Battlefield 4 Windows 7 vs. 8.1 Performance Review @ [H]

Freebo said:
I think the older PC would notice more of a difference with windows 8 as its better on resources.
Click to expand...

I can vouch for this (but not in games).

I'm using an old Dell Zino HD cube as my HTPC until I save up to build a new one to my liking. I upgraded the RAM in it, so that's not an issue, but the highest end CPU supported is an Athlon X2 Neo 1.8ghz, and the integrated Radeon 3200 IGP is pretty bad.

It did not like HD videos much in Vista Basic (which it shipped with) or Windows 7 Pro, but it handles almost everything I throw at it in Windows 8. The fact that I can use the non-Silverlight Windows 8 Netflix app means Netflix HD content works as well (which it doesn't in a browser, as with silverlight there is no GPU acceleration)

So Windows 8 is definitely helpful on older hardware, and a pretty damned good OS for a HTPC. The arrow keys on my Windows Remote navigate the the metro interface nicely.
 
Zarathustra[H];1040412512 said:
No one who knows what they are doing ever does an upgrade install, even when upgrading with an upgrade disk...
Click to expand...

But some of the people who ask us to help with their PCs do.
 
Zarathustra[H];1040412905 said:
I'm using an old Dell Zino HD cube as my HTPC until I save up to build a new one to my liking. I upgraded the RAM in it, so that's not an issue, but the highest end CPU supported is an Athlon X2 Neo 1.8ghz, and the integrated Radeon 3200 IGP is pretty bad.

It did not like HD videos much in Vista Basic (which it shipped with) or Windows 7 Pro, but it handles almost everything I throw at it in Windows 8. The fact that I can use the non-Silverlight Windows 8 Netflix app means Netflix HD content works as well (which it doesn't in a browser, as with silverlight there is no GPU acceleration)
Click to expand...

A system that old I would have thrown Linux on it. Mint 16 or Ubuntu would work better. I threw it on my old laptop and the machine breaths new life now. The boot speeds and shutdown are amazingly fast compared to Windows 7.

SIlverlight is a problem, but there is a way to get Netflix Desktop on there. Considering SIlverlight is a Microsoft product, the lack of Silverlight on Linux is Microsoft's fault.

trick0502 said:
Let's face the facts, 8.1 is all around faster than 7. It may have things that bother people (start button), but under the hood it is sperior to 7.
Click to expand...

That superiority does not justify the cost of getting Windows 8 on your machine. Right now Microsoft Windows 8 Pro is $80 off Amazon. If you already have a Windows 7 license then your money is better spent towards new hardware.

Depending on your hardware the money is better spent towards a AMD FX-6300 6-Core or a Intel Core i3-3240. Which will get you more FPS in Battlefield 4, and is more future proof then an operating system.

The only reason to get a copy of Windows 8 is because you didn't have a license for Windows 7 and the prices for Windows 7 are sky high on Amazon.
 
Ashbringer said:
A system that old I would have thrown Linux on it. Mint 16 or Ubuntu would work better. I threw it on my old laptop and the machine breaths new life now. The boot speeds and shutdown are amazingly fast compared to Windows 7.

SIlverlight is a problem, but there is a way to get Netflix Desktop on there. Considering SIlverlight is a Microsoft product, the lack of Silverlight on Linux is Microsoft's fault.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I WAS going to go with Linux on it, but I had aspirations of turning it into a pseudo DVR with a cable card type setup, and Linux simply does not have any support for encoded channels (or didn't last time I researched it) so that was out.

And the WINE workaround for Silverlight and netflix wouldn't work on this low end hardware, as it would have to decode netflix HD content on the CPU, and the CPU isn't fast enough. I need the windows 8 Netflix app, as it has GPU acceleration (that's how all the tablets and phones can play Netflix despite their comparatively anemic CPU's)
 
Ashbringer said:
A system that old I would have thrown Linux on it. Mint 16 or Ubuntu would work better. I threw it on my old laptop and the machine breaths new life now. The boot speeds and shutdown are amazingly fast compared to Windows 7.
Click to expand...

I've tried Mint 10 (or 11) on AthlonXP with 2 GB RAM and it ran the same as WinXP I had on it in actual use. Went back to XP. As for boot/shutdown, that is the last thing I care about when it comes to PCs. It is such a rarely done action, if at all.
 
Meeho said:
I've tried Mint 10 (or 11) on AthlonXP with 2 GB RAM and it ran the same as WinXP I had on it in actual use. Went back to XP. As for boot/shutdown, that is the last thing I care about when it comes to PCs. It is such a rarely done action, if at all.
Click to expand...

And when you do, who waits for it to finish? Click shutdown... walk away.
 
I have zero interested in Windows 8.

Please tell me Mantle will be on Windows 7 as well.

If not, no biggie, I already get blazing speeds on my 2 x R9 290x's with BF4.

I can wait out Mantle until it's on a dozen or so games well into future, i.e, I don't have deal with Windows 8 until much later on
 
Modred189 said:
Finally, registry tweaks are a no-go for me. Sure, it might fix BF4, but who know what other applications it might screw up.
Click to expand...
This is a registry tweak to disable core parking in Win7 which Win8 either does more efficiently or simply doesn't do it at all. It's also completely program agnostic unless its a 3rd party program intended to change power schemes since it doesn't need to be done by going into regedit. It can be done by a 3rd party program, or done through Window's own control panel by changing your power scheme by setting minimum processor state to 100%. For those using the AMD FX processors, there is a hotfix supplied by microsoft to disable core parking due to performance issues. This hotfix proves that core parking was the primary reason that AMD FX chips got better performance under Windows 8 when they were discussing it over a year ago.

Should it be done on a laptop? No. You will lose more battery life.
Should it be done on a desktop? Hell yes. Why not? The electricity usage difference is miniscule at best for something not using a battery. If you are overclocking your CPU, you likely don't give 2 shits about how much electricity you are saving.

Honestly, I think your fear is unfounded. ;)
 
Last edited:
(A lot of people were wrong that it was a large difference)

No we wasn't wrong as this go's back to beta as people with window 8 had a smooth playing game and people with windows 7 had choppy mess that was just crap.

DICE and Nvidia have been working around the clock trying to get windows 7 to run BF 4 smoother and not like a slide show so yes windows 8 was a large difference in game play if one expects the game to run like all games should run .

Newegg has been offering window 8.1 for $79 and anytime I fire BF 4 up .. then I want it to run darn smooth hardcore or not .. so it is worth it and HT should be on so all 8 treads are used on my cpu as how I bought it to run.
 
Well, I got bored and compiled the data from Hardware Pal's similar review, seen here. I appreciate Hard|OCP's testing, but they missed a big point by leaving out the CPU. If you play on any settings that really stress out your CPU, Windows 8.1 has ENORMOUS benefits for Battlefield 4 Multiplayer.

kv2D83g.png


No way around it. It's just comparing minimum FPS and just those two settings, but I had to do it by hand, so I only did the ones that were relevant to my system.
 
I read through this thread and saw several remarks about living with Windows 8 and how it has nothing to offer for the desktop.

It takes the same amount of time to install Classic Start on Windows 8 as it does to install Chrome on Windows 7.

This article found a performance decrease when unparking cores in multiplayer BF4 http://www.techbuyersguru.com/ochtgaming3.php and that the unparked i7 still failed to keep up with the i5/no HT i7
 
Great article gentleman! I'm in a solid BF4 clan and most of our guys have switched to Windows 8. A few of them reported dramatically improved frame rates, the guys with lower end CPUs.

I can't run windows 7 or windows 8 without classic shell because it's a vastly superior start menu and has excellent customization. It's also free and has been around for years.

From a gaming perspective, Windows 8 is worth it to me for the task manager and improved resource management. It also boots faster and I hate Windows 7 Aero crashes which are extremely common on my old rig.
 
ikjadoon said:
Well, I got bored and compiled the data from Hardware Pal's similar review, seen here. I appreciate Hard|OCP's testing, but they missed a big point by leaving out the CPU. If you play on any settings that really stress out your CPU, Windows 8.1 has ENORMOUS benefits for Battlefield 4 Multiplayer.

kv2D83g.png


No way around it. It's just comparing minimum FPS and just those two settings, but I had to do it by hand, so I only did the ones that were relevant to my system.
Click to expand...

When and how often are those minimums happening? It's hard to assign a level of importance to those numbers.
 
[H] I hope when mantle ships, and you get to the bottom of the Win 7/8 core parking issue, that you include a AMD 8530 or better in your review. If mantle and Win 8 alleviate the CPU constraints, then I would love to see how the Piledriver cores compares with a modern multi-threaded game. I don't think I am the only one ;)
 
Quartz-1 said:
I was disappointed to see no 4K performance comparison.

But I do have a technical question: since the motive behind the test is the benefits of upgrading, perhaps a better test would have been a Windows 7 system upgraded to Windows 8.1 rather than a clean 8.1 install?
Click to expand...

A windows 8 upgrade is the same thing just about as a clean install.... It archives the win 7 folder, imports settings and program registry info, and installs pretty much cleanly.
 
Modred189 said:
And when you do, who waits for it to finish? Click shutdown... walk away.
Click to expand...

Not something you do on a laptop, which is what he was talking about.

xorbe said:
When and how often are those minimums happening? It's hard to assign a level of importance to those numbers.
Click to expand...

Huh? They are in the same test, so minimums would be roughly the same areas. If you want full details go read their article. It is very informative, actually.
 
Last edited:
xorbe said:
When and how often are those minimums happening? It's hard to assign a level of importance to those numbers.
Click to expand...

They don't say, unfortunately. But, it's pretty clear pattern.

Look at the average FPS on that review to gauge it a bit better what the overall performance is. But, unequivocally, Windows 8.1 has significant benefits.
 
QuiteSufficient said:
This article found a performance decrease when unparking cores in multiplayer BF4 http://www.techbuyersguru.com/ochtgaming3.php and that the unparked i7 still failed to keep up with the i5/no HT i7
Click to expand...

Actually, it found ~8% increase in 5 of 6 scores from core unparking on Win7, which is in the range of Hard's Win8 benefit.

ikjadoon said:
They don't say, unfortunately. But, it's pretty clear pattern.

Look at the average FPS on that review to gauge it a bit better what the overall performance is. But, unequivocally, Windows 8.1 has significant benefits.
Click to expand...

They've tested on different configurations, so you can't really make a direct comparison.
 
My Q6600 @ 3.6 + Radeon 6950 flashed to 6970 teamed up to punch me in the face when I launched BF4.
 
this test was done on i7 with HT

try doing it on i5 or no HT

my system is win 7, i5, 16 GB ram, gtx680 using 320.49 drivers (most stable and fastest FPS IMO), and i run at 1080p everything ultra, not one hiccup or choppiness, it is smooth as anything, so not sure how review got these results.
 
I just "unparked" my CPU in win7, and what a difference it has made for me in BF4. Before BF4 was choppy, which of course I blamed on AMD's X-Fire, but now it is smooth as silk!

Just figure I would share my experience. :)
 
Have to agree with the article. Upgraded to 8.1, got more points in 3dmark, and BF4 smoothed out incredibly. After changing the start bar, I'll stay at 8.1
 
Meeho said:
Actually, it found ~8% increase in 5 of 6 scores from core unparking on Win7, which is in the range of Hard's Win8 benefit.



They've tested on different configurations, so you can't really make a direct comparison.
Click to expand...

They found an increase in single player games, and a decrease in multiplayer...the latter being vastly more important to me and I would assume most bf4 players - the operating assumption being that single player probably use 2 cores whereas as multiplayer pushes the CPU.
 
Can somoene test something for me in Win 8.1?

Is the "windows key" + "arrow key" still a shortcut for snap to half screen?

For whatever reason I can't seem to get this to work on my HTPC, but it may be because of the crappy mini-wireless keyboard thing I use for it.

This would be a big deal for me if it were gone, as with multiple monitors, drabbig the window to the side to snap it doesn't work, you have to use the keyboard shortcuts.
 
I was never a fan of Windows 8 since the first time I saw it. It is made for tablets and touch screens and not a desktop OS. But my Windows 7 install was getting a little long in the tooth so I decided to jump on Widnows 8.1 and I am happy so far. I immediately installed Classic Shell which makes 8.1 just like 7. It is more stable for me than 7 and it has alot of nice features. I'm glad I made the switch.
 
Surprisingly, the difference between Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 doubles in performance for the GTX 780 over the R9 290X. Here, we are seeing Windows 8.1 perform 6.3% faster under Windows 8.1! This is doubled the advantage the R9 290X had under Windows 8.1.
Click to expand...
I absolutely cannot wrap my head around this paragraph. Do you mean to say that "this is double the advantage..." and "we are seeing the GTX 780 perform 6.3% faster under Windows 8.1"?
 
QuiteSufficient said:
They found an increase in single player games, and a decrease in multiplayer...the latter being vastly more important to me and I would assume most bf4 players - the operating assumption being that single player probably use 2 cores whereas as multiplayer pushes the CPU.
Click to expand...

Huh? I was talking about BF4 multiplayer and it is the only game they tested with the core unparking tweak.
 
I just turned off HT on my 4770k and I am getting at least 20fps increase in BF4.

Thing Is that all 4 cores are at 80% without HT.

With HT, the physical cores only went up to 40-50%.

My guess is that BF4 does use HT really well since it takes a lot of load off the physical cores.

But the performance in BF4 is still much better with HT disabled.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Insano said:
I was never a fan of Windows 8 since the first time I saw it. It is made for tablets and touch screens and not a desktop OS. But my Windows 7 install was getting a little long in the tooth so I decided to jump on Widnows 8.1 and I am happy so far. I immediately installed Classic Shell which makes 8.1 just like 7. It is more stable for me than 7 and it has alot of nice features. I'm glad I made the switch.
Click to expand...

can you name them? I need a reason to switch from 7 to 8
 
wonderfield said:
I absolutely cannot wrap my head around this paragraph. Do you mean to say that "this is double the advantage..." and "we are seeing the GTX 780 perform 6.3% faster under Windows 8.1"?
Click to expand...

yes to both, The 290x gets a 3% advantage going from win7 to 8 while the gtx 780 gets a 6% advantage, twice the advantage the 290x got
 
Meeho said:
Actually, it found ~8% increase in 5 of 6 scores from core unparking on Win7, which is in the range of Hard's Win8 benefit.

They've tested on different configurations, so you can't really make a direct comparison.
Click to expand...

Yes and in almost every configuration, Windows 8.1 had HUGE benefits.

What are you exactly trying to say?
 
Just a question....did you guys see if there was any difference testing with Aero Glass on vs. off? Just curious if that would 'even the gap' so to speak since Win8 does not have Glass and I wonder if Glass being on (and therefore 7 offloading the GUI drawing onto the GPU) would affect the scores. I didn't see mention of this specifically in the testing methodology - whether or not you tested with or without Glass on/enabled.
 
ikjadoon said:
Yes and in almost every configuration, Windows 8.1 had HUGE benefits.

What are you exactly trying to say?
Click to expand...

That you can't make a direct Win 7 <-> 8 comparison from that article because they ran on different configurations.

EDIT: Ah, sorry for the confusion, I was refering to the article QuiteSufficient had posted.
 
Last edited:
I have a 7970 @1100core and 1500mem with 2500k running @4.5. Would be choppy and get random frame drops in windows 7. Switching to windows 8, it completely fixed the choppiness and random frame drops.
 
amddragonpc said:
Too bad Windows 8 has that stupid interface!
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean, because there's no way around having to using Metro... :rolleyes:

There's various free (ClassicShell) and paid (Start8) options to avoid using Metro at all. Sure, it sucks you can't just automatically turn it off or remove it completely via install options. But, the options are there so this argument is null.

I use Start8 and I haven't looked back to Windows 7.
 
kushdawg007 said:
I have a 7970 @1100core and 1500mem with 2500k running @4.5. Would be choppy and get random frame drops in windows 7. Switching to windows 8, it completely fixed the choppiness and random frame drops.
Click to expand...

LOL...you don't have to move to Windows 8 to get rid of the choppiness. I'm even more impressed you could tell it dropped a frame. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top