Windows Experience Index

[DonNagual]

Let's see what vista is giving your system:

The Windows Experience Index measures the capability of your computer's hardware and software configuration and expresses this measurement as a number called a base score. A higher base score generally means that your computer will perform better and faster than a computer with a lower base score, especially when performing more advanced and resource-intensive tasks.

Open Performance Information and Tools by clicking the Start button, clicking Control Panel, clicking System and Maintenance, and then clicking Performance Information and Tools.


Mine:

Click to Maximize

As you can see, I am running the Japanese version of Vista. The categories are (from top to bottom)

Processor
Ram
Graphics (desktop)
Graphics (gaming)
Primary Hard disk

It gives you an individual score for each category, then your main score is whatever was the lowest of all your categories. My lowest was my CPU score, so my main score equals my CPU score.

My system:
Core 2 Duo 6600
Evga 680i
2Gb Corsair XMS2
7950GT 512mb graphics

Also please note what version of vista you are running, as they have made major changes since the beta versions. Mine is on RC1.

Note: the purpose of this thread is not to compare our systems, but an evaluation of this new "index" system itself. Is it a good system or not.

Microsoft seems to want to simplify things by giving you an easy number. Then when you go to buy software, it will tell you what number your system needs to be in order to run the new software. I am sceptical, mainly of the way they choose your LOWEST score and assign that as your overall system score. So if you have a E6700 cpu, 2 Gigs of XMS2 ram but a low end graphics card, you are going to get a very low index score. Your high end parts mean NOTHING to your system's overall index. Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Mictlantecuhtli]

AMD Opteron 165 @ 2.8 GHz
Abit AV8
2 GB Corsair Value Select
7600GS 512MB graphics

Running Vista Ultimate RTM.

I don't know if Nvidia's drivers would get a better score, I'm using Microsoft's WDDM drivers because Nvidia's wouldn't install.

 

[DonNagual]

Well, it looks like the version you are running does make a pretty big difference. I am Vista Ultimate RC1, and you are on RTM. You got a better CPU score than I did. You do have a nice OC going on there but still my E6600 @ 2.4Ghz should outperform yours.

I checked your superpi and see yours completed the 1M at 32 seconds, mine did it in 25 seconds.

Again, the purpose of this thread is not to see who has the better score, but to evaluate this Vista Index itself and see if it is of any use.

The fact that you got a higher cpu score than I did could mean one of two things; either it ONLY looks at the CPU frequency to determine the score, or there have been major revisions to the test method since RC1.

According to microsoft:

The CPU Score

The CPU score was created to measure the processor performance when tasked with common Windows usage activities. The processor is assessed on the following items:

1. Compression and decompression using the LZW compression algorithm.
2. Compression and decompression using the Windows Vista compression algorithm used for hibernation files, ReadyBoost and other features.
3. Encryption and decryption assessment
4. Computing hashes
5. Encoding of video
The results are normalized and weight averaged in order to arrive at the final CPU sub‑score.

You also got a higher memory score. You are using corsair value select, and I am using XMS2 (we both have 2Gb).

P.S. by looking at your screenshot, it doesn't look like you have the aero interface turned on. Any reason for that?

 

[Mictlantecuhtli]

The memory speed difference is probably because Opterons have internal memory controller, Intel's CPUs don't.

I don't like the Aero interface.

 

[BugAlugs100]

Is WEI score different between 64bit and 32bit versions ?

:Q

My PC is quite nice but a Windows Experience Index of ONLY 4.7 !

Processor - 4.7 RAM - 5.9 Graphics - 5.9 Gaming Graphics - 5.9 Primay Hard disk - 5.7

So why is my CPU so slow?
The new dual core E6600 should be hitting 5.4 according to forums/sites/pundits and the like
I've been into BIOS and Vista settings, I've made sure that no CPU throttling is occuring.
My only other though is that i'm running the 64bit version.

Does anyone know if the 64bit version puts a different requirement on the CPU/Pocessor test ?

Some example stats

My Rig

E6600 4 MB L2 2.40 GHz 1066 MHz - WEI RATING 4.7
Vista Ultimate - 64 bit
<CPUMetrics>
<CompressionMetric units="MB/s">85.94229</CompressionMetric>
<EncryptionMetric units="MB/s">48.20735</EncryptionMetric>
<Compression2Metric units="MB/s">229.75929</Compression2Metric>
<Encryption2Metric units="MB/s">394.35495</Encryption2Metric>
<DshowEncodeTime units="s">9.83065</DshowEncodeTime>


Friends Rig
Dell XPS Laptop

T7400 4 MB L2 2.16 GHz 667 MHz - WEI RATING 5.4
Vista Home Premium - 32 bit
- <CPUMetrics>
<CompressionMetric units="MB/s">110.64363</CompressionMetric>
<EncryptionMetric units="MB/s">56.51694</EncryptionMetric>
<Compression2Metric units="MB/s">312.99292</Compression2Metric>
<Encryption2Metric units="MB/s">510.65292</Encryption2Metric>
<DshowEncodeTime units="s">6.92793</DshowEncodeTime>

Any thoughts on this would be great

BugAlugs

 

[Rick]

Just a little extra info...
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Windows-Experience-Index-Calculate-the-Vista-PC-Score-41047.shtml

1.0
A base score of 1.0 is intended to reflect the minimum specification needed to run Windows Vista™. PCs that meet this level will run Windows Vista™ in a basic, but acceptable manner. This is a “catch all” level assigned to any machine that can realistically upgrade to Windows Vista™ but won’t meet Level 2 specifications.

2.0
A base score of 2.0 represents the mainstream Windows Vista upgrade target system. This level of PC may run Windows Aero but users may see noticeable performance issues from time to time, especially on PCs with scores less than 2.5 and/or 64MB of graphics memory. Performance issues may also be noticeable when opening many application windows at the same time or when using very large monitors.

3.0
This level represents the value end of machines that will ship at the end of 2006 and into 2007. This is the lowest capability Windows Premium Logo PC that will ship with Windows Vista™ pre-installed. Windows Vista will generally enable Aero automatically on level 3 machines. Aero will perform quite well on level 3 machines with single monitors. With dual monitors (especially larger than 1280x1024), users may see noticeable performance issues from time to time, especially on machines with scores less than 3.5 and/or 128MB of graphics memory.

4.0
This level of machine represents a very good performing machine. In late 2006 and 2007 machines at this level will be considered high end. All Windows Vista features will run well with snappy performance. HD playback and recording of one HD stream will work well. 3D games and other high-end 3D applications will run acceptably on Level 4 machines. Multi-tasking will be quite good on these machines (when an application makes use of this capability). Many mid to high level 4 PCs will have dual core CPUs.

5.0
This level of machine represents the highest end of the PC market – gaming machines, high performance desktops, powerful media center systems and the like. Level 5 PCs will dramatically exceed the Windows Premium logo requirements. They will easily run Aero-Glass on multi-monitor systems at high resolution. First person shooters, multiple HD streams, video creation, high end multimedia applications are all characteristic scenarios of people who will be using Level 5 systems. As Level 6 machines are not defined yet, it is possible that the highest performance and capable Level 5 machines may be re-leveled as level 6 in the future (i.e. that may happen if the new hardware is evaluated before the index is updated with the new capabilities).

6.0 and beyond
Base scores of 6.0 and higher are not defined yet. They will be defined when the time comes and new innovations in hardware allow new capabilities. From past experience, it is expected this will happen at a rate of once every 12-18 months.

Levels 1 and 2 are sufficient only to run windows Vista under the basic performances: IM, web, email, simple games – Aero is out of the question. A level three machine will run Windows Vista Premium, Aero, standard definition TV and basic graphical games included. High-end desktops begin at level 4 – high definition video, high resolution monitors and dual monitors. Level 5 corresponds to top end desktops and that is enough said.

While computing the base score “the model logic is tolerant of one sub-score being below the threshold for a particular level by 0.1. For example, assume that in the above example, the memory score was 4.0 and the processor score 3.9. This would mean that the processor score would very marginally be the only item keeping the base score below level 4. The model addresses this issue by rounding up a single value that is below the next round level by 0.1,” White said.

To calculate the CPU subscore, Vista will evaluate:

1. Compression and decompression using the LZW compression algorithm.
2. Compression and decompression using the Windows Vista compression algorithm used for hibernation files, ReadyBoost and other features.
3. Encryption and decryption assessment
4. Computing hashes
5. Encoding of video

The Memory Score is a reflection of the bandwidth of moving data into and out of memory in mega bytes per second. This means that for 256 MB RAM, there will be a highest possible score of 1.0. For less than 500 MB - 2.0, 512 MB or less - 2.9, less than 704 MB - 3.5, less than 960 MB - 3.9 and less than 1.5 GB - 4.5.

The Graphics Score evaluates the video memory bandwidth on systems running Aero and playback Windows Media Video.

While the Disk Score is generally larger than 2.0 for modern disks, the Gaming Score corresponds to the number of frames per seconds, support for D3D 9, DX 9, WDDM drivers and support for Pixel Shader 3.0.

 

[Mictlantecuhtli]

bump

Times have changed somewhat, but I still have the same CPU.

A bottleneck somewhere?

I've also gotten used to Aero.

Vista Ultimate (32-bit) installed to Gigabyte i-RAM (which explains the HDD score). The rest are in my system specs.

 

[AlbertLionheart]

As of today I get a 5.9 - all the same.

 

[SNGX1275]

 

[SNGX1275]

Updated for Windows 7. I can't remember if this is the same hardware as when I ran it on Vista or not, I don't think it is. I think the CPU is slower in this machine now...


Click to Maximize

This machine's specs:
System
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Manufacturer To Be Filled By O.E.M.
Model 775Dual-VSTA
Intel Core2Duo E4400 2.0Ghz
Total amount of system memory 2.00 GB RAM
System type 64-bit operating system
Number of processor cores 2

Storage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total size of hard disk(s) 188 GB
Disk partition (C 5 GB Free (20 GB Total)
Disk partition (E 168 GB Free (168 GB Total)
Media drive (F CD/DVD
Maxtor 200gig IDE

Graphics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Display adapter type NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS (Prerelease - WDDM 1.0)
eVGA 7800GS Superclocked AGP


I added the lines in italics because Win 7 didn't provide enough detail IMO.

 

[AlbertLionheart]

Interesting - you have a 6.9 for graphics. I thought the max was 5.9!

I run my copy of Win7 on an ancient P4 2.8 Ghz Celeron with 1 Gb RAM and a PCII-E card from the bits box and get 3.8

 

[SNGX1275]

"The Windows Experience Index assesses key system components on a scale of 1.0 to 7.9."
Which was updated for Windows 7.

Then from Rick's quoted link: "6.0 and beyond
Base scores of 6.0 and higher are not defined yet. They will be defined when the time comes and new innovations in hardware allow new capabilities. From past experience, it is expected this will happen at a rate of once every 12-18 months."

 

[kmoore4318]

More details about my computer


Component Details Subscore Base score
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 965 @ 3.20GHz 7.6
Memory (RAM) 6.00 GB 7.8
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.1) 7.9
Gaming graphics 2936 MB Total available graphics memory 6.5
Primary hard disk 1822GB Free (1863GB Total) 6.0
Windows 7 Ultimate

6.0 Determined by lowest subscore

"The Windows Experience Index assesses key system components on a scale of 1.0 to 7.9."
Which was updated for Windows 7.

Then from Rick's quoted link: "6.0 and beyond
Base scores of 6.0 and higher are not defined yet. They will be defined when the time comes and new innovations in hardware allow new capabilities. From past experience, it is expected this will happen at a rate of once every 12-18 months."

Component Details Subscore Base score
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 965 @ 3.20GHz 7.6
Memory (RAM) 6.00 GB 7.8
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 (Prerelease - WDDM 1.1) 7.9
Gaming graphics 2936 MB Total available graphics memory 6.5
Primary hard disk 1822GB Free (1863GB Total) 6.0
Windows 7 Ultimate

6.0 Determined by lowest subscore

 

[TS-56336]

Whenever I made a clean install of my PC, I always perform a hardware assessment whether it improved or not. But it's always been 5.9 for me, the lowest subscore to be my hard disk. The rest are pretty much in a line of 7.0.

What about the TS members' performance rating? Did somebody hit a 7.0 or higher? Please care to share your scores. I am yet to see how rock-solid your desktop's are in terms of performance.


Here's mine

 

[Leeky]

Here's mine:



It's a pretty old system these days, but briefly specs are Intel LGA775 Core2Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, OCZ Gold 8GB DDR2-1066, SSD + loads of disks and a HD 6870. That's all stock results as well, as none of it is overclocked.

 

[slh28]

The max score for HDDs is 5.9, SSDs go up to 7.9.

 

[TS-56336]

Here's mine:

View attachment 74078

It's a pretty old system these days, but briefly specs are Intel LGA775 Core2Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, OCZ Gold 8GB DDR2-1066, SSD + loads of disks and a HD 6870

It's nice to get a sub-7 base score from an ancient LGA 775. Thanks for sharing. (y)

 

[TS-56336]

The max score for HDDs is 5.9, SSDs go up to 7.9.

So it's true. What score did you earn though?

 

[DelJo63]

Hmm; My Dell laptop shows a variation that is interesting (see attached)

The HD is rated 5.9 and the Aero Graphics pulls the overall rating down to 4.0
processor = 6.8
Ram = 5.9
Graphics = 4.0
Gaming = 5.1
HD = 5.9

 

[slh28]

So it's true. What score did you earn though?

I think it's telling me to upgrade my Nehalem CPU...

 

[colinf]

Cpu= 7.7
ram=7.7
graphics= 7.9
gaming=7.9
hdd=7.9

 

[cliffordcooley]

I went as far as making a screen shot to post. I always forget I can't upload images to TechSpot.

I would upload mine but TechSpot doesn't allow uploading images. I rarely have need of posting images to a site that won't allow them. Using a file hosting site for uploaded files is something I don't really need.

 

[Dawn1113]

Here's mine. I'm hoping the quality of the image won't come out too bad as I've had to do some cropping.

 

[Leeky]

I would upload mine but TechSpot doesn't allow uploading images.

Do you not have the "Upload a File" option next to the "Post Reply" button?



In my experience it has never been easier to add images to posts on the forum. A couple of clicks in the same place I'm replying and I can have as many images as I want, without having to link a single one from one of my own servers.

If its a forum problem we'd obviously be keen to resolve that issue for you. There shouldn't be any barriers in place that prevent you from uploading images on our end.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Do you not have the "Upload a File" option next to the "Post Reply" button?

Ahhh, yeah of course I do. lol


Been overlooking it all this time, I must be getting blind. The other forums usually have it in the header of the text editor. Since using that button only brings up a URL insert box, I was mislead to assuming it was not allowed.

OK here we go, lets upload this screen shot.



Thanks Leeky, one of these days I might learn to ask instead of assuming things.