Gaming Performance In Windows 7

[Tytalus]

More efficient hardware architecture is only part of the reason. Having low OS overhead is also of benefit. Anyone who thinks all those background apps like AV has no negative impact is out of touch with reality. The PC has to use brute force to get the same performance that a console can do on much less computing power.

Your statement doesn't make any sense... you demonize "AV" yet say "all those background apps", yet both aren't designed and built the same way.

If you read up on thread priorities you'll notice that there's many available for software. Typically processes run at "Normal", and background processes will run as "Background", "Lowest" or some intermediary. This means when the allotted time slice for the AV program comes up it requests resources that aren't currently in use during this cycle, and doesn't utilize resources that are in-use for higher prioritized processes. Anti-Virus programs are all written to be run at the lower process and I've never seen one written to use a higher priority than "Lowest" or "Background". This structure alone debunks any myth or preconception you may have regarding an anti-virus solution resulting in a computer running slower.

Now, something you COULD experience would be resource allocation taking longer than expected. The specific resource that could have such an issue would be RAM allocations. If your computer had high memory utilization OR had inadequate amounts of memory installed then the 20-50MB of memory utilized by the anti-virus program COULD be enough to force your real-time process (read: your game) to cache to the hard drive, rather than buffering in memory. THIS could result in reduced performance of your game, but this has nothing to do with processor overhead, and "low OS overhead" is a myth as well--the thread scheduler used in Windows will be nearly identical to the one used in every OS. There isn't much improvement to be had in this area--you can only optimize so far and the bulk of the optimizations for schedulers occurred almost a decade ago.

As for gaming performance in Windows 7, most people in the thread have it right--there's likely some optimizations made in the performance of driver usage for high-demand components (such as the video card drivers) which could improve things slightly. This is what I'd expect to see over time and has always been seen as newer versions of all operating systems are developed.

 

[Klob]

I didn't demonize AV at all so don't put lies into my mouth. I use AV on all my PCs except my Ubuntu PC.

If what some of you claim is correct then explain to me why AMD created Fusion for their customers. Explain why the gaming company Shockwave created a .bat file to shutdown background process before gaming. Explain to me why the url I posted last time this subject came up showed in benchmarking that every AV app negatively affects disk I/O performance.

I'm going to tell you why. Because you are a little boys club that likes to gang together and ridicule people that may know more then you because it makes you feel superior. Talking to some of you is about as productive as talking to a brick wall. A real thick brick wall.

 

[Klob]

Be an adult, accept that you were wrong, and move on.

But it is you who are wrong and not I. Just like Galileo was correct that the earth is round and not flat. You lot are like the Catholic church during the Spanish Inquisition, refusing to believe the facts because it doesn't support your BS. And it was me who posted an url that benchmarked AV apps and showed that they did indeed come with a negative impact on performance and no one here posted any benchmarks that showed they didn't as someone else claimed. It's just ridiculous that any of you think there is no negative impact and that is why I am sticking to my guns on this subject. But I now realize I am talking to arrogant dogmatic elitists with their heads up their asses and am wasting my time.

 

[Gott]

"Gaming Performance Versus Antivirus Software"
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2336629,00.asp

The results on the few they tested seem to be negligible in terms of AV's greatly affecting performance.

I'd say that antivirus products did decrease performance when all we had were single core CPU's but in today's age, I honestly don't see it myself nor from posted benchmarks.

 

[SpoonMaN-EQ]

But it is you who are wrong and not I. Just like Galileo was correct that the earth is round and not flat. You lot are like the Catholic church during the Spanish Inquisition, refusing to believe the facts because it doesn't support your BS. And it was me who posted an url that benchmarked AV apps and showed that they did indeed come with a negative impact on performance and no one here posted any benchmarks that showed they didn't as someone else claimed. It's just ridiculous that any of you think there is no negative impact and that is why I am sticking to my guns on this subject. But I now realize I am talking to arrogant dogmatic elitists with their heads up their asses and am wasting my time.

ok i gotta admit that this has me LOL.
remember it would also matter for game perf on how the OS would release those recources when the app starts up. vista and win7 both do a great job of this
iv used vista for about 2 years now and i think its a great OS but i really do feel that MS has a huge win in the works with 7

 

[DeaconFrost]

It's just ridiculous that any of you think there is no negative impact and that is why I am sticking to my guns on this subject.

You've been proven wrong, time and time again. You also were asked to give it a shot yourself, and you didn't want to do so. No one else has their head stuck in their ass but you. It is laughable, and shows a major mental flaw on your part, that you actually compare yourself to a great astronomer. Let me point something out to you. One quality of the greatest minds and scientists in history, is that they are all smart enough to admit that they are wrong, when given proof. You have been given proof, time and time again, and you simply choose to ignore it. That's a plain and simple definition of ignorance.

 

[TechieSooner]

So, if Win7 gives a better gaming experience because it uses less resources then why did I have to get into a shouting match with people here when I claimed not running AV in the background and unnecessary background crap while gaming also gives a better gaming experience? Seems to me that perhaps I know more than some people here give me credit for.

Hard to learn anything from system admin types who are not hardcore gamers. I know gaming machine setups and you know secure setups for noobs. Well, I know both but gaming systems are my forte'.

More efficient hardware architecture is only part of the reason. Having low OS overhead is also of benefit. Anyone who thinks all those background apps like AV has no negative impact is out of touch with reality. The PC has to use brute force to get the same performance that a console can do on much less computing power.

I didn't demonize AV at all so don't put lies into my mouth. I use AV on all my PCs except my Ubuntu PC.

If what some of you claim is correct then explain to me why AMD created Fusion for their customers. Explain why the gaming company Shockwave created a .bat file to shutdown background process before gaming. Explain to me why the url I posted last time this subject came up showed in benchmarking that every AV app negatively affects disk I/O performance.

I'm going to tell you why. Because you are a little boys club that likes to gang together and ridicule people that may know more then you because it makes you feel superior. Talking to some of you is about as productive as talking to a brick wall. A real thick brick wall.

But it is you who are wrong and not I. Just like Galileo was correct that the earth is round and not flat. You lot are like the Catholic church during the Spanish Inquisition, refusing to believe the facts because it doesn't support your BS. And it was me who posted an url that benchmarked AV apps and showed that they did indeed come with a negative impact on performance and no one here posted any benchmarks that showed they didn't as someone else claimed. It's just ridiculous that any of you think there is no negative impact and that is why I am sticking to my guns on this subject. But I now realize I am talking to arrogant dogmatic elitists with their heads up their asses and am wasting my time.

This is why some people shouldn't be allowed on the internet.

 

[Vermillion]

I didn't demonize AV at all so don't put lies into my mouth. I use AV on all my PCs except my Ubuntu PC.

If what some of you claim is correct then explain to me why AMD created Fusion for their customers. Explain why the gaming company Shockwave created a .bat file to shutdown background process before gaming. Explain to me why the url I posted last time this subject came up showed in benchmarking that every AV app negatively affects disk I/O performance.

I'm going to tell you why. Because you are a little boys club that likes to gang together and ridicule people that may know more then you because it makes you feel superior. Talking to some of you is about as productive as talking to a brick wall. A real thick brick wall.

Fusion gains are seen from the overclock. Not the shutting down idle services that take up minimal amounts of RAM. The whole "shutting down services" thing is nothing but a marketing gimick to get people like you to buy into it. You probably believe the Mac Ads too don't you?

The thing from Shockwave again is a marketing gimick. All it does is shutdown idle processes that use minimal amounts of RAM.

And as for you're AV URL from the other thread...I will once again respond to it. Is this the third or fourth time though? I've lost count. I will also remind you that you have NEVER responded to any of my responses. So I'll just quote myself to keep things short.

The guy only did boot times and didn't even say how he performed the test. Didn't say anything about the setup. What CPU? What hard drive? What drivers? What version of Vista (ie x86 or x64)? Did some of the AV software scan the system on bootup while others did not?

There are plenty of other questions that I could have asked about (How much RAM is a good one) but I only gave a few. Bottom line is if that guy's testing methodology was a boat it would take on more water then the Titanic.

"Gaming Performance Versus Antivirus Software"
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2336629,00.asp

The results on the few they tested seem to be negligible in terms of AV's greatly affecting performance.

I'd say that antivirus products did decrease performance when all we had were single core CPU's but in today's age, I honestly don't see it myself nor from posted benchmarks.

Interesting read but it changes nothing. In the end it proved that AV does nothing to harm performance. No system will have the exact same frame rates on every run so there has to be an acceptable margin of error especially when you use a worthless timedemo as the timedemo results will vary on every run. Those graphs show changes of things like a half of a frame to maybe a single frame. Running the test a second time may have given that half a frame or frame back.

This is why the [H] does things like run through an entire level of a game and provide feedback on that because that's what people want. Gamers want to know what the actual gaming experience is like not what 3DMark or some timedemo tells them.

 

[Gott]

Interesting read but it changes nothing. In the end it proved that AV does nothing to harm performance. No system will have the exact same frame rates on every run so there has to be an acceptable margin of error especially when you use a worthless timedemo as the timedemo results will vary on every run. Those graphs show changes of things like a half of a frame to maybe a single frame. Running the test a second time may have given that half a frame or frame back.

This is why the [H] does things like run through an entire level of a game and provide feedback on that because that's what people want. Gamers want to know what the actual gaming experience is like not what 3DMark or some timedemo tells them.

I posted it to show Klob that performance isn't lost when running an antivirus program.

 

[Vermillion]

I posted it to show Klob that performance isn't lost when running an antivirus program.

I know. I was just reinforcing that fact. Don't want it to be overlooked.

 

[JoNo216]

Windows 7 has made it capable to play Crysis on integrated video cards.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-cpu-gpu,6645.html

Older article.

 

[Klob]

You've been proven wrong, time and time again.

When? I've never seen one url that proves me wrong posted here. All I've seen is opinion and I'm the only one who posted an url that supported my position. Anyway, in the end it really doesn't matter. You guys run your PCs how you like and I will run mine as I like and we will just agree to disagree. Fair enough?

 

[Klob]

This is why some people shouldn't be allowed on the internet.

And anyone can see that what I said about elitists boys club is oh so true from what you just posted. You are your own worst enemy.

 

[oscrogo]

My question is...how much does an anti-virus program with a memory footprint of 40mb (symantec corp ed) impact a system that has 2gb of memory? 2% memory utilization doesn't equal degraded system performance.

And stop with the "I'm a gamer I have different needs" superiority complex..who cares? Most of us are gamers and most of us have been slapping together systems since back when you had to edit your configsys and himemsys just to get Tie-Fighter or Quest for Glory to run.

 

[Gott]

I did post a link that disproves what Klob has been stating all along. And those benchmarks echo what has been stated all throughout this forum topic.

 

[Klob]

does things like run through an entire level of a game and provide feedback on that because that's what people want.

Yea, and I highly doubt HardOCP has AV running when they do that because they know better, unlike you.

Maybe HardOCP could do an article on this subject and shut one of us up once and for all?

 

[Citizen86]

Hard to learn anything from system admin types who are not hardcore gamers. I know gaming machine setups and you know secure setups for noobs. Well, I know both but gaming systems are my forte'.

You must be so proud....

But it is you who are wrong and not I. Just like Galileo was correct that the earth is round and not flat. You lot are like the Catholic church during the Spanish Inquisition, refusing to believe the facts because it doesn't support your BS. And it was me who posted an url that benchmarked AV apps and showed that they did indeed come with a negative impact on performance and no one here posted any benchmarks that showed they didn't as someone else claimed. It's just ridiculous that any of you think there is no negative impact and that is why I am sticking to my guns on this subject. But I now realize I am talking to arrogant dogmatic elitists with their heads up their asses and am wasting my time.

So you're a righteous heretic now?

The only time people gang up on someone on this forum is when that someone is so obviously wrong that it hurts. The funny thing is they never actually reply to the rebuttals they receive, they just continue on with their fingers in their ears yelling "LA LA LA LA I KNOW I MUST BE RIGHT"

You are one of those people.

 

[Klob]

I did post a link that disproves what Klob has been stating all along. And those benchmarks echo what has been stated all throughout this forum topic.

Can you please post it again because I never saw it. If it just benchmarks FPS then it is useless because AV negatively impacts disk I/O performance which can affect the loading of new data in a game. We are talking about overall game experience here and not purely frame rate. Probably something most of you would never even notice. I am talking about getting optimal game performance for demanding games like Black Shark that require top notch performance from your PC in every area. My background is running simulations and not silly kids games. Tell me, how many of you here even own Black Shark? My guess is very few of you do, if any.

 

[Vermillion]

Yea, and I highly doubt HardOCP has AV running when they do that because they know better, unlike you.

Maybe HardOCP could do an article on this subject and shut one of us up once and for all?

Love how you quoted that but once again ignored (and even snipped out that information when you quoted me) everything else I posted about Fusion, that batch file and your AV URL "proof."

Oh and Dan_D and Mark_Warner (two of the [H] editors) both replied in your old AV Poll thread. For the record they both keep it running.

 

[Klob]

You must be so proud....



So you're a righteous heretic now?

The only time people gang up on someone on this forum is when that someone is so obviously wrong that it hurts. The funny thing is they never actually reply to the rebuttals they receive, they just continue on with their fingers in their ears yelling "LA LA LA LA I KNOW I MUST BE RIGHT"

You are one of those people.

Why did you even post to this thread? Your post has zero value because all it was is an attack on me and says absolutely nothing about the subject at hand. You are a waste of oxygen.

 

[Citizen86]

Can you please post it again because I never saw it. If it just benchmarks FPS then it is useless because AV negatively impacts disk I/O performance which can affect the loading of new data in a game. We are talking about overall game experience here and not purely frame rate. Probably something most of you would never even notice. I am talking about getting optimal game performance for demanding games like Black Shark that require top notch performance from your PC in every area. My background is running simulations and not silly kids games. Tell me, how many of you here even own Black Shark? My guess is very few of you do, if any.

It's quoted like 10 posts up, and only about 10 posts before that the actual link... seriously, I found it in 3 seconds after it was mentioned again....

Can you get anymore elitist? So because you run amazing war simulations that you call a game, every other game that isn't Black Shark is a silly kids game? Really?

 

[DeaconFrost]

Why did you even post to this thread? Your post has zero value because all it was is an attack on me and says absolutely nothing about the subject at hand.

This might be the funniest comment yet. Pot, meet kettle.

I'd agree to disagree with someone who had a valid point. If you ever approach that level, we'll talk. Until then, keep acting like a spoiled little child who isn't getting their way.

 

[Vermillion]

Can you please post it again because I never saw it. If it just benchmarks FPS then it is useless because AV negatively impacts disk I/O performance which can affect the loading of new data in a game. We are talking about overall game experience here and not purely frame rate. Probably something most of you would never even notice. I am talking about getting optimal game performance for demanding games like Black Shark that require top notch performance from your PC in every area. My background is running simulations and not silly kids games. Tell me, how many of you here even own Black Shark? My guess is very few of you do, if any.

So you want to worry about hard disk I/O with a game that is a severely CPU limited? I think you need to think again about what's causing the performance problems in Black Shark. Especially when the recommended video cards are a GeForce FX, Radeon X1300, or better.

The game is based on DX9 only and does NOT use multi-core technology. That's straight from the Black Shark home page.

Meaning you're running a game that makes use of a single core. I bet Crossfire and SLI are worthless with the game as well. I'd love to see how much of a systems GPU is actually being used with this game because we know how well this generation of hardware and even the last generation of hardware stomp DX9 games into the ground.

 

[number69]

You are a waste of oxygen.

lol.

 

[JoNo216]

help help! This thread has been hijacked by terrorists!