Windows Experience Index

Hi

I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.

I have added another 2Gb.
As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.

Shouldn't it have gone up?

possibly you did not put in the same speed of memory as you had and the over all speed has been reduced accordingly.








"Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message news:...
Hi

I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.

I have added another 2Gb.
As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.

Shouldn't it have gone up?

"Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi
>
> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>
> I have added another 2Gb.
> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>
> Shouldn't it have gone up?


There's a lot of theories as to why this is. What it seems to come to is
many motherboards and some CPUs don't perform as well if you fill all four
DIMM slots. See the following thread for most of the theories on why this
happens.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/24...channel-memory

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/

No. The memory score is based on memory throughput, rather than the amount.
However, you will gain more from adding the memory than the actual
throughput on most things.


--

Dustin Harper

http://www.vistarip.com | Vista Resource & Information Page


"Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi
>
> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>
> I have added another 2Gb.
> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>
> Shouldn't it have gone up?

If the memory you added is not "exactly" the same speed it will add
LATENCY even if it was faster memory. If indeed the memory is
FASTER add it 1st and if slower put it in last.

Latency can also occur do you MB design. Even though the rating
is slightly slower you should still see an increase in system performance
particularly when you run many programs or a few memory hogging
ones.

"Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi
>
> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>
> I have added another 2Gb.
> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>
> Shouldn't it have gone up?

You might find this discussion of WEI helpful to understanding what the
numbers mean:

http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/wi...es/458117.aspx

--
-Chuck Walbourn
SDE, XNA Developer Connection

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warrenties, and confers no rights.

"Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi
>
> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>
> I have added another 2Gb.
> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>
> Shouldn't it have gone up?


The WEI will be the number of the worst device on your system. It won't
give you any credit at all for all the good stuff. Mine is down because I
only have a few hundred GB of disk space, not a quadzillion. Everything
else is 5.9, but the disk brings it to 5.2.

"John" <> wrote in message
news:Ir-...
> "Uncle Nobby" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hi
>>
>> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
>> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>>
>> I have added another 2Gb.
>> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
>> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>>
>> Shouldn't it have gone up?
>
>
> The WEI will be the number of the worst device on your system. It won't
> give you any credit at all for all the good stuff. Mine is down because I
> only have a few hundred GB of disk space, not a quadzillion. Everything
> else is 5.9, but the disk brings it to 5.2.
>
>

The disk measurement is a measurement of throughput not free space. The WEI
is not about creating a number to brag about but to point out where the
bottleneck is so you will have an idea on what would be the best upgrade to
a system.

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/

please tell me you are not using a phenom cpu, if you are, then throw it
away. biggest mistake amd ever made. i have bben and amd supporter all my
life but this phenom is rubbish. otherwise let me know what cpu you are
running and wether all 4 modules are identical

"Uncle Nobby" wrote:

> Hi
>
> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>
> I have added another 2Gb.
> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my windows
> experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>
> Shouldn't it have gone up?
>
>

=?Utf-8?B?bW9vc2U=?= <> wrote in
news:07C84B5B-1AC7-4675-A061-:

> please tell me you are not using a phenom cpu, if you are, then throw
> it away. biggest mistake amd ever made. i have bben and amd supporter
> all my life but this phenom is rubbish. otherwise let me know what cpu
> you are running and wether all 4 modules are identical
>
> "Uncle Nobby" wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I have windows Vista which had 2Gb of memory.
>> The index was 5.2, that was the memory score.
>>
>> I have added another 2Gb.
>> As its a 32bit OS only 3.5 GB is detected, but when I updated my
>> windows experience the score went down for 5.2 to 5.
>>
>> Shouldn't it have gone up?

The experience has to do with your system as a whole, anything else
change recently on your system? Honestly I'd take that score with a
grain of salt, use some other benchmarking program like 3Dmark06, that
should give you a slightly more accurate score of your system
performance.

Also the difference between 2 gigs ram and 3.5 gigs is going to be
minimal, if anything. The difference between 1 gig and 2 gigs is huge,
but from 2gigs to 4 gigs, not so much. In other words, toss em an invest
the $60 into something else.


--
-A.