Windows 8 Versus Windows 7: Game Performance, Benchmarked

Status
Not open for further replies.

mubin

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2009
1,966
0
19,960
94
Only the fast boot time is noticeable in win 8. But still win7 is great and i love it as its 1years+ old running in my system, no crash, still fast.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3
It's good to see that there aren't any major performance deficits when moving to Windows 8, like some past Microsoft OS's. For the most part everything looks to be within the margin of error.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3
[citation][nom]steve360[/nom]Another reason NOT to buy Windows 8...I mean Windows Vista 2.[/citation]
And what reason is that? It seems pretty positive from a performance standpoint, which was the purpose of this article.
 

ojas

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2011
2,924
0
20,810
15
Hmmm...wasn't expecting anything else.

No compelling reason to upgrade for me yet.

Windows NT 7 is where it's at. B-)



EDIT: I KNOW Vista, 7 & 8 are NT 6.
 

lockhrt999

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2010
250
0
18,790
3
My current win7 installation is more than 2 years old. I never used windows installations that are older than 4-5 months. Yes, win7 ages too but it's too slow and well managed compared to old windows OS.

And yes win8 has better RAM and processor management as touted, but then you lose more time navigating through blocky interface. You complete your work a 3 seconds more with win8 but you had taken 5 more seconds to start that program from blocky interface.
 

mafisometal

Honorable
Jul 2, 2012
175
0
10,710
23
[citation][nom]lockhrt999[/nom]My current win7 installation is more than 2 years old. I never used windows installations that are older than 4-5 months. Yes, win7 ages too but it's too slow and well managed compared to old windows OS.And yes win8 has better RAM and processor management as touted, but then you lose more time navigating through blocky interface. You complete your work a 3 seconds more with win8 but you had taken 5 more seconds to start that program from blocky interface.[/citation]

You do know that you can use a program called Star8 by StarDock to get your desktop and toolbar back...it works quite well, no problems over here.
 

A Bad Day

Distinguished
Nov 25, 2011
2,256
0
19,790
2
[citation][nom]mafisometal[/nom]You do know that you can use a program called Star8 by StarDock to get your desktop and toolbar back...it works quite well, no problems over here.[/citation]

The problem is that Star8 and other 3rd-party tools haven't been able to fully replicate Win7's Start function.
 
G

Guest

Guest
looks like M$ is going the route of Apple and making a idiot proof OS, which is, well, good for IDIOTS :) anyone who actually wants to more than check email and play a game needs to stick to windows 7
 

agnickolov

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2006
520
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Hmmm...wasn't expecting anything else.No compelling reason to upgrade for me yet.Windows NT 7 is where it's at. B-)[/citation]
Well, Windows 7 is actually NT 6.1, while Windows 8 is NT 6.2...
 
G

Guest

Guest
laugh, windows 8 works fine and i love it on my 50" bigscreen. enjoy your small Start menu.
 

mykebrian

Honorable
Mar 28, 2012
91
0
10,640
1
what i really don't like on windows 8 is just the start menu. i hope they'll introduce an option if you want to have the metro style or the windows 7 style.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0
The main concern over Win8 is the question that is still unresolved...what is MS's approach to their Windows Store going to be. If they intend to try to close off outside development, well, it will kill Windows. What they need to do is come out and answer the question one way or another or else Win8 may very flop to begin with.

I'm still confused about the interface and UI. Some articles say MS is trying to make it hard to have a classic desktop yet I've seen articles with screenshots showing a very Windows 7 like desktop.
 

ojas

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2011
2,924
0
20,810
15
[citation][nom]agnickolov[/nom]Well, Windows 7 is actually NT 6.1, while Windows 8 is NT 6.2...[/citation]


I meant Win NT 7 when it releases.
 

Bloob

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2012
632
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]The main concern over Win8 is the question that is still unresolved...what is MS's approach to their Windows Store going to be. If they intend to try to close off outside development, well, it will kill Windows. What they need to do is come out and answer the question one way or another or else Win8 may very flop to begin with.I'm still confused about the interface and UI. Some articles say MS is trying to make it hard to have a classic desktop yet I've seen articles with screenshots showing a very Windows 7 like desktop.[/citation]

Win 8 is pretty much identical to Win 7, Start menu has just been replaced with Start screen. Win RT does not allow applications to be installed to desktop ( people would just get confused why their x86 applications don't work on ARM ). Every store that currently works on Win 7, will work on Win 8.
 

Todd Sauve

Distinguished
Jun 28, 2011
20
0
18,520
1
I've been using the Win 8 Release Candidate for several months now on a spare PC I built out of used parts, with an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ CPU and 2 gigs of RAM. It works fine, though I hate the new interface and use the free Start8 utility to do away with it.

After all is said and done I find that the only real advantage it has over Win 7 is that it starts and closes faster.

To which I must conclude "So what?"

If that is all there is to Win 8 I will gladly keep Win 7 and save myself a lot of aggravation and money.
 

hunshiki

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2011
58
0
18,630
0
I already pointed this out at the other article, but I guess I have to cross-post.
Please understand that there is no performance benefit. No. None.

Boot speed, shutdown speed and the other yadda are just marketing buzzwords. If you ever used Windows 8 for a longer while (a week is enough) you will notice it's got the very same boot speed. Especially if you count that none of the benchmarks count the startup time as full boot. They count the time until Metro (Modern UI) shows up. Which means the desktop is not even loaded. It's like comparing a desktop OS with iOS or other mobile operating systems.

Other "snappiness" and whatnot. The UI is full of effects, animations, transitions. It's a fake sense of "snappiness".
Gaming benchmark? Hah. Some of the games won't even work, and the rest just runs with the same speed.
 

designasaurus

Honorable
Sep 1, 2012
52
0
10,630
0
Please don't take this the wrong way, but I really wish you guys (Tom's) had used an FX processor to do these tests. I haven't believed a word of all the "win8 scheduler will bring 10-15% improvements in Bulldozer performance" rumors since the moment they started, and it would be nice to have some tests to point to show the truth of things.
 

xrodney

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2006
588
0
19,010
10
[citation][nom]crymoar[/nom]laugh, windows 8 works fine and i love it on my 50" bigscreen. enjoy your small Start menu.[/citation]
You can simply get graphical application start menu as gadget if you need it you don't need to buy new windows just for that. And if i want to use it as media player simply start XBMC which is way better then anything M$ can offer.

For me Windows8 is just dumbed down version of windows 7 with removed functionality, slightly improved CPU/Memory management and painful system administration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS