Aero runs and looks just fine, games like WoW perform the same as they did in XP. Is there a problem here? My video card atm is a Radeon 9550.
I'd say the vid card is just about on par with my other components...I have no clue why I would get a score like that (and yet still be able to run my games).
Actually, after looking at the details, it seems there's ~256 megs shared system memory. I don't know why.
Copy/paste
Display adapter type ATI Radeon 9550 / X1050 Series
Total available graphics memory 511 MB
Dedicated graphics memory 256 MB
Dedicated system memory 0 MB
Shared system memory 255 MB
Primary monitor resolution 1280x960
DirectX version DirectX 9.0 or better
I had a 9550 once upon a time. That was 3 upgrades ago I think. Just passed it down to a friend. I guess the real measure is if it does what you need it to do. But a 1.0? Sheeeesh. More power to you. :bigggrin:
Actually since performing this test earlier on today 've now gone back to XP due to driver issues with my 8800GTS. I had a general loss of image quality overall even on my desktop and various graphical anomolies that affected my desktop, and certain web pages. I'll probably go back to Vista when Nvidia can sort themselves out and get our Vista ready card to function properly.
Processor AMD athelon 64 x2 5200 Windsor dual core 2.61ghz -5.1
Memory (RAM) 2.00 GB corsair dominator 44412 ddr2 800 - 5.9
Graphics evga gforce8800 gts - 5.9
Gaming graphics 640 MB Total available graphics memory - 5.9
hard disk western digital 320gig 7200rpm -5.8
(have a 10,000rpm raptor to replace it once i feel comfy with vista)
this is with a asus crosshair am2 motherboard
zalman 9700fan
680watt supply
bring on crysis!
hey RMF,
you on 32 or 64? I just installed this less than hour ago and put the latest drivers (64 bit in my case) on my 8800gts (driver 11.65) and havent had a single problem at all yet.. bout to install my microsoft flight simulator X now lol to really test it....
Processor AMD athelon 64 x2 5200 Windsor dual core 2.61ghz -5.1
Memory (RAM) 2.00 GB corsair dominator 44412 ddr2 800 - 5.9
Graphics evga gforce8800 gts - 5.9
Gaming graphics 640 MB Total available graphics memory - 5.9
hard disk western digital 320gig 7200rpm -5.8
(have a 10,000rpm raptor to replace it once i feel comfy with vista)
this is with a asus crosshair am2 motherboard
zalman 9700fan
680watt supply
bring on crysis!
hey RMF,
you on 32 or 64? I just installed this less than hour ago and put the latest drivers (64 bit in my case) on my 8800gts (driver 11.65) and havent had a single problem at all yet.. bout to install my microsoft flight simulator X now lol to really test it....
I was using the x64 version. I just find it amazing how the overall quality of my image could dergrade the way it did in vista. Anyway, I'll wait another couple of months and reinstall it when things have improved.
I also installed flight simulator x to test it. The card I'm sure is more than capable of running flight simulators graphics with ease, but the game is not programmed to take advantage of dual core processors and ran like ****. I'm talking like 15FPS with almost everything turned up or down. Antialiasing on or off, resolution highest or lowest...made no difference. With all of the air traffic and weather settings on the lowest I could get it up to the low 20's. What a poorly coded piece of software it is.
after installing flight simulator X again i noticed each time i ran the program an icon popped up in my system tray saying something about a program has been switched to vista basic colors due to its incompatibility blah blah blah... so thats pretty crappy a microsoft product is having problems being ran on a microsoft operating system...
once in game i went ahead and brought up several of the sliders to boost the eye candy but i didnt max things out cause i knew there would be a catch. and sure enough it was barely running the graphics i just boosted so its better but not much better than when i was on the xp direct x9 setup.
and it wouldnt do any good if i bought a second 8800gts cause fsmX isnt optimised for sli either.... its just typical ms crap... which is a shame cause ive really been impressed with how easy vista was to intall and how easily everything has worked so far.
one thing i did notice is my saitek x36 flight stick needs some vista drivers... vista no longer recognises 2 8point top hats.. it recognises one of them and the other as a POV. so the one top hat that i had my view left, view right, blah blah blah set to i cant anymore since vista isnt assigning as a "switch" , its assigning all 8 functions of that hat as 1 switch only...
that on top of the fact fsmX wont let you use the controller software which would allow you multiple functions being programmed to each button, switch, knob etc... so in fsmX your stuck with only assigning one feature to each thing... which is just dumb.
how did you get such a high score on memery ive got 3 gig ddr2 and only scored 5.2
Size isn't everything. You'll notice if you look at the score that the sc ore is based on Memory operations per second, it isn't based on the size. More isn't always better. What speed and brand is your RAM?
I love it when people dont research products before they buy em and slap em in their pc lol
i researched several days before choosing my hardware on this recent gaming rig.. and i wouldve went with more processor (which is where my lowest score came) if i had more funds lol...
but i think my ram was the corsair dominator 240pin ddr2 800mhz pc6400 44412. I forget all the specs now.
i imagine his is 400mhz plus has a latency of 5???
Just put my new pc together, got pretty damn scores.
Amd 6000x2 :: I thought it would be a bit lower than some of you guys core duo's but it was the other way around
Corsair XMS2 Pro 2x1GB @ 800mhz
7950GT KO
HD only 5.5, could have went with 10k rpm but not worth the extra $100+ if you ask me
Comments
Processor: 4.1
Memory: 4.4
Graphics: 1.0
Gaming graphics: 1.0
Primary hard disk: 5.0
Aero runs and looks just fine, games like WoW perform the same as they did in XP. Is there a problem here? My video card atm is a Radeon 9550.
I'd say the vid card is just about on par with my other components...I have no clue why I would get a score like that (and yet still be able to run my games).
Copy/paste
Display adapter type ATI Radeon 9550 / X1050 Series
Total available graphics memory 511 MB
Dedicated graphics memory 256 MB
Dedicated system memory 0 MB
Shared system memory 255 MB
Primary monitor resolution 1280x960
DirectX version DirectX 9.0 or better
*sigh*
Oh well, I guess it's fine for now since Aero looks/runs good and my games run just fine.
5400+ X2
2x 1GB Kingston PC5300
MSI 8800GTS 640MB
150GB Raptor
Actually since performing this test earlier on today 've now gone back to XP due to driver issues with my 8800GTS. I had a general loss of image quality overall even on my desktop and various graphical anomolies that affected my desktop, and certain web pages. I'll probably go back to Vista when Nvidia can sort themselves out and get our Vista ready card to function properly.
Processor AMD athelon 64 x2 5200 Windsor dual core 2.61ghz -5.1
Memory (RAM) 2.00 GB corsair dominator 44412 ddr2 800 - 5.9
Graphics evga gforce8800 gts - 5.9
Gaming graphics 640 MB Total available graphics memory - 5.9
hard disk western digital 320gig 7200rpm -5.8
(have a 10,000rpm raptor to replace it once i feel comfy with vista)
this is with a asus crosshair am2 motherboard
zalman 9700fan
680watt supply
bring on crysis!
hey RMF,
you on 32 or 64? I just installed this less than hour ago and put the latest drivers (64 bit in my case) on my 8800gts (driver 11.65) and havent had a single problem at all yet.. bout to install my microsoft flight simulator X now lol to really test it....
I was using the x64 version. I just find it amazing how the overall quality of my image could dergrade the way it did in vista. Anyway, I'll wait another couple of months and reinstall it when things have improved.
I also installed flight simulator x to test it. The card I'm sure is more than capable of running flight simulators graphics with ease, but the game is not programmed to take advantage of dual core processors and ran like ****. I'm talking like 15FPS with almost everything turned up or down. Antialiasing on or off, resolution highest or lowest...made no difference. With all of the air traffic and weather settings on the lowest I could get it up to the low 20's. What a poorly coded piece of software it is.
once in game i went ahead and brought up several of the sliders to boost the eye candy but i didnt max things out cause i knew there would be a catch. and sure enough it was barely running the graphics i just boosted so its better but not much better than when i was on the xp direct x9 setup.
and it wouldnt do any good if i bought a second 8800gts cause fsmX isnt optimised for sli either.... its just typical ms crap... which is a shame cause ive really been impressed with how easy vista was to intall and how easily everything has worked so far.
one thing i did notice is my saitek x36 flight stick needs some vista drivers... vista no longer recognises 2 8point top hats.. it recognises one of them and the other as a POV. so the one top hat that i had my view left, view right, blah blah blah set to i cant anymore since vista isnt assigning as a "switch" , its assigning all 8 functions of that hat as 1 switch only...
that on top of the fact fsmX wont let you use the controller software which would allow you multiple functions being programmed to each button, switch, knob etc... so in fsmX your stuck with only assigning one feature to each thing... which is just dumb.
Size isn't everything. You'll notice if you look at the score that the sc ore is based on Memory operations per second, it isn't based on the size. More isn't always better. What speed and brand is your RAM?
i researched several days before choosing my hardware on this recent gaming rig.. and i wouldve went with more processor (which is where my lowest score came) if i had more funds lol...
but i think my ram was the corsair dominator 240pin ddr2 800mhz pc6400 44412. I forget all the specs now.
i imagine his is 400mhz plus has a latency of 5???
I am humbled!
i got
CPU: 2 x opteron 2.4Ggz
4.9
RAM: 3 gigs out of 4 recognized
4.7
Graphics - 2 x Dual GeForce Go 7600
4.4
Gaming Graphics - 4.7
Primary Hard disk - Sata
5.9
OVERALL
4.4
i have ultimate and it seems a little sluggish... i feel like it should be higher best on my specs.. any one have any ideas?
TIA
Memory (RAM) 2.00 GB 5.7
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce 7300 LE 3.8
Gaming graphics 399 MB Total available graphics memory 3.2
Primary hard disk 83GB Free (139GB Total) 5.6
3.2 overall
That's on my new work pc - not bad imo considering i was on a 5yr old p3 machine this time last week
Amd 6000x2 :: I thought it would be a bit lower than some of you guys core duo's but it was the other way around
Corsair XMS2 Pro 2x1GB @ 800mhz
7950GT KO
HD only 5.5, could have went with 10k rpm but not worth the extra $100+ if you ask me
Processor: Intel Quadcore 2.66GHz scored 5.9
Graphics: NVidia 8800GTX (768MB) scored 5.9
HardDisk: 300 MB Raptor RAID scored 5.9
Memory: 4GB 800MHz DDR2 scored 5.1:(
32-bit Vista sees only 3GB of RAM.
Are those reporting higher memory score running 64-bit?
Any recommendation on whether I should switch to 64-bit Vista? Feed back appreciated.
Thanks,