaps it is speed and not the amount for the Index. I went back to my 4G of OCZ ReaperX PC2-8500 for this build. __________________ "My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen

May 9, 2009, 03:54 AM	#16
drwho HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Carol Stream, IL Posts: 572 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Well, I'm up and running. Kinda playing around with things and when trying the Experience Index it would run for about a third of the way through and then a message pops up saying it cannot complete and tells me to close it. __________________

May 9, 2009, 04:52 AM	#17
FireElements DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 189 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index I'm running two drives in RAID 0 yet still only getting 5.9. My RAM score seemed pretty high though.

May 9, 2009, 01:54 PM	Thread Starter #20
Mac Daddy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 7,950 Rep Power: 80 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index Yes they have strengthened the testing which really isn't a bad thing. I treat this as I do Everest benchmarks and tests to compare results within themselves on system changes. __________________ "My mom said the only reason men are alive is for lawn care and vehicle maintenance." - Tim Allen

May 18, 2009, 03:00 AM	#22
swimtech HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 4,040 Rep Power: 124 System Specs	Re: Windows 7 Experience Index How low can you go? Just finished configuring the RC on the old Athlon system - upgrade installation from Vista SP1 32bit. The only software I added was the Catalyst 9.3 suite (for my legacy 9600XT), even though Win7 installed a basic driver for it. All the other hardware is seen and working too, even the Envy 24 audio codec card and old Logitech webcam - I consider myself very fortunate though the upgrade install from Vista probably helped me along those lines... Memory - 1.9 1.25Gigs PC 100 SDRam across all 3 slots Processor - 1.9 Athlon 1.2Ghz (200Mhz) Graphics - 2.9 for Aero Gaming gfx - 4.4 9600XT stock - how about that? Hard disk - 3.9 250G WD IDE The machine feels like it runs smoother than XP but does take about a minute and a half to boot and present all the taskbar icons, starting from the OS selection screen (still has XP SP3 on the other partition). That gaming graphics score really surprised me. It was a 3.9 with the basic Win7 installation driver. __________________ It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it.