Windows 8 Versus Windows 7: Game Performance, Benchmarked

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Come on Tom's. You benchmarked ATI's "headling Windows 8 driver", 12.11 beta3, but you didn't use Nvidia "headlining Windows 8 driver" 310.33 beta. 🙁
 
For what it's worth, I had the same "missing art" problem in Sleeping Dogs with Win 7 and an MSI 7950, so I don't.think we cam blame that entirely on Win 8.
 
Where are the CPU benchmarks ?
Also, i would like more "multitasking" benchmarks. Like converting 2 videos together, and then working on Word. This would measure the CPU scheduling improvements of Win8.

How do you plan to measure the GUI/2D performance improvements of Win8 ?
 
[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]And what reason is that? It seems pretty positive from a performance standpoint, which was the purpose of this article.[/citation]

You get the same performance for 100+ bucks more!
that's one reason for me not to upgrade to windows 8, also there is no new directx that win 7 wont support, so you pay 100+ to get the same performance you already have.
 
Gabe mentioned it more as a step towards a closed ecosystem , MS trying to be like apple . This is going to be a disaster for indie companies , trying to get a footstep in the gaming market . Some amazing games will never see the light of day , because of this . They are being herded into a system that will demand some kind of certification , which they will have to pay for , extrordinary amounts like 15.000 to 50.000 , that no indie can afford . Its a known goal of the industry , that will ensure corporate domination . It never was a matter of performance .
 
[citation][nom]xrodney[/nom]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.[/citation]



Care to tell us what is missing in windows 8 and why you think it is a dumbed down version of windows 7 because you are in fact wrong everything that windows 7 offers is in windows 8 yet improved


The start screen does everything the start menu did obviously you just looked at it and go i cant do this cause i dont wast my time 3 mins to figure it out or something



Care to ex
 
ive tried start8, but its really buggy, although I like their windows 8 style it doesn't completely work

there is also classic start, which appears to be more functional and less buggy.
 
Windows 8 was never supposed to be much of an improvement over Windows 7 in performance except with the Bulldozer/Piledriver CPUs. Tom's, why would you not test the CPUs that mattered the most for such an article?

Really, we don't expect to see gaming performance change in the move from Windows 7 to Windows 8. AMD
Zoom
even let us know prior to the FX-8350 launch that a properly patched Windows 7 machine shouldn't behave any differently from one with Windows 8 on it (that's why you didn't see us include Windows 8 numbers). Companies like AMD and Nvidia have had plenty of time for driver development, and proper support for modern graphics cards was in place on Microsoft's launch day. For the most part, once you fire up your favorite game, your experience should be pretty similar.
Click to expand...

Current tests show otherwise, so AMD/MS can say that all they want to, but they seem to be full of ***. Simply looking back on comparisons done by Tom's and other sites show fully patched Windows 7 still losing to Windows 8 with FX performance.

[citation][nom]jbx007[/nom]ive tried start8, but its really buggy, although I like their windows 8 style it doesn't completely workthere is also classic start, which appears to be more functional and less buggy.[/citation]

It's Classic Shell. The start menu is just one part of the program.[citation][nom]hunshiki[/nom]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.[/citation]

Classic Shell and a few others can let you auto boot into the desktop (skipping the Metro screen) and with that, you'd really boot faster than 7. Furthermore, I've noticed a dramatic improvement in WiFi connection time, among other improvements. I've used several versions of Windows 8 and Server 2012 (including the first preview of each that I've still used to this day) and I still notice improved boot time compared to a fresh install of 7, although it's not a huge difference. It's not a huge improvement, but it's not just some buzzword, at least not in my experience.
 
Here we go again... DOS is better then 3.11. 3.11 is better then 95. 95 is better then 98. 98 is better then 2k. 2k is better then XP. XP is better then Vista. Vista is better then win7. win7 is better then win8.

One would expect that we are all still on DOS...

Why are you doing that to yourself? New OS brings new ecosystem and that ecosystem will be installed on every new rig. It will grow fast. Is there any reason you want to stay behind? As we can see in this article, compatibility or performance are not an issue. Old hardware will work the same or better then with win7. Upgrade is cheep and effortless.
 
Sleeping Dogs texture issue is not relevant to Windows 8, I had this problem on Win 7 Gaming Laptop, I'd like to see the article modified to reflect that...

Additionally I just upgraded my desktop to Win 8, Everything is working fine so far, I have only tested about 10 Games but so far so good. New UI is good, in fact I probably would not have seen this review if it wasn't for the Toms Hardware Metro App :)

Anyone who is an early adopter and enjoys trying out new concepts (Which I think is most of us), should give it a go and for £25 from Microsoft direct, it's not exactly expensive.
 
Lol i've been reading this shit comment for months about win8 ,,,this stupid comments about win8 is like...i like apple better bcause its simple and get no viruses...well if you don't know about PC and what you do with a PC...has nothing to do which operating system is it your using,,,it's a matter of being a sheep lol,,,who the hell spend their time opening a start menu lol and how the hell a start menu matter for...all i need is a damn shortcut for my programs,games ,,,i'll understand some advance Users to have comments about it..but an average users is just a sheep commenting for nothing all they do is surf the net,some social programs,play solitaire,music which has nothing to do with a damn start menu,,,or simple,who the hell refuse an upgrade,,,operating system is about upgrades its an unfinnished environement , ppl just woke up about technologies or own a smart phone and they automatically think their opinion matters...stick with apple if you don't like changes :)
 
[citation][nom]gnodeb[/nom]Here we go again... DOS is better then 3.11. 3.11 is better then 95. 95 is better then 98. 98 is better then 2k. 2k is better then XP. XP is better then Vista. Vista is better then win7. win7 is better then win8.One would expect that we are all still on DOS... Why are you doing that to yourself? New OS brings new ecosystem and that ecosystem will be installed on every new rig. It will grow fast. Is there any reason you want to stay behind? As we can see in this article, compatibility or performance are not an issue. Old hardware will work the same or better then with win7. Upgrade is cheep and effortless.[/citation]

Ehh, Vista compared to 7 may be an outlier there 😉
 


Na. it's really not that way. Win 3.0 made gui commonly viable for most pc users and it was great. When 95 was released, I had tingles down my spine the first time I sat in front of a 133mhz pentium running it. Wow was it impressive. Xp seemed to also be a very pleasant jump for most. What a rock solid os at the time. When windows 7 was released I ran to go get it as fast as I could ( I skipped vista entirely, when it got better I was already decided on waiting for 7) am still very pleased with my windows 7 functionality. Everything in between those I mentioned seemed mostly "whoopty do". Though 95 and Vista had the hugest requirement steps from their predecessors to run them decently.

All that said, in my dream world I'd still totally love to be running steam drm free on a linux based kernel os! I know, delusional.
 
[citation][nom]designasaurus[/nom]"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.[/citation]

It seems to be so that win7 updates has allmost completely removed that difference. But still it would be nice to see how "completely" those win7 upgrades has managed to fix that sheduler problem. If AMD says that there is not differense I am keen to believe that though.
 
I bet that I can give another explanation for how Windows 8 didn't improve things outside of even the margin of error in most examples: you'r using an i7-3960X and no matter how good or bad the scheduling is, it has six very high-speed physical cores that don't have a scaling issue between them and thus don't have an issue. I'd like to see the same tests done not only on FX, but if reasonably possible, also on i3s where Hyper-Threading matters in many games and thus may benefit from scheduler improvements.
 
[citation][nom]UNKNOWN9122[/nom]I kinda like the windows 8 flat interface, and when you add pokki is is basically Windows 7 with a app store[/citation]
I bet on anything you want that future Windows releases if they will still keep the metro style we will see tweaking of the flat graphics to somewhat glossy shiny ones :) just for the fake "re-invent / innovate" the GUI later.
 
If windows does not make metro removable then I will fight for my rights to stay on Win7 until a suitable alternative.
 
Its time gamers stopped being LAZY!

Learm how to use Linux.

Write to all the Game developers en-mass and request Open GL games.

Move away from this closed system crap once and for all!

 
[citation][nom]lockhrt999[/nom]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]

This is simply not true. Add a shortcut to the task bar.
Windows 7... click Start, Programs, folder, application
Windows 8... Click start, type the name, click or
Windows 8... Find the application, click.

I'm constantly amazed by the negativity in this place
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom