1220°
Submitted by lowlight 711d ago | article

Windows 7 vs Windows 8 - The Definitive Performance Comparison

HCW.net - For gaming performance, frames per second is not sufficient to portray actual gaming performance. This article looks at frame delivery times, in milliseconds, and shows pretty significant results depending on system configuration.

For office applications, trace based benchmarks were used to show overall responsiveness using real workloads and real data. This gives a better indication of overall performance compared to existing benchmarks that are hardware limited (Gaming, Hi-tech, Industry, Microsoft, PC hardware, Software, Windows, Windows 7, Windows 8)

lowlight  +   711d ago
Great news for gamers with AMD systems IMO :)
DoomeDx  +   711d ago
LOL
ATi_Elite  +   711d ago
Windows 8 has nothing.....so far that would make me spend $100!

Come on Microsoft give us the Xbox 360 library on Windows 8 and you will get my money but until then Win7 is just perfect!
Brawler  +   711d ago
You can use the windows 8 upgrade tool and get windows 8 pro for $39.99 if you don't want a flashy disk.
#1.2.1 (Edited 711d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
darthv72  +   711d ago
the $40 upgrade
I did that on an xp netbook and it was amazing results. XP was getting sluggish and taking longer to load each time even after i streamlined the boot process as much as i could. clearing lots apps no longer needed and even upped the memory from 1gb to 2gb.

Win8 needed the 2gb anyway so i went for it and wow. I really like the win8 and it is essentially the window 7 desktop with the metro ui for the start menu. It isnt that bad to deal with. I did have to do a resolution trick to get the start menu to work right but overall i am impressed in its performance on an acer onenote netbook.
Yi-Long  +   710d ago
A lot of new systems right now are being sold with W8 pre-installed...
... I want to know if I can downgrade to Windows 7 for free.
mn21  +   710d ago
aside from the interface and forced integration of touch screen, win8 has run faster than win7 for me, on both my desktop and netbook. the boot up time is ridiculously fast too, and i'm not booting from a ssd
Sarick  +   710d ago
With the new management methods Microsoft is forcing upgrades. How, by making the latest direct-x and .net only function on the newest Microsoft OS's.

For instance even though support for XP and Vista haven't been discontinued both products can't get .net 4.5 installed because MS didn't make those versions compatible with it. A lot of developers must either tell their clients you have to upgrade or we must hold ourselves back to old code.

The same deal is going on with direct-x 11.1 unless you have the Windows 8 you can't run the new games that will require it. So the PC game developers will either be forced to use old direct-x holding back features to keep customers or develop for the bleeding edge customers and abandon everyone without the latest OS installed.

Either way the windows OS is a monopoly and is pretty much in control of subscribing people to upgrade more then needed. Apparently by doing this they can directly influence the markets shift for the newest available product without directly saying we're discontinuing support for older OSs.
#3 (Edited 710d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
hellvaguy  +   710d ago
Not sure how you come to the conclusion MS forces you to buy windows 8. I mean did masked men show up at your house with guns? Please don't breed, ever.

O and Im forcing you to give me money. Just send it in the mail, kkthnks!
Sarick  +   708d ago
Are you serious? If the game software won't run with the older OS you only have one option. The option is buy the newer version or be left behind even though the OS hasn't finished it's lifespan.

Look the the PSN agreement the USER most upgrade to the new OS if they want access to PSN. When Sony removed other OS the users where extorted into upgrading disabling other OS or lose PSN access.

Like I stated, several core packages are restricted to Windows 7. Windows 8 is required for the new direct X. It's not like these can't be made available to older OS's they're only made available to windows 8 making developers and customers choose to upgrade or lose compatibility.

People are really super gullible if they don't realize how they're being manipulated. I guess if they like the latest greatest stuff they think "I'm in control" but in reality they're compulsively upgrading anyway. The people who aren't interested bleeding edge recognize this because it affects them the most.

Good luck playing a direct X 11.1+ game on Windows 7 because it's not compatible. I guess you won't need an upgrade to play the game after all based on that explanation.

http://www.engadget.com/201...

Nice mature "don't breed" comment at the end of your comment, It really backs up the validity of your comment.
#3.1.1 (Edited 708d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
hellvaguy  +   708d ago
So all new software shud be free under your business model. That's an awesome communist model you got there. Im sure every business will be on board will never making a profit. Everything shud be free, the world can then just run on love.

Wow your dumb, so dumb.
Sarick  +   708d ago
Literally, you still don't get the gist of what I'm saying yet you flat out use the same personal immature attack logic. I'm pointing out that the life cycles of the softwares are being manipulated. Look up the meaning of manipulated.

This means that even though Windowssays these OS's will be supported. It is not the case with all core packages that make software cross compatible.

Windows XP SP3 is 8 April 2014
Vista SP2 is 11 April 2017
Windows 7 SP1 is 14 January 2020
Windows 8 will be 10 January 2023

Windows XP SP3, Vista SP2 are "NOT compatible" with .net 4.5. You can't install these packages on your computer. This means that the developers must fall back to 4.0 code or the products will not run for those OS's.

Windows 7 SP1 is not compatible with future Direct X installations.

To put it simple, even if Microsoft has an end of support til they aren't supporting/patching or updating the compatibility between new and old OS's.

Either you update or you simply can't purchase or install software that requires a framework upgrade. This means the products listed as being supported are being phased out way before their end of life.

This is common sense, If a product says supported and you bought it that means the OS should be patched and kept up to date until it's end of life.

This brings me to the conclusion that the product performance comparison will drop off by next year as some developers start to abandon older content before the end of life.

This has nothing to do with FREE software. It has everything to do with the products losing partial support. This is why it is an effective method to migrate customers to newer products.

Do some research, the only thing you've shown me is you're out of control and have no counter evidence even remotely related to what I'm trying to convey.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
No stories found