View Full Version : 3dmark06 XP vs Vista results
I'm seing quite a big difference between the two in 3dmark06 and I'm wondering what difference you guys are getting?
My results.. :headexplode:
XP SP2: 13049
Vista 64x: 11816
Everything the same , C2D@3.5GHz and 8800GTX@675/2052 with latest drivers for both OS's.. This isnt normal is it?? :(
3DMark05
XP: 17.400
Vista: 16.700
3DMark06
XP: 11.200
Vista: 10.600
:)
Its normal. I opened a topic yesterday with the same question.
Hmm, I actually just scored 12100ish in vista which isnt as bad but still almost 1k clear of XP.. I really hope they improve DX9 performance under vista. It makes the overclock kinda of pointless when it's completely nulled by the crappy performance. :(
$n][pErMan
05-05-07, 09:16 PM
Points in 3dmark are useless IMO... just a rough idea of your computers performance. Your using a GTX... trust me.. you are fine ;)
[pErMan']Points in 3dmark are useless IMO... just a rough idea of your computers performance. Your using a GTX... trust me.. you are fine ;)
It's a still a measure of DX9 performance, games can be on average 10% slower in vista so I don't think it's useless at all. It's showing DX9 performance is a fair bit slower then XP and since all games currently are DX9 that means gaming performance IS worse. :(
Blacklash
05-05-07, 10:17 PM
Yes, it's normal at this time. XP SP-2 is it if you are after a max 06 or 05 score. Dual boot if you are 3dmark benchmark fan.
Of course when 07 comes out interest in 06 will drop.
Dual booting to XP is also good for old games and OGL.
$n][pErMan
05-05-07, 11:23 PM
It's a still a measure of DX9 performance, games can be on average 10% slower in vista so I don't think it's useless at all. It's showing DX9 performance is a fair bit slower then XP and since all games currently are DX9 that means gaming performance IS worse. :(
But then again... most people are switching to Vista for the expected DX10 games :) As said above.. if ur a benchmark fan use XP to get the highest... but if your games play fine in Vista I would not worry about it!
methimpikehoses
05-05-07, 11:49 PM
The next 3dmark is going to be DX10 only, so XP is soon to be owned.
The next 3dmark is going to be DX10 only, so XP is soon to be owned.
So your saying we should upgrade to vista just for 3dmark even if there are no DX10 games?
[pErManif ur a benchmark fan use XP to get the highest... but if your games play fine in Vista I would not worry about it!
05-06-07 02:17 AM
Actually no, if you like the best performance in your games right now use XP, if your a benchmarker use XP. If you don't care about either use vista.
$n][pErMan
05-06-07, 02:34 PM
So your saying we should upgrade to vista just for 3dmark even if there are no DX10 games?
Actually no, if you like the best performance in your games right now use XP, if your a benchmarker use XP. If you don't care about either use vista.
If you have an 8800 the difference of 20 FPS when you are already well over 200 FPS is trivial. If you clamer for that extra FPS that your eyes can't see then by all means use XP. Id personally rather use Vista and know that in the next few months when the DX10 games roll out I will already be setup and familiar with the operation and will have already worked the bugs out of my system on Vista. Duel boot is also an option for the FPS nuts.
[pErMan'] Id personally rather use Vista and know that in the next few months when the DX10 games roll out I will already be setup and familiar with the operation and will have already worked the bugs out of my system on Vista. Duel boot is also an option for the FPS nuts.
Or rather use XP and enjoy the best performance possible and then buy vista when it's actually needed, it's like windows xp just with a dumbed down interface for noobs, you don't need any time "get familar" with it.
methimpikehoses
05-06-07, 04:50 PM
So your saying we should upgrade to vista just for 3dmark even if there are no DX10 games?
Yes. Only benchmarks for now. Have fun.
$n][pErMan
05-06-07, 06:03 PM
Or rather use XP and enjoy the best performance possible and then buy vista when it's actually needed, it's like windows xp just with a dumbed down interface for noobs, you don't need any time "get familar" with it.
Have you ever used it? If you have been using all the other Windows OS's it does take some time to get used to where everything is at. Also I fail to see how your games are more enjoyable with an extra 20 FPS when you are well over 100 anyway. :rolleyes: Looks good maybe on some silly FPS screenshot but quite trivial IMO.
[pErMan']Have you ever used it? If you have been using all the other Windows OS's it does take some time to get used to where everything is at. .
I've used them all and i'm currently dual booting between XP and Vista and thats just total BS, if your familar with Win2k/XP, Vista is a piece of cake.
$n][pErMan
05-06-07, 10:39 PM
I've used them all and i'm currently dual booting between XP and Vista and thats just total BS, if your familar with Win2k/XP, Vista is a piece of cake.
Not if you used the "Classic" menus like I always did :p I think most would agree the layout of Vista is quite different. The good thing is you don't really need to know where things are at as long as you use the search box.
[pErMan']Not if you used the "Classic" menus like I always did :p I think most would agree the layout of Vista is quite different. The good thing is you don't really need to know where things are at as long as you use the search box.
I always use classic menus. :rolleyes:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.