where is the point of return for upgrading processors

August 22, 2008

With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9 low

is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I except to

find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really it is

stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and vista

betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card with

raid 5

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the score

keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron score

will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever change

and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of what

else is on the market.

The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine will

perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware would

survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points that

I can think of.

Tony. . .

"Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

low

> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I except

to

> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really it

is

> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and vista

> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card with

> raid 5

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

point taken, The transition from all the dual and tri boots and finally

sticking to one operating system on a pretty stable computer is probably

where I need to be. The video card was worth doing but from there I see no

real need to do anything. It is a clean install all drives but my photos

where formatted when I reinstalled. I think I am at the point of holding

and making the thing work. Vista Ultimate 64 on the desk top and vista

premium on a tablet 32 bit will take some getting used to but so did xp

and 2000 and 98. Time to settle in and learn and stop playing with the

parts. Thanks

"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

> score

> keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron score

> will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

> change

> and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

> what

> else is on the market.

>

> The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

> will

> perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

> would

> survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

>

> A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

> that

> I can think of.

>

> Tony. . .

>

> "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

> news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

> low

>> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I except

> to

>> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really it

> is

>> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

>> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and vista

>> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

>> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card with

>> raid 5

>>

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark and

will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are due to

be released as new hardware requires it.

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

Quote:

"Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce higher

levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18 months,

as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores are

introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base scored of

2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its components

are upgraded)."

HTH

Robert

"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

> score

> keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron score

> will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

> change

> and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

> what

> else is on the market.

>

> The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

> will

> perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

> would

> survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

>

> A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

> that

> I can think of.

>

> Tony. . .

>

> "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

> news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

> low

>> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I except

> to

>> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really it

> is

>> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

>> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and vista

>> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

>> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card with

>> raid 5

>>

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

You are absolutely right. You have to find the spot at which to make a stop.

I do not have personal experience from Opterons, but I remember the

technology leap they represented when they came and there is no doubt in my

mind that they can easily run circles around much of the more modern

equipment, even today.

I think you've made some well tempered decisions for a very healthy system -

change it now and you risk breaking the original concept.

"The buck you save or spend, will be measured against the lenght of time you

will have to live with your investment" - is a good thought, that I try to

live by - you have got to trust your own instinct as to when you hit the

'Happiness Factor'. If you run a Benchmark, there is a huge chance that

you'll find some odd thing or other that you think you may want to change.

Tony. . .

"Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

news:Ok6GKyDBJHA.2292@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> point taken, The transition from all the dual and tri boots and finally

> sticking to one operating system on a pretty stable computer is probably

> where I need to be. The video card was worth doing but from there I see

no

> real need to do anything. It is a clean install all drives but my photos

> where formatted when I reinstalled. I think I am at the point of holding

> and making the thing work. Vista Ultimate 64 on the desk top and vista

> premium on a tablet 32 bit will take some getting used to but so did xp

> and 2000 and 98. Time to settle in and learn and stop playing with the

> parts. Thanks

> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

> > score

> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron score

> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

> > change

> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

> > what

> > else is on the market.

> >

> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

> > will

> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

> > would

> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

> >

> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

> > that

> > I can think of.

> >

> > Tony. . .

> >

> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

> > low

> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

except

> > to

> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really

it

> > is

> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and

vista

> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card

with

> >> raid 5

> >>

> >

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

This, apparently, is still in the future and it will never be a benchmark as

it is based on assesment of technologies. SATA ll is twice as fast as SATA l

and will have a score point as follows, but that is not a benchmark of how

the equipment performs in YOUR machine, except that you can expect SATA ll

equipment to be faster than if you had chosen SATA l equipment instead.

Interesting - that Microsoft is about to change this, but I don't think it

changes the level of trust the consumer should put to the score as being any

kind of a benchmark.

Tony. . .

"Robert McMillan" <rmcmillan@bigpond.com> wrote in message

news:e%23jr0IEBJHA.1740@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark and

> will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are due

to

> be released as new hardware requires it.

>

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

>

> Quote:

> "Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce higher

> levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18

months,

> as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores are

> introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base scored

of

> 2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its components

> are upgraded)."

>

> HTH

> Robert

>

> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

> > score

> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron score

> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

> > change

> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

> > what

> > else is on the market.

> >

> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

> > will

> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

> > would

> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

> >

> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

> > that

> > I can think of.

> >

> > Tony. . .

> >

> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

> > low

> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

except

> > to

> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really

it

> > is

> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and

vista

> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am running

> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card

with

> >> raid 5

> >>

> >

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

So far as I know, they were never intended to change. The scores are

"fixed". But it is absolutely true that they are essentially meaningless in

day to day work. What matters is not what the benchmark is for any one

score, but what the actual bottleneck is on any system. So, for example, if

you have a system where you're doing a lot of memory intensive operations,

but ones that don't stress the CPU, then it is your memory scores that

matter, not your CPU score.

In Matt's case, his video card change made a very noticeable change in his

day to day operations. I'm not surprised, there are a lot of things where

the video is the bottleneck in Vista, and getting better video may not

change the final result of how long a particular operation takes, but it

does change how fast it appears to happen. Getting up to a better video card

improves the "snappiness" of Vista significantly.

Changing processors? I really doubt it will make any perceptable difference

at all.

--

Charlie.

"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

news:OIpwlREBJHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> This, apparently, is still in the future and it will never be a benchmark

> as

> it is based on assesment of technologies. SATA ll is twice as fast as SATA

> l

> and will have a score point as follows, but that is not a benchmark of how

> the equipment performs in YOUR machine, except that you can expect SATA ll

> equipment to be faster than if you had chosen SATA l equipment instead.

>

> Interesting - that Microsoft is about to change this, but I don't think it

> changes the level of trust the consumer should put to the score as being

> any

> kind of a benchmark.

>

> Tony. . .

>

> "Robert McMillan" <rmcmillan@bigpond.com> wrote in message

> news:e%23jr0IEBJHA.1740@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark and

>> will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are due

> to

>> be released as new hardware requires it.

>>

> http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

>>

>> Quote:

>> "Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce

>> higher

>> levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18

> months,

>> as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores are

>> introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base scored

> of

>> 2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its

>> components

>> are upgraded)."

>>

>> HTH

>> Robert

>>

>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

>> > score

>> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron

>> > score

>> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

>> > change

>> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

>> > what

>> > else is on the market.

>> >

>> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

>> > will

>> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

>> > would

>> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

>> >

>> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

>> > that

>> > I can think of.

>> >

>> > Tony. . .

>> >

>> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

>> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

>> > low

>> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

> except

>> > to

>> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really

> it

>> > is

>> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

>> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and

> vista

>> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am

>> >> running

>> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card

> with

>> >> raid 5

>> >>

>> >

>>

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

I agree.

Sometimes moving from 2 gigs to 4 gigs of RAM makes your Vista snappier than

upping the uP.

My kid made that move and now when he plays the Crysis game it looks as if

he had the fastest processor in the market, but it is only more RAM and his

"lowly" AMD dual-core 4800+

Carlos

"Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

> So far as I know, they were never intended to change. The scores are

> "fixed". But it is absolutely true that they are essentially meaningless in

> day to day work. What matters is not what the benchmark is for any one

> score, but what the actual bottleneck is on any system. So, for example, if

> you have a system where you're doing a lot of memory intensive operations,

> but ones that don't stress the CPU, then it is your memory scores that

> matter, not your CPU score.

>

> In Matt's case, his video card change made a very noticeable change in his

> day to day operations. I'm not surprised, there are a lot of things where

> the video is the bottleneck in Vista, and getting better video may not

> change the final result of how long a particular operation takes, but it

> does change how fast it appears to happen. Getting up to a better video card

> improves the "snappiness" of Vista significantly.

>

> Changing processors? I really doubt it will make any perceptable difference

> at all.

>

> --

> Charlie.

> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> news:OIpwlREBJHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> > This, apparently, is still in the future and it will never be a benchmark

> > as

> > it is based on assesment of technologies. SATA ll is twice as fast as SATA

> > l

> > and will have a score point as follows, but that is not a benchmark of how

> > the equipment performs in YOUR machine, except that you can expect SATA ll

> > equipment to be faster than if you had chosen SATA l equipment instead.

> >

> > Interesting - that Microsoft is about to change this, but I don't think it

> > changes the level of trust the consumer should put to the score as being

> > any

> > kind of a benchmark.

> >

> > Tony. . .

> >

> > "Robert McMillan" <rmcmillan@bigpond.com> wrote in message

> > news:e%23jr0IEBJHA.1740@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> >> Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark and

> >> will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are due

> > to

> >> be released as new hardware requires it.

> >>

> > http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

> >>

> >> Quote:

> >> "Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce

> >> higher

> >> levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18

> > months,

> >> as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores are

> >> introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base scored

> > of

> >> 2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its

> >> components

> >> are upgraded)."

> >>

> >> HTH

> >> Robert

> >>

> >> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> >> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> >> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark, the

> >> > score

> >> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron

> >> > score

> >> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

> >> > change

> >> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent of

> >> > what

> >> > else is on the market.

> >> >

> >> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista machine

> >> > will

> >> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your hardware

> >> > would

> >> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

> >> >

> >> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista score-points

> >> > that

> >> > I can think of.

> >> >

> >> > Tony. . .

> >> >

> >> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

> >> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> >> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at 5.9

> >> > low

> >> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

> > except

> >> > to

> >> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out. Really

> > it

> >> > is

> >> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought to

> >> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and

> > vista

> >> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am

> >> >> running

> >> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card

> > with

> >> >> raid 5

> >> >>

> >> >

> >>

> >

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

Hi,

you can use the performance protocol feature.

mmc->peformance->

jk

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

First thanks to all who have responded. My goal in all this was to get what

I paid for whether I need it or not. I started this computer before vista

was out, really before xp 64 was out. I picked a board the tyan 2885 by the

reviews I choose the highpoint raid card because it used a part of the

board so not to create a bottleneck, pci x card runs fast raptor drives I

made a mistake with the ram not all of it needed to be registered and ecc

but I errored in a good way the memory is fast and stable. From there I

proceeded on. I figured out how to dress drivers through this group and xp

64 betas I dual booted with xp 32 because my scanners would not work with

xp64. I worked through the vista betas and on and on. I delayed installing

Vista because it meant flashing bios and a reinstall of the operating

system. I did try but reflashed them when I could not see what was on raid

card. This install vista ultimate was because I was ready for a fresh

install. I dropped the dual and triple boot. I went to raid 5, I had all

those extra drives. I married 2 case together because all drives were to

much for one power supply.

In summary I changed a video card twice. a borrowed ATI card because I could

not get Nvidia card to work. then fast 3850 agp card

I moved scanners to a networked computer, it is connected thru a KVM switch

and shares monitors so it really did not move them far.

I updated a capture card wintv 1600. Plextor usb does not work with 64 bit,

really my only loss.

I have taken this computer as far as I can, it is time to use it, Thanks

to the group and thanks for the help.

"Juergen Kluth" <jkluth-newskonto@dokom.net> wrote in message

news:O%23k7UCGBJHA.2032@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Hi,

> you can use the performance protocol feature.

> mmc->peformance->

> jk

>

August 22, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

Yup. RAM is much more likely to be the bottleneck these days.

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

"Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:8E43D3C1-511B-4AD4-A689-3C38A12A7CA0@microsoft.com...

>I agree.

> Sometimes moving from 2 gigs to 4 gigs of RAM makes your Vista snappier

> than

> upping the uP.

> My kid made that move and now when he plays the Crysis game it looks as if

> he had the fastest processor in the market, but it is only more RAM and

> his

> "lowly" AMD dual-core 4800+

> Carlos

>

> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

>

>> So far as I know, they were never intended to change. The scores are

>> "fixed". But it is absolutely true that they are essentially meaningless

>> in

>> day to day work. What matters is not what the benchmark is for any one

>> score, but what the actual bottleneck is on any system. So, for example,

>> if

>> you have a system where you're doing a lot of memory intensive

>> operations,

>> but ones that don't stress the CPU, then it is your memory scores that

>> matter, not your CPU score.

>>

>> In Matt's case, his video card change made a very noticeable change in

>> his

>> day to day operations. I'm not surprised, there are a lot of things where

>> the video is the bottleneck in Vista, and getting better video may not

>> change the final result of how long a particular operation takes, but it

>> does change how fast it appears to happen. Getting up to a better video

>> card

>> improves the "snappiness" of Vista significantly.

>>

>> Changing processors? I really doubt it will make any perceptable

>> difference

>> at all.

>>

>> --

>> Charlie.

>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>> news:OIpwlREBJHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> > This, apparently, is still in the future and it will never be a

>> > benchmark

>> > as

>> > it is based on assesment of technologies. SATA ll is twice as fast as

>> > SATA

>> > l

>> > and will have a score point as follows, but that is not a benchmark of

>> > how

>> > the equipment performs in YOUR machine, except that you can expect SATA

>> > ll

>> > equipment to be faster than if you had chosen SATA l equipment instead.

>> >

>> > Interesting - that Microsoft is about to change this, but I don't think

>> > it

>> > changes the level of trust the consumer should put to the score as

>> > being

>> > any

>> > kind of a benchmark.

>> >

>> > Tony. . .

>> >

>> > "Robert McMillan" <rmcmillan@bigpond.com> wrote in message

>> > news:e%23jr0IEBJHA.1740@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> >> Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark

>> >> and

>> >> will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are

>> >> due

>> > to

>> >> be released as new hardware requires it.

>> >>

>> > http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

>> >>

>> >> Quote:

>> >> "Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce

>> >> higher

>> >> levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18

>> > months,

>> >> as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores

>> >> are

>> >> introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base

>> >> scored

>> > of

>> >> 2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its

>> >> components

>> >> are upgraded)."

>> >>

>> >> HTH

>> >> Robert

>> >>

>> >> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>> >> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> >> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark,

>> >> > the

>> >> > score

>> >> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron

>> >> > score

>> >> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't ever

>> >> > change

>> >> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent

>> >> > of

>> >> > what

>> >> > else is on the market.

>> >> >

>> >> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista

>> >> > machine

>> >> > will

>> >> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your

>> >> > hardware

>> >> > would

>> >> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

>> >> >

>> >> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista

>> >> > score-points

>> >> > that

>> >> > I can think of.

>> >> >

>> >> > Tony. . .

>> >> >

>> >> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

>> >> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> >> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at

>> >> >> 5.9

>> >> > low

>> >> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

>> > except

>> >> > to

>> >> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out.

>> >> >> Really

>> > it

>> >> > is

>> >> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a thought

>> >> >> to

>> >> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64 and

>> > vista

>> >> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am

>> >> >> running

>> >> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid card

>> > with

>> >> >> raid 5

>> >> >>

>> >> >

>> >>

>> >

>>

September 24, 2008

Re: where is the point of return for upgrading processors

I am back I know it made no sense but I did upgrade processors from the

single core 244 to the dual core 275 system is maxed at 5.8 there was a

significant improvement 1.1 points. will keep group posted

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

news:uC6eXnHBJHA.3648@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Yup. RAM is much more likely to be the bottleneck these days.

>

> --

> Charlie.

> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64

> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>

> "Carlos" <Carlos@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:8E43D3C1-511B-4AD4-A689-3C38A12A7CA0@microsoft.com...

>>I agree.

>> Sometimes moving from 2 gigs to 4 gigs of RAM makes your Vista snappier

>> than

>> upping the uP.

>> My kid made that move and now when he plays the Crysis game it looks as

>> if

>> he had the fastest processor in the market, but it is only more RAM and

>> his

>> "lowly" AMD dual-core 4800+

>> Carlos

>>

>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

>>

>>> So far as I know, they were never intended to change. The scores are

>>> "fixed". But it is absolutely true that they are essentially meaningless

>>> in

>>> day to day work. What matters is not what the benchmark is for any one

>>> score, but what the actual bottleneck is on any system. So, for example,

>>> if

>>> you have a system where you're doing a lot of memory intensive

>>> operations,

>>> but ones that don't stress the CPU, then it is your memory scores that

>>> matter, not your CPU score.

>>>

>>> In Matt's case, his video card change made a very noticeable change in

>>> his

>>> day to day operations. I'm not surprised, there are a lot of things

>>> where

>>> the video is the bottleneck in Vista, and getting better video may not

>>> change the final result of how long a particular operation takes, but it

>>> does change how fast it appears to happen. Getting up to a better video

>>> card

>>> improves the "snappiness" of Vista significantly.

>>>

>>> Changing processors? I really doubt it will make any perceptable

>>> difference

>>> at all.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Charlie.

>>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>>> news:OIpwlREBJHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>> > This, apparently, is still in the future and it will never be a

>>> > benchmark

>>> > as

>>> > it is based on assesment of technologies. SATA ll is twice as fast as

>>> > SATA

>>> > l

>>> > and will have a score point as follows, but that is not a benchmark of

>>> > how

>>> > the equipment performs in YOUR machine, except that you can expect

>>> > SATA ll

>>> > equipment to be faster than if you had chosen SATA l equipment

>>> > instead.

>>> >

>>> > Interesting - that Microsoft is about to change this, but I don't

>>> > think it

>>> > changes the level of trust the consumer should put to the score as

>>> > being

>>> > any

>>> > kind of a benchmark.

>>> >

>>> > Tony. . .

>>> >

>>> > "Robert McMillan" <rmcmillan@bigpond.com> wrote in message

>>> > news:e%23jr0IEBJHA.1740@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>> >> Actually from what I have read the vista scores are a fixed benchmark

>>> >> and

>>> >> will not fall as time goes on, instead new levels (6 and higher) are

>>> >> due

>>> > to

>>> >> be released as new hardware requires it.

>>> >>

>>> > http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2006/09/22/windows-experience-index-an-in-depth-look.aspx

>>> >>

>>> >> Quote:

>>> >> "Over time, as systems become more advanced, we expect to introduce

>>> >> higher

>>> >> levels of 6 and beyond. This will be done approximately every 12-18

>>> > months,

>>> >> as new innovations in hardware become available. When new base scores

>>> >> are

>>> >> introduced, existing scores will not change (i.e. a PC with a base

>>> >> scored

>>> > of

>>> >> 2.2 today will score a 2.2 in the new updated index, unless its

>>> >> components

>>> >> are upgraded)."

>>> >>

>>> >> HTH

>>> >> Robert

>>> >>

>>> >> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>>> >> news:%23f8czsDBJHA.4368@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>> >> > Do take note of the fact that the Vista score is not a Benchmark,

>>> >> > the

>>> >> > score

>>> >> > keeps changing as better hardware comes to market and your Opteron

>>> >> > score

>>> >> > will keep on falling as time goes on. A benchmark score doesn't

>>> >> > ever

>>> >> > change

>>> >> > and remember that your CPU will keep on doing it's work independent

>>> >> > of

>>> >> > what

>>> >> > else is on the market.

>>> >> >

>>> >> > The score is an utterly useless measure for how well your Vista

>>> >> > machine

>>> >> > will

>>> >> > perform - it was introduced as an assesment to how well your

>>> >> > hardware

>>> >> > would

>>> >> > survive making the change going to Vista, nothing more.

>>> >> >

>>> >> > A well maintained system scores far higher than most Vista

>>> >> > score-points

>>> >> > that

>>> >> > I can think of.

>>> >> >

>>> >> > Tony. . .

>>> >> >

>>> >> > "Matt Schneyer" <matt@xyz.net> wrote in message

>>> >> > news:%23bxe13BBJHA.4572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>> >> >> With the new video card at 5.9 memory is at 5.5 disks or at

>>> >> >> 5.9

>>> >> > low

>>> >> >> is dual single core 244 opteron processors. at 4.6 Where would I

>>> > except

>>> >> > to

>>> >> >> find a return on changing processors or is my system maxed out.

>>> >> >> Really

>>> > it

>>> >> > is

>>> >> >> stable and plenty strong enough for what I do. It is just a

>>> >> >> thought to

>>> >> >> finish this build. I have been at it through the betas of xp 64

>>> >> >> and

>>> > vista

>>> >> >> betas to take it to conclusion is just a thought. Thanks I am

>>> >> >> running

>>> >> >> vista ultimate 64/ on a Tyan 2885 board High point 1820 raid

>>> >> >> card

>>> > with

>>> >> >> raid 5

>>> >> >>

>>> >> >

>>> >>

>>> >

>>>

>

Sign In

where is the point of return for upgrading processors

Recommended Posts

Guest Matt Schneyer

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest Tony Sperling

Guest Matt Schneyer

Guest Robert McMillan

Guest Tony Sperling

Guest Tony Sperling

Guest Charlie Russel - MVP

Guest Carlos

Guest Juergen Kluth

Guest Matt Schneyer

Guest Charlie Russel - MVP

Guest Matt Schneyer

Similar Content

Old Member Returns

Which processor is better?

Processor Problem

cmd.exe - Entry Point Not Found The Procedure entry point clReleaseDevice could not be located on the dynamic link library

Request for Windows 11 Support on Intel i5-7200U Processor

Browse

Activity

Site Info