Weird Windows 7 score | The Coffeehouse

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

Why is graphics so low, compared to the gaming graphics score? What could be the cause?

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

Oh yeah, GPU is ATI Radeon HD4300 series (I think 4350)

Ion Todirel
buuu

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 3:35 PM

weak (weak, weak, weak) machine? Wink

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 3:35 PM

Drivers.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to W3bbo

#Nov 3rd @ 3:58 PM

I wish. I installed the latest catalyst and now IE is flashing central... Sad

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 3:59 PM

Hrm.

Tip: while it's not technically necessary to reboot after installing new video drivers, restarting IE does indeed provide some advantages Smiley

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 3:59 PM

"ATI Radeon HD4300 series" Ah, now see, there's your problem. Now if you had an nVidia card...

dahat

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 4:04 PM

You've worked with computers for how long... ? Why on earth was not "reboot and see if the problem persists" rather high up on your troubleshooting list?

jmzl666
Diablo

I have an ati radeon HD 3450 and have the same issue, gaming performance is 5.5 and aero is 4.0

Sven Groot
My name has 9 letters. Coincidence? I think not...

In reply to jmzl666

#Nov 3rd @ 9:13 PM

I have an ATI Radeon HD3850, and both graphics and gaming graphics score a 6.9.

jmzl666
Diablo

In reply to Sven Groot

#Nov 3rd @ 9:29 PM

can we trade? please.

Maddus Mattus
Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda

So what is the problem?

Do you get laughed at by your peers when you compare Windows Seven performance index scores?

Wink

stevo_
Human after all

In reply to Sven Groot

#Nov 3rd @ 9:29 PM

But thats an entirely different card, the numbering system shouldn't be taken at all relatively with gpus.

I would take a guess that the gpu is highly budget and the technology that is tested for desktop composition is crippled.

Sven Groot
My name has 9 letters. Coincidence? I think not...

In reply to stevo_

#Nov 4th @ 1:48 AM

The point I was making was that it couldn't be an issue intrinsic to the Catalyst drivers or the Radeon HD series since it doesn't happen in all cases.

I guess it would've helped if I had actually said that. Tongue Out

My guess would also be that some part of the pipeline that Aero uses heavily (but which the tests apparently don't consider to be important for gaming) is not very fast on that particular card.

webmonkey
How am i supposed to code with theeeeeese ?

I have exactly the same with my work machine, it's only an onboard nVidia 9300 but i still don't get why gaming graphics are rated higher than graphics.

Dodo
I'm your creativity creator™ :)

In reply to webmonkey

#Nov 4th @ 12:32 PM

I assume, because gaming graphics doesn't test VRAM bandwidth. I have the same thing here if I use a Geforce 8400.

Dr. Cameron
Discounted C1ALIS, V1A9RA, V1C0D1N delivered directly to Dr. House

In reply to PaoloM

#Nov 3rd @ 3:35 PM

4350 is the slowest model of the 4xxx series and it runs at such a low speed that it doesn't even require a fan for cooling but at least it doesn't give unrealistic scores like Intel IGPs do.

Dr. Cameron
Discounted C1ALIS, V1A9RA, V1C0D1N delivered directly to Dr. House

In reply to W3bbo

#Nov 3rd @ 5:10 PM

You mean, like one of the dozens of the low-end nvidia cards that nvidia is desperately trying to keep on the market by changing the model name (like the 100m, 103m, 105m, 110m and 210m) all of which are slower than that 4350 and also have no dx10.1 (no dx10.1=aero on win7 will use more ram) and a very poor video acceleration?

LeoDavidson

In reply to Dr. Cameron

#Nov 4th @ 1:41 PM

no dx10.1=aero on win7 will use more ram

Got a link for that? I've found a bunch of things inferring it from early/vague statements but can't find anything definitive or that explains why DX10.1 hardware is required to reduce the DWM memory footprint.

Is this the memory reduction where only one copy of each window is stored in memory instead of two? Or is that done for all cards that can run DWM and the DX10.1 thing an extra saving on top of that?

Dr. Cameron
Discounted C1ALIS, V1A9RA, V1C0D1N delivered directly to Dr. House

In reply to LeoDavidson

#Nov 4th @ 2:15 PM

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20081029/windows-7-dwm-cuts-memory-consumption-by-50/

nVidia: the way it's meant to be delayed.

LeoDavidson

In reply to Dr. Cameron

#Nov 4th @ 2:24 PM

I found that short post but it doesn't explain which memory savings are due to DX10.1 and why. It also mention features (e.g. color hot track, enhanced thumbnail animations) which work fine with DX10.0 hardware as far as I can tell.

So I'm not sure the page intended to imply that DX10.1 hardware was required for any of these improvements. (And if it was, maybe that changed since.) That's why I wonder if there's a more detailed description somewhere. (Perhaps in the video it links to but it's 73 minutes long and I don't care that much. Smiley Just curious.)

Also, do the relevant parts of the DX10.1 API require DX10.1 hardware? The API improvements in question could all be at the software level and not require hardware support. (Never written any DX stuff so maybe it doesn't ever work that way. I don't know. But I could see the improved API offering benefits even on older hardware, with only some of the new API features requiring new hardware.)

LeoDavidson

In reply to LeoDavidson

#Nov 4th @ 3:08 PM

According to the Engineering 7 blog post about DWM improvements, the memory footprint reduction requires WDDM 1.1 drivers. No mention of DX10.1 at all.

Edit: Also, from Wikipedia: "Direct3D 10.1 runtime can run on Direct3D 10.0 hardware [...], but new features will be supported exclusively by new hardware." None of the listed new features in 10.1 sound like they're relevant to DWM's memory usage but the Wikipedia page may not be complete.