Windows 8 Versus Windows 7: Game Performance, Benchmarked

Page 5 - 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.
Here's the most comprehensive gaming Win 7 vs Win 8 review I've seen to date -> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Microsoft/Windows_8_Graphics_Performance/1.html

Otherwise, clearly start-up, browser and some office apps appear to favor Win 8. I have no plans to install Windows 8 either in my home or office until SP1 (except for dual boot / testing only use) and then I'll reevaluate. In testing we've found problems with some of our vendors and we're still working on bugs with IE 10 for our IDX products. So we're published warnings on Windows 8 and IE 10 not to upgrade yet.

FPS Summary of 17 Games:

perfrel_1920.gif
 
[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]

Microsoft is not that stupid. Outside Development is what drives Windows. There will always be third party apps and other things avail outside of the Microsoft App store.
 
[citation][nom]cats_paw[/nom]I got a way of thinking that might surprise some: If it aint broke, dont fix it.I dont even understand why they decided to make windows 8 now. For mobile, ok! But for PCs....Well, no matter, as long as Win7 keeps working as good as it does today (and it works marvels for me), i am not interested in spending money on something i dont really need.[/citation]

MS wants to be profitable, so they have to make new products. They made Windows 8 because they had to make new products if they wanted to remain profitable and it had been long enough for a new OS release on their normal Windows release schedule.
 
[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Here's the most comprehensive gaming Win 7 vs Win 8 review I've seen to date -> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews [...] nce/1.htmlOtherwise, clearly start-up, browser and some office apps appear to favor Win 8. I have no plans to install Windows 8 either in my home or office until SP1 (except for dual boot / testing only use) and then I'll reevaluate. In testing we've found problems with some of our vendors and we're still working on bugs with IE 10 for our IDX products. So we're published warnings on Windows 8 and IE 10 not to upgrade yet. FPS Summary of 17 Games:[/citation]

That's with an Intel CPU. We want to see with a modular AMD CPU.
 
[citation][nom]maxinexus[/nom]A real life situation does not involve $1000 CPU. Should have used i5 2500 or 3550 and FX8150 or 8350[/citation]

I disagree. The point of this article is to see if there's a difference in Win7 and Win8.

A good way to do that is to use high-end processors that have a good chance of exposing differences, not by using low-end processors that may have other bottlenecks.
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]I disagree. The point of this article is to see if there's a difference in Win7 and Win8. A good way to do that is to use high-end processors that have a good chance of exposing differences, not by using low-end processors that may have other bottlenecks.[/citation]

Maybe so, but what chance does a high-end CPU have of showing OS based bottle-necks when it is so fast that the O's overhead is too minimal to change things, especially when you have spare cores for the OS to balance itself on because of most games not making use of even the first four too well? A lower end CPU would show the OS's overhead more and an AMD modular CPU would show irrefutable proof of how little or how much the Windows 8 improved performance over Windows 7 on AMD optimization.
 
An ever bigger concern is that Microsoft might disallow certain software to run on its new operating system.
Click to expand...
Oh, please. Does anyone really believe MS is going to flag certain software to prevent the OS from executing it?

Sound a little like Apple's closed platform? The development community is rightly afraid that Microsoft's Windows Store is going down the same path.
Click to expand...
Of course MS will exercise control over what's offered there. It's their distribution outlet. Is this any different than Apple's App Store restricting what's offered, or Wal-Mart refusing to stock certain ESRB ratings and games? No. And neither of those killed development studios.

And while it's clear that the company will exercise control over what is offered in its Store, nobody is certain what will happen outside of it.
Click to expand...
Yes we do. You can install whatever software you want on your desktop. Have a CD/DVD? Pop it in the drive. Using Steam, Origin, Amazon Digital? DL the sucker and play it. Sheesh.


Of course, this is a different story entirely on Windows RT, which is being limited to applications available through the Windows Store. As a result, it's going to be harder for Valve to make as much money on Windows RT-based devices
Click to expand...
I don't understand this "confusion" of Win8 vs WinRT, Windows Store vs open installation. Who is trying to run Steam on an ARM platform? Are people expecting to play Crysis on a tablet? Really?

And why should Valve be worried about the Windows Store? Yes, it's another competitor in software distribution. It may take a small chunk of their market, but that will hardly kill them. Gaming enthusiasts will still likely stay with the ecosystems they're invested in. The casual market may gravitate to the Windows Store. But competition is good for the consumer. You want more customers? Offer your potential customers something your competitors don't.

And no, this is NOT going to drive off independent developers. This is not going to close off Windows to anyone, so they'll still have all the old distribution methods open to them.

And to anyone complaining about the lack of other Win 7 vs Win 8 testing, that will likely come later. This article was just testing whether Win 8 has any catastrophic gaming limits. It doesn't. I too am curious how Win 8 changes the AMD scheduling and if it changes other things, like content creation, media encoding, and heavy productivity. You can't test all that in one story since the variables become too many. My guess is those stories are in progress and I'll be patient and wait for those articles to be released.
 
[citation][nom]RedJaron[/nom]Oh, please. Does anyone really believe MS is going to flag certain software to prevent the OS from executing it?[/citation]

Yes, Win 8 desktop is still open.

I think you're belittling the steps Microsoft has taken here though. Most people would agree that mobile is the future of computing and Win RT is Microsoft's way of testing the waters.

It's telling that they chose to test those waters with a closed platform. They didn't have to. And if it's hugely successful for them it's probably naive to assume that the desktop will remain off limits for eternity.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being an alarmist. Desktop Win8 is open and works fine. But I'm not ignorant of the potential significance of these developments, either. I don't see the value in ignoring it. It certainly has a lot of devs spooked.
 


AMD's modular CPU is it's own thing and its something we'll probably look at apart from this game-centric article.

It's important to us too, it's just not the focus here. I'd rather split it up and look at it on its own.
 
So 10 very recent games play well on Windows 8. Well, no kidding. The game developers obviously made their newest games ready for the new operating system. The kudos should go to the game designers who had to work around any problems with the new OS, and not with compatibility of Win8.

What I'd like to see is benchmarks using older titles (3-4years old) and recent non-AAA titles that haven't updated their games specifically to run on Win8. I'd like to see the same thing done with software too.

Sorry Tom's, but you need to go a bit more in-depth on this article.
 
Can you elaborate why these devs are worried? Are they worried that MS will be even more closed-off than Apple's App Store currently is? MS knows it's behind in the "app count" race ( a pointless number, but the average consumer is told, "Don't go Windows Phone, you have no apps!" ) They're already trying to entice devs to fully embrace WP, so I would imagine part of that offer would be a more open acceptance process for the Windows Store.
 
Nothing I see is significant enough to put up with the pitfalls of Windows 8. I will stick with Windows 7.
 
strange enough tho, why I see more people complained about win8 than vista. win8 are fine as what there are, it is just need u to adapt to the new UI. They arent that inconvenient if u know how to use the pinning feature. It may be not an attractive upgrade from win7 users, but definitely a big plus from XP/vista users.

I take the new UI over the crappy performance vista has.
 
[citation][nom]Tomfreak[/nom]strange enough tho, why I see more people complained about win8 than vista. win8 are fine as what there are, it is just need u to adapt to the new UI. They arent that inconvenient if u know how to use the pinning feature. It may be not an attractive upgrade from win7 users, but definitely a big plus from XP/vista users.I take the new UI over the crappy performance vista has.[/citation]

Crappy performance Vista had? Puh-lease.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2886/windows_7_vs_vista_cpu_memory_performance_comparison/index7.html

Vista had "crappy" performance due to the general masses not having driver support on release day and then making a bunch of myths about how bad it was. That's it, it didn't (and still doesn't) have bad performance, it just had bad support (which it doesn't anymore). I've been running Vista since release with no hitches or problems, and I'll be running it until Windows 9 it looks like. The Windows operating system from XP to Vista was a big change, but from Vista -> 7 -> 8 when it really comes down too it aren't that different from each other.
 
There is a small learning curve to the Windows 8 Metro UI with the tiles but after just a little practice it is fairly easy to work with. Even so if you want to you can "Ctrl-D" and work with the Historic Windows XP/VISTA/7 desktop. I actually am a two screen person so I have the Metro UI with the tiles on one screen and the traditional desktop on the other.
 
Im happy this review came out so quickly, with win8 releasing only few days ago!!

Though my question is, would it be the same for all the the other cards in the market?
 
I see one possible problem with this article and that is the tests appear to be bandwidth capped. Suggestion would to be run the tests again with Higher end video cards to remove that possibility.
 
I see one possible problem with this article and that is the tests appear to be bandwidth capped. Suggestion would to be run the tests again with Higher end video cards to remove that possibility.
Click to expand...

That's a strange conclusion.

The bottleneck is the graphics card, wether it's the GPU or bandwidth it doesn't matter all that much.

The point is to see if the OS makes a difference.
 
I played Sleeping Dogs on HIGH in Windows 8, no problems :/ And i mean i played trough the whole thing so..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom