Windows 7 Experience rating?

N

noobtech

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
2,663
I thought a Core 2 Duo beats out a X2 6000+? Also, DDR3 is supposed to be better than DDR2 right? My Desktop still blows away my laptop. I figured it would be way better, except for the gaming part, cuz my desktop has a HD 4850... while my laptop has onboard video.

Desktop,
Processor 6.1 (X2 6000+ 3.0Ghz)
Memory 5.9 (DDR2-800)
Graphics/Gaming 7.3 (HD 4850)
Primary Disk 5.9 (WD Blue)

Laptop,
Processor 5.7 (Intel Mobile Core 2 Duo T6670)
Memory 5.7 DDR3 (DDR3 PC3-10700 (677)
Graphics 4.1 (Onboard)
Gaming 3.4 (Onboard)
Primary Disk 5.9 (dunno but 7200rpm sata)

Even though the Laptop is 2.2Ghz, I thought core 2 duo stomped x2 6000... I guess not? It's alright though, I got the laptop for general pc usage... not trying to game or do any graphics.

But still... how come my ram isn't being rated higher on the PC? wEiRd!
 
A slow Core 2 doesn't beat a fast X2. Also the integrated memory controller in the AMD system is much faster than the memory subsystem in the Core 2 system.
 
You're also putting too much stock in an absolutely worthless performance measure.
 
DDR3 is faster but it's not inherently better. If your bus is at 333mhz, you're not going to notice any boost going to DDR3 over DDR 2, which is basically what your expecting with your setup. If you have more memory capacity on the desktop then I would expect that to score higher.

Also, don't listen to the naysayers that tell you WEI is worthless because I bet most of them run synthetic benchmarks (3dMark) and those are equally meaningless. They just like repeating what other people say.
 
bigdogchris said:
DDR3 is faster but it's not inherently better. If your bus is at 333mhz, you're not going to notice any boost going to DDR3 over DDR 2, which is basically what your expecting with your setup. If you have more memory capacity on the desktop then I would expect that to score higher.
Click to expand...
You also have to take into account that DDR3 runs at much higher latencies than DDR2. There are a number of instances where lower clocked DDR2 can outpace faster clocked DDR3 simply because of latency issues with DDR3.

Same thing happened when going from DDR1 to DDR2; you need DDR2 533 to match DDR1 400.
 
noobtech said:
I thought a Core 2 Duo beats out a X2 6000+? Also, DDR3 is supposed to be better than DDR2 right? My Desktop still blows away my laptop. I figured it would be way better, except for the gaming part, cuz my desktop has a HD 4850... while my laptop has onboard video.

Desktop,
Processor 6.1 (X2 6000+ 3.0Ghz)
Memory 5.9 (DDR2-800)
Graphics/Gaming 7.3 (HD 4850)
Primary Disk 5.9 (WD Blue)

Laptop,
Processor 5.7 (Intel Mobile Core 2 Duo T6670)
Memory 5.7 DDR3 (DDR3 PC3-10700 (677)
Graphics 4.1 (Onboard)
Gaming 3.4 (Onboard)
Primary Disk 5.9 (dunno but 7200rpm sata)

Even though the Laptop is 2.2Ghz, I thought core 2 duo stomped x2 6000... I guess not? It's alright though, I got the laptop for general pc usage... not trying to game or do any graphics.

But still... how come my ram isn't being rated higher on the PC? wEiRd!
Click to expand...

mobile C2D and Sodimm modules will be slower then their desktop counterparts, due to being adapted for mobile environments.

and why do you assume every C2D beats anything? nowadays C2D is a marketing name, especially in the realm of laptops
 
noobtech said:
But still... how come my ram isn't being rated higher on the PC? wEiRd!
Click to expand...

because, as been discussed to DEATH around here, the WEP is NOT to be used to compare different systems.
it is NOT a true benchmark utility like SysMark, and whatever else is out there now-a-days.
 
86 5.0L said:
mobile C2D and Sodimm modules will be slower then their desktop counterparts, due to being adapted for mobile environments.

and why do you assume every C2D beats anything? nowadays C2D is a marketing name, especially in the realm of laptops
Click to expand...

Im still living in the days where the conroe core came out and blew away the competition. LoL...

I forgot about the looser latency timings on the ram too. :-/
 
Either way, both of those cpus are better than my Pentium D 915, which only gets a score of 4.5 :(
 
Aaron11 said:
Either way, both of those cpus are better than my Pentium D 915, which only gets a score of 4.5 :(
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the Pentium M in my ~4 year old Sony Vaio laptop gets a 5.0'ish. Certainly should be more than 0.7 worse than a mobile C2D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top