http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/...sta/index.html
Windows XP vs. Vista: The Benchmark Rundown
Patrick Schmid, Achim Roos
January 29, 2007 09:16
Shop for Computer Systems
* Apple iMac 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo 24" Desktop $1,899.95
* Apple iMac 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo 17" Desktop $959.95
* Apple Mac mini 1.66GHz Core Duo Desktop $575.95
* Apple iMac 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo 20" Desktop $1,439.95
* Apple Mac Pro Dual Xeon 2.66GHz Dual Core Desktop $2,199.00
See More Products ...
Is Windows Vista Faster Than XP?
Our Windows Vista coverage began with a hands-on diary by MobilityGuru's Barry Gerber, followed by an assessment on gameplay under Windows Vista by graphics presidente Darren Polkowski, as well as a complete feature rundown of Vista. Barry took the new operating system and its look & feel with a grain of salt, while Darren was disappointed because OpenGL support was dropped along the way, meaning that Windows Vista currently offers horrible performance for graphics applications utilizing the Open Graphics Library.
We are sure that mainstream users will appreciate the improved usability of Windows Vista, and the average office/multimedia user will likely never notice the lack of OpenGL. However, a chapter on the overall performance of Windows Vista requires more dedication. In particular, two things require an in-depth analysis:
* Basic Windows Vista Performance
How does Windows Vista perform compared to Windows XP? Will applications execute equally quickly, or will they even run slower due to the new features and the AeroGlass interface?
* Windows Vista Performance Enhancements
With SuperFetch and ReadyBoost, Windows Vista introduces two features to make use of today's technology in order to improve the user experience. This means that more application data should be actively cached into all available memory (SuperFetch), whether that is physical RAM or a USB Flash memory device (ReadyBoost). Microsoft's goal was to create balanced performance by removing delays in everyday work.


Reply With Quote
