Windows 7 experience index

C

crawlgsx

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
1,252
While I know that the Windows Experience index is nothing to go by, an interesting test today has me baffled.

Me and a buddy both installed windows 7 build 1700 today. Updated drivers etc..

We both have the same motherboard and very similar ram while not the same, both clocked pretty close.

In the windows experience index I only get a 5.5.... (cpu scores 7.4, hard drive 6, etc..)

Yet he scores 6 cpu, 6 hdd, but 6.6 on memory....

I would be ok with this if there were any logic, but I can't find it.

If we both run Everest's Cache and Memory benchmark in Vista X64 my memory kills his.

I get ~9100 read, 10,000 write, 9000 copy and 59 latency

He gets ~ 8100 read, 8700 write, 7700 copy and 65 latency.

Does anyone know what The Windows 7 Experience Index base's it's memory score from?
 
position of the stars hashed together with a random number devided by the current time of day.

Seriously, WinSAT scores are pretty much useless.
 
ryan_975 said:
position of the stars hashed together with a random number devided by the current time of day.

Seriously, WinSAT scores are pretty much useless.
Click to expand...

As I figured, and I expected these responses :).

I would still be curious as to what W7 ACTUALLY bases its scores on.

Hell it even gave his HDD score the same as mine(his normal WD 16mb cache 7200 rpms raided vs my Velociraptor's raided)
 
crawlgsx said:
As I figured, and I expected these responses :).

I would still be curious as to what W7 ACTUALLY bases its scores on.

Hell it even gave his HDD score the same as mine(his normal WD 16mb cache 7200 rpms raided vs my Velociraptor's raided)
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone really knows. It can't be much since it takes about 30 seconds to test 6 different systems.
 
I know in Vista I think to get the score was about rendering a video or something to that nature.
 
It's based on capacity and I believe speed from the benchmark it runs. Keep in mind I've experienced faster benchmarks with slower ram timings.
 
For the cpu it appears to be a combo of cores and speed. With ram it seems almost totally dependent on quantity. For hard drives it appears free space is king as long as it is a modern drive. Vid card scores seem to be based on a driver check and number of gpu's more than anything. Notice I say "appears", and "seems". I have had it give me different scores on the same PC after a reinstall. Have also had it give me different scores after a driver update on an existing install.
Damned if I can figure out why, aside from my personal belief that it is broken in the RC.
 
bigdogchris said:
My CPU score in Vista is 5.8, but it's a 6.4 in 7.
Click to expand...

Vista's max score is 5.9 in every area, so it seems Win7 simply increased the max, it doesn't mean your CPU was rated any higher, just on a different scale
 
Tylerdurdened said:
Vista's max score is 5.9 in every area, so it seems Win7 simply increased the max, it doesn't mean your CPU was rated any higher, just on a different scale
Click to expand...
I don't think the 1.0-5.9 calculation is any different because that would mean a 4.0 system on Vista is different than a 4.0 on 7. If your in 7, and have a 5.0 but it's a 6.0 according to Vista, and you have software that requires a 6.0, you're going to think it doesn't meat the requirement. 1.0-5.9 has to be the same on both, at least it should be. Everything else on my system ranked the same.
 
AMD_Gamer said:
can you use aroe and all the special effects inside vmware or virtualbox ?
Click to expand...

I don't think so unless Aero doesn't require graphic acceleration. Win7 supposedly adds something that would allow your CPU to perform DX10 effects, but who knows if it's this version, and even if it is, I'm sure VMware would need to add support for that feature.

As for as the person that replied to my comment, I'm sorry but I didn't understand anything you said
 
Hmm, still doesn't make since. Everest Benchy (while not the longest test) already shows that my memory is reading/writing/copying faster. We both have 4gb (I actually have 6gb in the first time, slightly lower in everest score but still all higher than him) but even when I took the 2 1gb Dominators out and went back to the 2x2 (same setup as him) I still only scored 5.5 *shrug*
 
are you a benchmark whore or something? I'd honestly stop worrying about it, who cares if your friend scores faster?
 
janitor53 said:
are you a benchmark whore or something? I'd honestly stop worrying about it, who cares if your friend scores faster?
Click to expand...

No one, including myself.

It isn't a matter of "Who can score higher". it is a matter of why does Windows 7 apparently think that my memory is running slow.

The only way for me to come to a realistic conclusion is to know how Windows 7 is testing my memory in the first place.

I am not a "benchmark whore" but I am a performance obsessed whore who likes to get the most out of his machine as possible.

Anything useful to add? By your post history I'm going to say probably not :rolleyes:.
 
crawlgsx said:
The only way for me to come to a realistic conclusion is to know how Windows 7 is testing my memory in the first place.
Click to expand...
Try asking the guy (Nick White) in the link I posted above. It will almost certainly not be tested the same way as the Everest cache/memory test.

I don't even pay attention to the WEI scores.
 
pxc said:
Try asking the guy (Nick White) in the link I posted above. It will almost certainly not be tested the same way as the Everest cache/memory test.

I don't even pay attention to the WEI scores.
Click to expand...

No Doubt about that. It's probably a really simplistic read/write test, I will contact him and see what he has to say, thank you!
 
WEI is ghey. It was created for old, antiquated hardware that wouldn't probably run Vista to begin with. Enthusiasts shouldn't be paying attention to it unless their boxes are somehow less than 5.9...
 
Brahmzy said:
WEI is ghey. It was created for old, antiquated hardware that wouldn't probably run Vista to begin with. Enthusiasts shouldn't be paying attention to it unless their boxes are somehow less than 5.9...
Click to expand...

Jeez what do you people not understand? It's not that he scored too low or his friend scored higher, it's simply about understanding the mechanics and processes behind it. And even if he did want to know why his friend scored higher and he is a benchmark whore, so fucking what? This is a nerd forum, GTFO if you don't like these kind of discussions
 
just intalled it but it cant find my ethernet drivers
Vita would automatically detect ethernet drivers

any advice guys?
 
chapin_Fourlife said:
just intalled it but it cant find my ethernet drivers
Vita would automatically detect ethernet drivers

any advice guys?
Click to expand...

Use a different computer and download the latest drivers and copy them to a USB drive, or if you have a CD, install it from there and then update to the latest drivers once you have internet access
 
Tylerdurdened said:
Jeez what do you people not understand? It's not that he scored too low or his friend scored higher, it's simply about understanding the mechanics and processes behind it. And even if he did want to know why his friend scored higher and he is a benchmark whore, so fucking what? This is a nerd forum, GTFO if you don't like these kind of discussions
Click to expand...

Haha! I LOL'd... WEI is made fer dummies, that's all. No need to call us nerdy benchmark whores....
 
*sigh* well at least some people can read, stupid and ignorant people never cease to amaze me :rolleyes:.

As some of the intellegent people have already re-stated (and I already stated twice), this has NOTHING to do with who beats who's score.

I am curious as to WHY Windows 7 is scoring me so low, not because it means a damn thing, it is simple curiosity. My goal was to see if anyone knew what method it used, simple.

If any of you need it dumbed down further I will see if I can get a 5 year old to explain it for you.
 
Yay i'm reviving a slightly old thread!

I just installed Windows 7 Beta 7000 and ran WEI twice and got the same results:

CPU: Q6600 G0 @ 3.2ghz: 7.3
RAM: 2x2gb G.Skill DDR2 800 @ 854mhz with 5-5-5-15 timings: 7.3
Graphics: Visiontek HD 4870 @ 790/1100: 7.9
Gaming Graphics: " ": 6.8
Hard Disk: WD 640gb 7200rpm: 6.0

Seems like my memory score is really high... and I expected more for gaming graphics.
 
aznofazns said:
Yay i'm reviving a slightly old thread!

I just installed Windows 7 Beta 7000 and ran WEI twice and got the same results:

CPU: Q6600 G0 @ 3.2ghz: 7.3
RAM: 2x2gb G.Skill DDR2 800 @ 854mhz with 5-5-5-15 timings: 7.3
Graphics: Visiontek HD 4870 @ 790/1100: 7.9
Gaming Graphics: " ": 6.8
Hard Disk: WD 640gb 7200rpm: 6.0

Seems like my memory score is really high... and I expected more for gaming graphics.
Click to expand...

lol that's funny, because my ram is running at ~1100 @ 5-5-5-15 and I get 5.5 haha.
 
The Windows 7 scores are retarded.
The max is now 7.9 (seriously, Microsoft?), and the scores are all over the place.
My hard drive (Seagate, 7200rpm, 250gb) rates a measly 3.0 for god knows what reason.... and I have pretty much the same memory + timings as dude above and it's also at 5.5 (as opposed to the 7.3 from the other dude).

Eh, whatever... lol
 
I would like Windows 7 to grade system performance based on an A-F scale. In red for the low grades. And smileys for a really fast systems (frownies for bad systems, 'barfies' for REALLY terrible systems).
 
GushpinBob said:
I would like Windows 7 to grade system performance based on an A-F scale. In red for the low grades. And smileys for a really fast systems (frownies for bad systems, 'barfies' for REALLY terrible systems).
Click to expand...

lol that is funny :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top