Windows 7 Performance Guide
by Ryan Smith and Gary Key on October 26, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
After nearly a year-long build-up, Microsoft’s ongoing pre-launch campaign to woo computer users has come to a close, with the public launch of Microsoft’s latest and greatest desktop OS, Windows 7.
Windows 7 is being born in to a world of uncertainty, one Microsoft has never faced before to such a degree. Apple’s (and Mac OS X) market share is the highest it’s been in over a decade. Linux has finally gained however small a foothold in home computers through netbooks. And what was Microsoft’s next-gen operating system, Windows Vista, has taken enough backlash that it’s going to be in therapy for the rest of its life.
By no means are these troubled times for Microsoft, but never has victory been less assured.
Unfortunately, Windows Vista started life as a technical misfit, something even we didn’t fully comprehend until later. It ate too much virtual address space, it copied files slowly, and it ran poorly on the lowest of the low-end computers of the time. Microsoft fixed many of these problems by the time SP1 hit, but by then it was too late. Vista went from a technical misfit to a social misfit, with no hope of immediate redemption.
So Windows 7 is being launched with some gargantuan tasks on its shoulders, few of them technical. First and foremost, it needs to reverse Vista’s (and by extension, Microsoft’s) bad image among existing Windows users, in order to get them off of the old and insecure Windows XP. Then it needs to help stem the continuing flow of Windows users to Mac OS X, which has continued to grow over the years. And finally, it still needs to innovate enough so that Windows doesn’t end up stagnant, and ideally sell a few copies to Vista users while it’s at it.
It’s a large order, one that as we’ll see Microsoft won’t completely deliver on, but they’re going to get fairly close to.
In the meantime, we’re left a launch that has been a very long time coming. Between the public beta, the public RC, and Win7 having been finalized 3 months ago, virtually anyone that wanted Win7 has had the opportunity to try it. Anyone could get the release version by the middle of August through TechNet, MSDN, Action Pack, or any other of a number of sources that Microsoft released Win7 to well ahead of the public launch. The real launch was 3 months ago, so the public launch is almost a technicality.
And with that said, let’s get started with our final look at Windows 7.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
207 Comments
View All Comments
Tewt - Monday, November 2, 2009 - link
Toms pretty much had the same conclusion as Anandtech. Here is a quote from their conclusion:"From the benchmarker’s standpoint, the change from Windows Vista to Windows 7 is simply a matter of documentation."
I wish someone would quantify the "snappy" feeling or the "it feels faster" they get from Windows 7 because I'm not seeing a compelling reason to move from Vista from either article on the two sites.
werfu - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
I absolutely love Win7. I've installed the RC on my Thinkpad T61p and it's a real pleasure to use it compared to Vista. It's more responsive, not like Vista sluggish experience. However, the ACPI driver for the T61p don't work right. The screen doesn't dim and power management don't work right. I think that's really odd, as it's been working right under Vista and Linux.Also, I wonder if the NAS test was done using a Large Packet enabled NAS. It do make a huge difference on networking gear that support it.
strikeback03 - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
Have you checked for updated drivers recently? Lenovo had a bunch of Win7 drivers for my T43 which were all dated within the past week.7Enigma - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
Did you happen to do any benchmarking or "general user responsiveness" when you upgraded the systems? I have upgraded 3 systems since Windows 95 and in every case I ended up reformatting and doing a clean install; not because of a hardware/software issue, but rather because some unknown demon made the systems chug.I've seen this same issue with the move from XP SP2 to SP3 on my dad's computer (in this case to the point where we actually rolled back to SP2). In that instance it is possible the extra security features/etc. on an older system that just couldn't take it, but in the other instances it seemed to be a major problem.
Any comments by the authors would be greatly appreciated.
Ryan Smith - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
One of the systems that I did the upgrade install on was my personal system. I'm not going to publish any numbers since they aren't rigorous enough, but before and after testing didn't reveal any differences in performance. It continues to perform just as well as any other Win7 system I have.7Enigma - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 - link
Thank you for the response Ryan. Honestly while the articles are fantastic, it is the timely comments from the authors that make this site the best.Postoasted - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
Had been using XP64 for about 4 years and lived through all its teething problems. Had been totally satisfied except that with some programs it couldn't regulate the RAM efficiently. I have 6 gigs of RAM and would ofter run out while using some apps. With 7 Ultimate I can watch an H264 movie, have FF open and encode a movie all at the same time and have RAM left over. For me Windows 7 was the fix.nafhan - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
I'll go out on a limb and say that anyone who feels comfortable configuring POP3/SMTP settings would also be comfortable downloading the free mail client from MS (or Thunderbird, etc.). Businesses will likely have MS Office installed (including Outlook). Non-technical users generally use webmail.So, the only group I can come up with who would want it installed by default is tech-savvy users without Office, that prefer MS's free desktop client over webmail, and don't have admin rights to install it themselves or access to IT support to install it for them.
jay401 - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
Gary - Whatever happened to the P55 motherboard reviews and round-up articles you mentioned last month? Are they still on the way? I think we've seen 3 or 4 P55 motherboards reviewed so far at Anandtech. Are you still going to review the others?It's not so much the performance that's important or unknown, since they're all relatively similar. It's the technical specs comparisons, the board layout images and commentary, any issues you experienced while testing with them, etc. Would love to see the round-ups.
Gary Key - Monday, October 26, 2009 - link
They are coming shortly. We went back and purchased 8 retail boards to do additional testing on the Foxconn socket compared to the Lotes/Tyco Amp. I have finished that testing and guess what, no changes on air or water, plus it appears the revised Foxconn socket is certainly working better, not perfect, but much better.