Windows 7 Benchmarks Show Little Improvement On Vista

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy examines Windows 7 from the kernel up, subjecting the 'pre-beta' to a battery of benchmarks to find any signs that the OS will be faster, more responsive, and less resource-intensive than the bloated Vista, as Microsoft suggests. Identical thread counts at the kernel level suggest to Kennedy that Windows 7 is a 'minor point-type of release, as opposed to a major update or rewrite.' Memory footprint for the kernel proved eerily similar to that of Vista as well. 'In fact, as I worked my way through the process lists of the two operating systems, I was struck by the extent of the similarities,' Kennedy writes, before discussing the results of a nine-way workload test scenario he performed on Windows 7 — the same scenario that showed Vista was 40 percent slower than Windows XP. 'In a nutshell, Windows 7 M3 is a virtual twin of Vista when it comes to performance,' Kennedy concludes. 'In other words, Microsoft's follow-up to its most unpopular OS release since Windows Me threatens to deliver zero measurable performance benefits while introducing new and potentially crippling compatibility issues.'"

Comments

Re:At least it is not slower

[Computershack]

*cofff* Ubuntu 8.10 *cofff*

Indeed. It's as bloated and slow as hell compared to 7.10. The analogy is quite good.

Re:Goodness me, what FUD

[Lumpy]

Are you on drugs?

"Some facts:
- Vista is barely slower than XP on hardware bought within the last 2 years. It was fairly slower on RTM for many reasons, but vastly improved drivers & some colossal patches have put that to bed now."

I reproduce this over and over and over with customers. They have a 2 year old laptop that came with XP and the "upgrade to vista" we upgrade it and the COMPUTER IS IN FACT SLOWER. Why do you think the boards out there were flooded with these reports over the past couple of years. In order to make vista as fast as XP you gotta have a good video card, a good fast dualcore processor and a hunk of ram (2GB) Most laptops have crap level video cards so that vista ran like a dog. Every single Lattitude from 2006/2007 we did a vista reinstall to was in fact very slow compared to the XP install.

I know you work for the microsoft get the facts campaign but get real. Anyone that has touched Vista knows it needs a lot behind it to make it feel responsive.