News - A million people registered for the Windows 10 Technical Preview

[Corky34]

Pretty much all those topics I've noted are well known all over the place.

Most of the articles i have read show Windows 7 & 8 to be very similar in terms of performance, Windows 8 wins some benchmarks, Windows 7 wins others.

The CPU scheduler improvement talk started with the infamous Windows 7 scheduler hotfix that was meant to drastically improve AMD's Bulldozer architecture performance (total gains ended being less than 10%), which then Windows 8 showed further improvements on AMD's module approach, while Intel gained performance on both single and multithreaded scenarios.

Most articles i have read comparing Windows 7 with the hot fix applied and Windows 8 with the fix built in, show no appreciable difference.

About DX performance, the performance baseline is, on a worst case scenario, the same as the highest Windows 7 could provide, while current gen games like BF4 perform faster and much more stable (see, vendor-independent frame pacing and average frame rates) than on Windows 7.

Most articles say that BF4 sees a 3-6% gain from using Windows 8, that's fine if you only ever use your PC for playing BF4 but what about all the other games.

Storage subsystem performance (SATA, eSATA, USB2.0/USB3.0) has both read and writes improved, how big a change depends on hardware used, but all devices I saw reported as well as personal tests shown improvements, with the exception being Windows 8.0 (8.1 fixed that) having about 1-2% lower write performance due to a forced malware check during file operations.

Every article i have read shows there is little to no difference between the two operating systems, in fact some articles actually show Windows 8 is slower when it comes to the storage subsystem.

Resource management wise, Windows 8.x uses less RAM, has less running processes, improves VRAM swap as well as preemptive multitasking, a much better approach to TDRs, to name a few.

Aren't all of those, as i first mentioned, aimed at the mobile computing market ?

There are many resources on the web about this topic, but here are a few I just stumbled upon:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25238...nce_tests.html
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406668,00.asp
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/win...in8,13423.html

All of those links are to tests run on the preview builds of Windows 8, care to find some that are more recent, like some articles of the released product.

[tribaljet]

I advise you to read up on WDDM numbers, for instance. Resource management improvements is useful on all systems and if you think it's limited to mobile devices, then you're sorely mistaken. The point is that Windows 8.1's performance (excluding Windows 8) goes beyond what Windows 7 can do, on all subsystems. And about gaming, it's not all about min/avg/max fps, it's also about how they're delivered.

I have no need to defend an OS. If you like it, fine. If you don't, it's fine as well. I've just shown what Windows 8.1 can do, same as what Windows 7 can't, as to prevent naysayers thinking Windows 8.x isn't a technical improvement over Windows 7 (obviously excluding UX).

And BTW, preview builds of Windows 8 already outperform Windows 7 on multiple metrics, nevermind Windows 8 RTM or Windows 8.1.

[Corky34]

Sorry but what does the Windows Display Driver Model, or the timeout detection and recovery of the GPU driver have to do with performance ?
And while some resource management improvements are of benefit to both mobile and desktop computing, those introduced in Windows 8 are not that type of improvement, IIRC they are all aimed at extending battery life.

Just proclaiming Windows 8.1's performance (excluding Windows 8) goes beyond what Windows 7 can do means nothing if you can't backup what you say with proof, something that you have failed to do, using some benchmarks run on the preview build mean absolutely nothing. How about providing something to backup your claims based on an released version ?

And if you have no need to defend an OS, why are you claiming Windows 8.x offers decent performance improvements, better resourcement, more UI fluidity, a better CPU scheduler, improved DX performance, without providing anything to backup your claim. If, as you say you have no need to defend an OS, why are you attempting to do so with no proof ?

[tribaljet]

Compare VRAM usage between OSes, as well as lower overhead, which last time I checked did increase performance, but apparently that's going over your head.

Like I said before, you want to be a naysayer, then knock yourself out. But go ahead and prove me wrong, if you can.

[Corky34]

Lower usage of any ram doesn't equal better performance, if anything using less ram would degrade performance as any resources would have to be loaded from disc.

I'm not being a naysayer, I'm just asking you to provide proof to back up your claims. I have provided many articles that disprove what you claim (contrary to you saying i haven't), yet you still seem to be struggling to provide any articles for the released version of Windows 8.x

[tribaljet]

Apparently you yet again dismissed the overhead matter, but feel free to think that process/service handling is irrelevant.

I have linked articles of preview versions that already show better performance, and you do remain a naysayer from your posts, which means it's like talking to a wall. So, good luck on that.

[Corky34]

All you seem to do is come up with excuse after excuse, the time it take to load something from a drive far outweighs any overheads, the overheads of keeping something stored in ram are minimal, it's why CPU's have L1, L2, L3 caches, because it's quicker to store constantly used data in faster memory.

You keep saying that you have provided links to the preview version of Windows 8 but this is not what the public uses, lots of things can and did change from the preview build to what was finally released. I'm still waiting for you to provide some proof of what you claim, that the released versions of Windows 8.x provide decent performance improvements, would it be that you aren't providing any articles to backup your claim because what you said isn't true, and that in actually fact Windows 8.x is no better or worse than Windows 7 in terms of performance.

Is it that difficult to provide some proof to backup what you claim ? That Windows 8.x provide decent performance improvements, the Windows 8.x that the public buys, not some preview build.

[tribaljet]

Thank you for showing you have zero proof on how Windows 7 matches Windows 8.x performance, nevermind outperforming it. Apparently that was a bit too much for what you could muster.

I'm done talking with you.

[Corky34]

I didn't say Windows 7 outperforms Windows 8, i said "Windows 8 wins some benchmarks, Windows 7 wins others".
It's you that have claiming that one OS outperforms the other, without any proof to back up those claims, proof that I'm still waiting for by the way.

You only have to look up the page for the links I've provided, if you're having problems they're right here.