OS Mobility Explored

by Jarred Walton on September 21, 2009 6:00 PM EST

Gateway NV52 (AMD) - Futuremark

Since we were already installing the various operating systems and running battery life tests, we thought it might be interesting to run some of the Futuremark benchmarks (while waiting for the battery to recharge...). Windows XP can't run the latest Vantage versions of PCMark and 3DMark, but we included 3DMark03/05/06 and PCMark05. Here are the results.

Gateway NV52 Futuremark Performance

The results in the 3DMark tests are very close, with the largest gap coming in 3DMark03. XP leads Vista by 3% in that test, which is hardly noticeable, and the results in the other 3DMark suites are within 1%. PCMark shows a much larger difference, with PCMark05 putting Vista in the lead by 7% over XP and 8% over Windows 7. We'll take a closer look at those results below, as the composite score is very deceiving. PCMark Vantage goes the other way, with Windows 7 beating Windows Vista by almost 20%. Let's look at the individual test results in both PCMark benchmarks to get a better idea of what's going on, beginning with PCMark05.

Gateway NV52 PCMark05 Breakdown
  XP SP3 Vista SP2 Win7 RTM
PCMark05 Score 3590 3875 3623
HDD XP Startup (MB/s) 6.664 5.948 6.168
Physics and 3D (FPS) 111.1 97.4 103.7
2D Transparency (Windows/s) 214 2730 478
3D Pixel Shaders (FPS) 55.02 54.81 52.86
Web Page Rendering (Pages/s) 2.450 1.644 1.962
File Decryption (MB/s) 35.91 34.02 36.05
2D 64 Line Redraw (FPS) 331.8 362.7 392.1
HDD General Usage (MB/s) 4.233 4.038 3.941
Multitasking 1 1000 930 948
Audio Compression (KB/s) 1936 1313 1163
Video Encoding (KB/s) 310.4 366.8 402.2
Multitasking 2 1000 889 934
Text Editing (Pages/s) 113.0 88.4 100.7
Image Decompression (MPixels/s) 23.64 23.54 23.09
Multitasking 3 1000 956 1047
File Compression (MB/s) 4.224 3.86 3.283
File Encryption (MB/s) 21.04 20.72 29.27
HDD Virus Scan (MB/s) 68.37 59.38 52.88
Memory Latency (MAccesses/s) 6.73 7.103 8.382

When you look at the composite score, Windows Vista looks very attractive in PCMark05. The individual results tell a completely different story! (Note that we calculated results for the multitasking tests relative to the XP score, which is why it scores 1000 on all three tests.) The high composite score of Vista is a result of the 2D Transparency test, where it is nearly 13 times as fast as XP and almost 6 times as fast as Windows 7. Exactly how important is 2D transparency? It probably helps in Vista when you're using Aero Glass, but it shouldn't matter much at all in Windows XP.

Obviously 2D transparency is a weak point of XP - or at least the XP drivers - so we went through and calculated the relative performance in the PCMark05 tests with and without 2D Transparency. We used the XP result as the baseline metric. Including 2D Transparency, Vista's average performance is 200% of XP and Windows 7 is 108%. Remove that one result and XP ends up being 8.6% faster than Vista and 3.5% faster than Windows 7. The composite PCMark score is weighted, and we don't have exact details on their formula. It's clear that 2D Transparency does not have the same weight as the other tests, but it's still enough to skew the results.

Gateway NV52 PCMark Vantage Breakdown
  Vista SP2 Win7 RTM
PCMark Vantage 2566 3055
Memory 1467 1529
TV and Movies 1541 1835
Gaming 2121 2126
Music 2170 3347
Communications 2971 3652
Productivity 2499 2558
HDD Test 2445 2372

The results for the individual test suites in PCMark Vantage are a lot closer than the 2D Transparency result from PCMark05, and Windows 7 leads in most of the tests. Gaming performance is essentially a tie, Vista leads by 3% in the HDD test suite, but everything else favors Windows 7 - sometimes by a large margin. We don't know exactly why Windows 7 scores so much higher in the TV and Movies, Music, and Communications test suites. It could be that driver differences play a part, or it may be that Windows 7 is simply better optimized for some of these tests. We do know that most users think Windows 7 performs better than Windows Vista, and the PCMark Vantage results clearly support that impression.

Gateway NV52 (AMD) - Battery Life Gateway NV52 (AMD) - OS Benchmarks
Comments Locked

106 Comments

View All Comments

  • PrinceGaz - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    When surfing on my iTouch, I find that the vast majority of websites display almost the same (complete with images) despite the lack of Flash, and Java as well for that matter (it does at least support JS). There are just the odd undisplayed areas which in most cases are where I know ads would be normally. A very few websites use Flash for navigation and content display without any alternative version of the site available, but the overwhelming majority of sites display fine.

    That being said, I would prefer to have the option to enable Flash and/or Java if I wished, but would probably leave Flash off most of the time given the likely impact it would have on battery-life and overall responsiveness.
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    Is there a way to force a mobile version of ESPN that still displays all the links that are flash on the main site?
  • emboss - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    For day-to-day browsing I have flash turned off. Even on Windows it speeds things up, and as a bonus kills most of the ads that try and get around ad blocking. Excluding YouTube videos, I maybe have to enable it once a month or so to use a site that's broken enough to require it.

    Then again, I use the internet for information rather than entertainment, and things like MSDN don't require flash :)
  • sc3252 - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    Flash isnt really a part, you can view most sites without it. The only sites that really need it are those crapy sites you really dont want to be at.
    Another nice point to make is how poorly optimized flash is for GNU/Linux. I am not surprised when using firefox without blocking flash you get such lower battery life since there is almost no acceleration on GNU/Linux. With a 3.2ghz core 2 I can't watch fullscreen flash without skipping and jerking on Debian testing.
  • pcfxer - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    With my 2.9GHz Athlon X2 5000+ BE, 4GB RAM on PC-BSD 64-bit (with the stock nvidia drivers), I am able to view full screen HD flash without a hint of trouble. This is handled via binary emulation of Linux running Firefox linux with linux flash plugins.

    Perhaps, anand could test a REAL Unix-like OS and try out PC-BSD. It is MORE "free" than Linux (GPL).
  • pcfxer - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 - link

    I realize that some people may mistake this "REAL Unix-like" for seriousness, it is a joke btw. That said, I am serious about testing PC-BSD - I am a tester for them anyhow ;).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now