Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows 7 On Multicore — How Much Faster?

Posted by Soulskill on from the where-do-i-buy-a-256-core-netbook dept.

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Andrew Binstock tests whether Windows 7's threading advances fulfill the promise of improved performance and energy reduction. He runs Windows XP Professional, Vista Ultimate, and Windows 7 Ultimate against Viewperf and Cinebench benchmarks using a Dell Precision T3500 workstation, the price-performance winner of an earlier roundup of Nehalem-based workstations. 'What might be surprising is that Windows 7's multithreading changes did not deliver more of a performance punch,' Binstock writes of the benchmarks, adding that the principal changes to Windows 7 multithreading consist of increased processor affinity, 'a wholly new mechanism that gets rid of the global locking concept and pushes the management of lock access down to the locked resources,' permitting Windows 7 to scale up to 256 processors without performance penalty, but delivering little performance gains for systems with only a few processors. 'Windows 7 performs several tricks to keep threads running on the same execution pipelines so that the underlying Nehalem processor can turn off transistors on lesser-used or inactive pipelines,' Binstock writes. 'The primary benefit of this feature is reduced energy consumption,' with Windows 7 requiring 17 percent less power to run than Windows XP or Vista."

12 of 349 comments (clear)

  1. Windows 7 is better than Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Suck it, nerds.

    1. Re:Windows 7 is better than Linux by cHiphead · · Score: 4, Funny

      I bet you even threw a Windows 7 launch party.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:Windows 7 is better than Linux by CarpetShark · · Score: 4, Funny

      Agreed. I particularly like the feature where you rename a folder, and it shows up as renamed, but on the filesystem, it's still called "New Folder". Gotta love the strict testing that Microsoft put in.

  2. Less power? by Canazza · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nooo! I was hoping that power consumption would continue to increase! Sooner or later our PCs would require 1.21GW!

    --
    It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    1. Re:Less power? by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Indeed. So much work with my lightning catcher for nothing.

      Well, time to go back to the human reanimation experiment.

  3. Not Really by Mikkeles · · Score: 4, Funny

    'What might be surprising is that Windows 7's multithreading changes did not deliver more of a performance punch,'

    No, it's not surprising.

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    1. Re:Not Really by logixoul · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, _I_ like Vista. Does give me a BSOD now and then, and I had to use DosBox for a few things, but it makes me happy otherwise. Speedy, good looking, well organized, simple UI, good app support for what I use, and mostly just works.

  4. Snow Leopard is better than Windows 7 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Suck it, Microsoft drone.

  5. Re:Something is wrong with Win7 power management by T+Murphy · · Score: 5, Funny

    So you've got a Linux fan and not a Windows fan. Not surprising on this site.

    --
    My webcomic
  6. Linux is better that Snow Leopard by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 5, Funny

    Suck it, transitive property.

  7. Re:Not fast enough by mister_playboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I see you are using Windows 7... :)

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  8. Re:Something is wrong with Win7 power management by Clairvoyant · · Score: 2, Funny

    Any examples?

    (Score:-1, Troll)

    There' s one ---^ :)