V
Void
Guest
I tested a Core 2 system today, using the same Video card, Drive and the
default settings on the motherboard. Yes, I know that the chipset and
motherboard are different, but it's still interesting:
All previous tests, same video card, same hard drive, 2gb to 4gb RAM,
default install of Vista Business.... Video score of 1.0 in both
categories.
On the Intel D945PLRN board, Core 2 - 2.4Ghz (not a Core 2 Duo), 2GB
RAM, same video card, same drive, default install, it gets a 3.0 and 3.6
score for video.
The difference is not expected - the Dual CPU Xeon 3.2ghz machine should
have performed much faster, being a server class motherboard, same video
card, same harddrive....
So, it seems that MS has indeed determined that people running less than
a Core 2 CPU will suffer performance problems.
--
Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
default settings on the motherboard. Yes, I know that the chipset and
motherboard are different, but it's still interesting:
All previous tests, same video card, same hard drive, 2gb to 4gb RAM,
default install of Vista Business.... Video score of 1.0 in both
categories.
On the Intel D945PLRN board, Core 2 - 2.4Ghz (not a Core 2 Duo), 2GB
RAM, same video card, same drive, default install, it gets a 3.0 and 3.6
score for video.
The difference is not expected - the Dual CPU Xeon 3.2ghz machine should
have performed much faster, being a server class motherboard, same video
card, same harddrive....
So, it seems that MS has indeed determined that people running less than
a Core 2 CPU will suffer performance problems.
--
Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)