Not sure what's bottlenecking my system

[Agallochh]

I've also noticed a significant boost from Vista to 7 that I never quite understood.

However, being a reasonable person and not a philosopher, I didn't question it.

Is that Hannelore from QC as your avatar?

[Funkyjunky]

More like hypocrisy police. And version numbering has nothing to do with it. 7 has kernel level improvements that SP2 does not give Vista. Unless you're trying to imply just because a kernel shares the same major version number they are 'the same', and that NT5.2 from 2007 has no performance improves over NT5.0 from 2000.

Lets have a look at the numbers

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/28...son/index.html

[XxJay247xX]

More like hypocrisy police. And version numbering has nothing to do with it. 7 has kernel level improvements that SP2 does not give Vista. Unless you're trying to imply just because a kernel shares the same major version number they are 'the same', and that NT5.2 from 2007 has no performance improves over NT5.0 from 2000.

Ofc not, but 7 does use the same kernel as windows vista, just improvements, but I hate the people who jump on the "I hate vista because its a memory hog" bandwagon when 7 uses practically the same amount as ram as it, Sure your going to get some improvements over windows vista to 7, but your not going to notice it when playing wow and that's a fact.

[Kaneiac]

Is that Hannelore from QC as your avatar?

The one and only.

@XxJay247xX: I lack the technological knowledge to explain the boost in performance, but I'm not a fucking retard either. I don't see why it's your prerogative to deny any boosts, but it's pretty fucking annoying.

[Agallochh]

Ofc not, but 7 does use the same kernel as windows vista, just improvements, but I hate the people who jump on the "I hate vista because its a memory hog" bandwagon when 7 uses practically the same amount as ram as it, Sure your going to get some improvements over windows vista to 7, but your not going to notice it when playing wow and that's a fact.

That's not a fact.

Alt+tab out of WoW on vista.
Now do it again on 7.
Back to doing it again on Vista.
Then one more time on 7.

Much faster.

[dotSeed]

Ofc not, but 7 does use the same kernel as windows vista, just improvements, but I hate the people who jump on the "I hate vista because its a memory hog" bandwagon when 7 uses practically the same amount as ram as it, Sure your going to get some improvements over windows vista to 7, but your not going to notice it when playing wow and that's a fact.

I think we're arguing over terms. They share the same kernel yes, but not the same version - that's what I'm getting at (ergo performance differences). Vista's bad reputation came mostly from the simple fact it had higher base requirements than XP and suffered from some terrible driver problems. Just like 2000 used to be the 'smarter choice' compared to XP back in the day because 'XP used more RAM'.

Lets have a look at the numbers

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/28...son/index.html

If you read the thread you would have seen I already posted benchmarks that showed differences. Both for and against Vista compared to 7.

[XxJay247xX]

The one and only.

@XxJay247xX: I lack the technological knowledge to explain the boost in performance, but I'm not a fucking retard either. I don't see why it's your prerogative to deny any boosts, but it's pretty fucking annoying.

*sigh* please read what I said above, plus if you don't know what I'm talking about then why are you reading what I am posting..
I'm not hating on 7, I'm trying to prove that vista is just the same as 7 just with some tweaks here and there, and your not going to see improvements in game, fair enough 1-3 FPS increase in some cases, but if you really want to see improvements you need to upgrade your hardware and do some overclocking to push the most out of your system.

[Kaneiac]

*sigh* please read what I said above, plus if you don't know what I'm talking about then why are you reading what I am posting..
I'm not hating on 7, I'm trying to prove that vista is just the same as 7 just with some tweaks here and there.

Sorry, I didn't know what I wasn't allowed to read any post on this site because I lack the foresight to tell you're a self-righteous wikipedia junkie.

You're not "proving" (what a loose term) anything. You're flat out saying people are wrong when they provide anecdotes that contradict what you've read. Guess what? That's not impossible.

I'm sure a lot of people's anecdotal speed improvements probably came from fresh formats and what have you.

I have great experience with this back with Battlefield 2142 when I was using the 7 RC. Punkbuster didn't work with 7, so I had to reformat and go right back to Vista. I actually had a decline in performance after a fresh reinstall of Vista than I did going from Vista to 7. It was the same with WoW at the time.

I have no idea what caused it, but the numbers certainly weren't imaginary or false as Jay likes to think they are.

[knumskul]

Derail topic much?
Special olympics pics need to be posted here.

How about we get back to the original topic at hand?

Try checking that your power plan isn't set at power saver. Happened to me before. I couldn't figure out why i had low fps til i noticed my power plan was in power saver.

[XxJay247xX]

Wikipedia junkie? dude if your going to post bull shit like this, don't post at all, you know nothing, I bet your computer is made by Dell, Compaq or some other crappy manufacturer, I don't care what you have to say, it means nothing, that's all I'm trying to prove is that Vista isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

[Kaneiac]

Wikipedia junkie? dude if your going to post bull shit lie this, don't post at all, you know nothing, I bet your computer is made by Dell, Compaq or some other crappy manufacturer, I don't care what you have to say, it means nothing, that's all I'm trying to prove is that Vista isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

Oh, assumptions! How fun!

I can send you 4 receipts for the last 4 computers I've built, but I'm sure you'd say they don't exist because they don't agree with what you say.

Check out dotSeed's benchmark comparisons for Windows 7 v Vista with the same hardware. I like how you conveniently ignored that.

First page on that:

OS Windows 7 Ultimate Edition x64 RTM
Windows Vista Ultimate Edition x64 SP2

OH THEY ARE USING SP2!

LOOK AT THAT!

[Xeraxis]

Oh no, I got caught by the grammar police.
http://www.osnews.com/story/19793/Wi...uilds-on-Vista <--- the .1 is just improvements, which have been added into Vista SP2, the only new thing 7 brought to the table was new features, such as improved networking and a update to windows explorer..

Also to the link you posted, they are not using Vista Sp2.

For someone who likes to jump on everyone saying they are uninformed I suggest you check out that link again. They are using SP2 for their Vista tests. Also when trying to prove your point it's probably best not to cite an article from the pre-RC build of said product.

[XxJay247xX]

Oh, assumptions! How fun!

I can send you 4 receipts for the last 4 computers I've built, but I'm sure you'd say they don't exist because they don't agree with what you say.

As I said, I don't care what you say, I don't care if you built 100 overpriced i7 systems.
I cba to argue any more, this is not going anywhere.

[Simca]

Wikipedia junkie? dude if your going to post bull shit like this, don't post at all, you know nothing, I bet your computer is made by Dell, Compaq or some other crappy manufacturer, I don't care what you have to say, it means nothing, that's all I'm trying to prove is that Vista isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

I have seriously lol'd at the number of times you've attacked major computer manufacturers (and other users) without provocation in this topic though.

Yes, built computers > manufactured computers, but it has zero, zilch to do with the topic at hand.

[Kaneiac]

As I said, I don't care what you say, I don't care if you built 100 overpriced i7 systems.
I cba to argue any more, this is not going anywhere.

I'm gonna ask again - why not explain the benchmarks posted by dotSeed? They ARE using Vista SP2, so you can't pull that shit again.

I'm seriously wondering.

[lopus]

is not hating on vista is just that 7 seem to work faster thats it. i personally saw an increase on my wow fps of about 10fps.

[Kaneiac]

is not hating on vista is just that 7 seem to work faster thats it. i personally saw an increase on my wow fps of about 10fps.

Exactly. That's what I'm trying to get at. But Jay is apparently the guru here and that's impossible. Vista was a fine OS for when I had it.

[Dedweight]

Wikipedia junkie? dude if your going to post bull shit like this, don't post at all, you know nothing, I bet your computer is made by Dell, Compaq or some other crappy manufacturer, I don't care what you have to say, it means nothing, that's all I'm trying to prove is that Vista isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

Hard to prove anything if you don't exactly supply any. I run Vista, haven't touched Win7 yet as I find Vista to be sufficient for my needs, but I do understand what it takes to prove something and you're not doing it. If you don't care what we have to say and can't supply significant proof to what then leave the thread. You gave your opinion on what could be his performance bottleneck, that's all the OP really needed.

Just leave the thread and stop arguing about what your experiences and opinions are with Vista vs Win7, it's not doing anyone in this thread any good.

[Cilraaz]

Vista vs 7 means nothing to this thread. Make another if you want to argue about it. Stick to the OP's question or you might end up with a ban.

OP: Your CPU is more likely the bottleneck. WoW has very low video card requirements. Other than CPU, it could be a driver issue or heat issue. You could check your temps with a program like HWMonitor (does both CPU and GPU), GPU-Z (GPU), or Core Temp (CPU) to make sure that they're not too hot. Also, make sure your drivers are up to date. If everything checks out, it just sounds like you're lacking in the CPU horsepower department. The i3 is really a workstation CPU and not meant for higher gaming requirements.

[XxJay247xX]

Exactly. That's what I'm trying to get at. But Jay is apparently the guru here and that's impossible. Vista was a fine OS for when I had it.

I said, I don't want to argue any more, plus "Vista was a fine OS for when I had it" that's what I'm trying to prove that its not a memory hog, but whatever I suck at proving stuff as it seems.