Vista 32-bit WEI scores differently from Vista 64-bit WEI on same Inspiron 1520

I own an Inspiron 1520 which was shipped with Vista 32-bit.

From a friend I got a Vista 64-bit which I am currently running in trial mode to see if I'll go for it everything should work just fine.

Having downloaded all sort of 64-bit drivers for my laptop (dell's own website and elsewhere on the internet), I am left with 1 single problem - WEI (Windows Experience Index) on Vista 32 shows this score:

Processor - 5.4
Memory (RAM) - 4.8
Graphics - 4.7
Gaming Graphics - 5.3
Primary Hard Disk - 4.9,

whereas WEI on Vista 64-bit shows the following:

Processor - 4.9
Memory (RAM) - 4.8
Graphics - 4.7
Gaming Graphics - 5.3
Primary Hard Disk - 4.9

As you can see, the processor is seen differently by the 2 OS's, hence my puzzle: is it just a matter of drivers, or is it vista 32 WEI scoring different from that of vista 64?!

To sum up, what i need to know is:

Will my Inspiron 1520 be slower on Vista 64 instead of actually being faster, because if it will, there's no point in purchasing the expensive Vista 64.

Your answers will help me make up my mind - Thank you all.

====================
Inspiron 1520:
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2 GHz
RAM 2 GB dual channel
HDD 160 GB @ 5400 rpm
NVidia 8600M GT

 

WEI is absolutely USELESS. Use a real benchmark like PCMark05.

 

Also, there is no guarantee of a speed increase...especially not an increase in everything you do. Currently, the main benefit of x64 is the ability to address beyond 3.2gb of RAM. Since you are running 2gb, there will not be any real benefit until apps are created that can take advantage of an x64 OS/processor/3+gb of RAM setup.

Greg is right though, WEI is not good for much in terms of benchmarking. It does allow you to unlock the Aero theme though...but all you need is a 3.0, I believe.

 

Just goes to show that a 64bit OS is still almost useless now. Not that WEI is a good benchmark, but still. Unless you have specific 64bit software then you won't take advantage of a 64bit OS.

Plus, 32bit software will run in an emulated mode while in a 64bit OS, so that could be the cause for the lower score as apposed to it running natively in a 32bit OS.

 

I have gotten many different scores from WEI, it came with scores around 2.9 and 2.8, it was really weird considering my specs.

 

weird when i switched from 32 to 64 bit on my dv2500 the wei score staryed the same

 

Weird enough it is, that's what I say. IMO it's either an issue with the 64-bit drivers (which aren't well developed enough just as yet) or it's vista's own WEI internal mechanism which is different in the 2 skues. (if that be the case, a lower score on vista 64 could actually mean a SAME or BETTER result than a higher score on 32 version - but i think this is just nonsense)

That aside, i find it very interesting that pretty much no one posted WEI results for different skues of Vista on the SAME configuration, be it notebook or desktop - such a list would be very useful as it would lead to better software development.

A brilliant idea! i'll do just that and come back later to let you know the results.

Thank you all for helping

 

This is interesting... If I remember correctly my i1520 (with similar specs) got the same processor rating in Vista 32 and in Vista 64 4.8 (same as I've seen it score in Staples on other Dell 32bit installs)...

Maybe we need to have others post their WEI Processor score from 32 bit Vista? Maybe yours was a fluke?

*yawn* another one of you people... Quick to bad mouth with no real world experience or even a solid understanding...

I'm not going to re-write everything for you as you can do a search or go to the relavent places and learn, but I'll give a quick rebutal.

1. 32bit software emulation is done at the HARDWARE level (directly on the CPU) so it runs AS FAST as it does on a 32 bit OS.
2. 64bit Vista has a lot of pluses on using it, such as increased stability; better security; and increased address limits (not just RAM address limits, but the increased RAM allocation for the UI) to name a few, and very little downsides; with the only major downside being lack of hardware drivers (not really a problem on newer hardware).

So stop spreading F.U.D. and go learn something... You'll benefit yourself and everyone else

 

Explain? I'm using Ultimate x64, and if anything wouldn't the stability vary more than x86. My reasoning is based on many early x64 driver issues. I've run pretty rock solid, but am curious to know where the increased stability and security remarks are coming from.

 

Is it more stable? It's more secure in general, but more stable...I'm not sure, it depends on the drivers.

 

Yea drivers are the core cause of Windows Instability so it can easily vary, but the WHQL requirement that underscores Vista x64 more than Vista x32 contributes to better drivers (in theory at least).

 

That's not true. Vista x64 doesn't need WHQL drivers, it needs signed drivers. There is a difference there. I don't think I have ever seen a BSOD on it (except on my old computer, but it had faulty hardware).

 

Thanks for catching my mistake, sorry.

 

as promised, i'm back with some benchmarking.

PCMark has proven a total disappointment: i downloaded the trial version but only one submission of results is allowed - after benchmarking vista 32, they didn't allow me to benchmark vista 64 any more since they considered that as a second time, although installed on a different system. What a waste of time! So be it.

i then did some searching on the internet and came up with following:

- CINEBENCH which is both 32bit and 64bit
- PassMark - 32bit only

I ran cinebench only once on each OS, and PassMark 5 times on each OS.

Cinebench vista 32 - the 5 benchmark results as follows:

514 / 507.9 / 511.3 / 512.4 / 512.2

Cinebench vista 64 - the 5 benchmark results as follows:

495.8 / 423.5 (!!!) / 475 / 486.4 / 489.1

As you can see, all vista 64 results are lower than vista 32 results.

On the contrary, Cinebench revealed higher results for vista 64:

Rendering (Single CPU): 2287 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 4367 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.91

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2836 CB-GFX

compared to vista 32:

Rendering (Single CPU): 2024 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 3770 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.86

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 2547 CB-GFX

I don't know what to make of the above results, nor can I go deep into what sorts of benchmark each application ran, or how can they even be compared to PCMark.

All I know for sure is Cinebench is designed with both vista 32 and 64 in mind, therefore it has 2 .exe files, one for 32bit and the other for 64bit, as opposed to PassMark which in Vista 64 ran under 32bit environment. Someone said it might have to do with the lower scores, while Frazell said it had nothing at all - my knowledge fails on this one .