• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

3DMark in XP vs. in Vista

Man of Honour
Soldato
Joined
2 Aug 2005
Posts
8,721
Location
Cleveland, Ohio, USA
I got a shiny new x850 Pro last week so that I could run the hardware accelerated effects of Windows Vista. I was poking around and decided to take some graphics benchmarks on each platform. I think there might be some weirdness going on. I'd like to know what you guys think about it.

My spec:
dual Xeon at 3.0 GHz (200 MHz * 15)
2048 MiB OCZ
ATi x850 Pro, 12 Pipes (not nlocked to XT speeds), running 500 MHz core and 1000 MHz memory
Wndows XP SP2, all patches and updates, latest ATi drivers
Windows Vista Beta 2, all patches and updates, latest ATi drivers
All benches were run at 1024 x 768 x 32 with no AA, i.e. default settings

In 3DMark01 I saw this:
  • XP 21217
  • Vista 14346

3DMark05
  • XP 5401
  • Vista 4922

Should Vista really be that far behind in 01? Isn't the 6.0 kernel supposed to have better memory management that is supposed to help performance like this? I'm going to run 06 in a minute or two here. I'll let you know how it goes.
 
Tbh, I dont think the Vista drivers from any manufacturer are fully functional and mature enough to match the performance of the XP counterparts yet.

Add that to that fact that you are testing a beta OS, containing a lot debug code etc against a much more refined and established one.

I Remember comparing 3dmark scores from XP to win98 and seeing the same difference.
 
Yeah, you can't compare them at all. You're running no way near complete drivers on a Beta OS. XP has been around for years so the drivers for graphics are going to be far more developed and what have you..

I sound lame.. But I'm really tired :o
 
Bah, I get a 1504 in 3DMark06 in XP and it won't install in Vista.

Are these numbers similar to what's normal for this card? When my AS Silencer finally comes in I'll have a go at unlocking the other pixel pipes and overclocking it.
 
I got 3DMark06 to run on both systems now.

XP: 1472
Vista: 1588

Vista takes one of three. This one is arguably more CPU intensive so I'd say that this bodes well.
 
Now here's something weird. I switched it back over to XP and ran with the x850 overclocked using ATiTool. I turned the CPU up to 565 HMz and the memory to 1.13 GHz. I re-ran 3DMark01 and I scored a 12062. I was able to do better than that with my Radeon 9100! I didn't futz with any AA settings or anything like that.

How's that happen?
 
well i just ran 01 in vista and scored 18492 with my agp x800gto (default microsoft drivers, 12 pipes, 400mhz core, 350mhz mem ddr1 :eek: ). just installing 01 in xp now.... :p

edit: in xp with cat6.3s i get 23848 so even though there is a large difference, it's not as pronounced as yours....
 
Last edited:
Alright, it's nice to see that I'm not the only one taking a hit in Vista. Here's another one, how are you whupping my card by 2000 marks in XP when mine runs a faster core with faster memory and the same number of pixel pipelines?
 
3dmark01 loves my cpu (pentium m aka dothan). for these benchies, it was actually clocked at a modest 2.4ghz although it will do 2.7ghz 24/7 no problem. :cool:

also running tightish timings on my ram helps (2-2-3-5). :)
 
Back
Top Bottom