I don't understand vista experience rating.

This isn't a huge thing, but the score isn't making since to me. I bought an Asus F8 A few weeks ago with the following specs:

14" 1280x800, Intel Core 2 duo 2.2, 800 fsb, ATI Radeon hd2600 512 dedicated DDR2, 3 gig of memory 160 gig HHD. Anyway here are is my Window Experience rating:

processor: 5.1
memory: 4.7
graphics: 4.8
gaming graphics: 4.8
primary hard disk: 5.2


Well after telling my friend all about Asus he started looking at them and ended up picking up an Asus G2 with these specs:

17" 1900x1200, AMD Turion x2 2.2, 800 fsb, ATI Radeon hd2600 256 dedicated DDR3, 2 gig of memory, 160 gig HHD.
Here is his Window Experience rating:

Processor: 4.9
memory: 5.9
graphics: 5.9
gaming graphics: 5.1
primary hard disk: 4.8


I was just intrigued at how there was such a difference in our ratings. Mine doe tend to run a little bit faster so the processor makes since, however the memory makes no since to me at all. He has 2 gigs and a 5.9 rating and I have 3 gigs and a 4.7 rating. Why is that?
Also his graphics sit higher than mine, which I was assuming since he has DDR3, however even when he runs Crysis or half life 2 at the same resolution as my screen (1280x800) his computer tends to lag more than mine.

Anyway, I was just wondering how the ratings could be so different but yet my computer tend to run a little better. The main thing though I am really wondering about is the ram. How do I have more but yet have a whole 1.2 difference? Thanks

 

don't worry about it. the vista experience thing is about the worst "benchmark" there is.

 

second that. there isn't much to understand here. the vista experience index is a shot in the dark.

if you want to get the fastest possible gaming performance, consider an upgrade to windows xp.

 

LOL!

Look at my score and specs are in signature.


CPU: 5.1
RAM: 4.7
Graphics: 3.6
Gaming Graphics: 3.3
Primary Hard Disk: 4.7

 

you mean downgrade

 

the reason the memory score on the Turion laptop is so much higher is because the memory controller is integrated onto the processor.

Also GDDR3 > GDDR2 by a long shot.

I haven't seen benchmarks of the the HD 2600, but the benchmarks for the 8600m GT GDDR3 SMOKES the 8600m GT GDDR2 by upwards of 30%.

 

The Vista Experience index is an idication about how good your PC will run Vista. Take for what you want.

Plz don't mention XP. Vista can more then keep up with XP. I traded my copy of XP for Vista and I never saw a reason to go back. Gaming performance is solid as ever.

 

Don't feed it. Just let it go. Let it go...good.

 

That's why I am confused. His computer (256 ddr3) should be running Crysis way better than mine (512 ddr2), considering we have the same card, but it doesn't and it seems to be mine is running it better which makes zero since to me. The whole reason I told him that laptop should kick butt for the price, was because of it having the ddr3, but it seems to not be running as affluently as mine and we have both updated the same drivers, so it's not making since.

Also thanks Elrabin for the help on the understanding of the memory that totally helps.

 

A lot of things factor in into gaming performance. The other laptop could be hampered by a lesser CPU when I see its WEI score.

 

I get graphics 3.0 with a 8800M GTX.

 

Now that's just funny!!!!!!!

:laugh:

 

WEI is useless. It shouldn't be used to compare hardware. Use benchmarking software for that (3DMark, fraps, HDTune, etc)

 

Haha I just spit crab meat all over my monitor. Wow. The notebook I'm on now scores a 3.0, running a GMA950.

I am curious as to what WEI will have to say about the T7250 w/ 8600m GT Vostro that's landing on my doorstep tomorrow.

 

I think the AMD processors use ram different so that score may be different just because of that.

 

AMD processors will always score higher than Intel in the memory test because of the on-die memory controller. Intel processors need large 2nd level cache due to the memory controller being separate on the motherboard.

Just because one doesn't understand why there are differences does not make the W.E.I. meaningless. That's why we run it to determine where there are differences/bottlenecks.

I'm not familiar with the game you are referring to, but perhaps this particular game is more CPU-intensive than GPU-intensive.

 

Could be any number of factors causing what you're describing. Drivers, bloated OS install, different quality settings, CPU/RAM differences etc...And yeah, WEI = useless

 

Maybe because he has different settings in crysis or has a higher resolution.

 

Yup, I doubt he could bear playing in 1280x800 on a 1920x1200 screen....

Drivers used are also to be taken in consideration