Windows shows low graphics perfofmance score

Hello!
My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
But:
Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
How to improve the performance of the card?
Sincerely.

"Dima" <> wrote in message
news:e1NDJK%...
> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
> graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
> very low,

No. It isn't "very" low. The highest score is 5.9 at the moment, I believe.
"very" low would be "1.0". What you've got is a nice card as far as it goes,
but it's a nice "middle of the range" graphics card, and you've got a nice
middle range score for it. A nice Radeon 3870 or even a 3870x2 or whatever
it's called will fix that for you if you _must_ have a high score and you
want to stick with ATI.

> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?

3 things can cause a low score for the graphics card, usually
1. the card is as fast as it's going to get.
2. the drivers are out of date.
3. the drivers are faulty.

Note that for the last two items, this can include anything in the "chain"
of devices that the graphics card needs to communicate with the rest of the
system, you can't have a system work to its full potential if it's built on
sand, kinda like trying to drop a racing-car engine into an old clunker car
you purchased from a scrap dealer.

> How to improve the performance of the card?

1. Update the drivers
2. Make sure they're working properly
3. get a new card
..
What are your expectations from this card? Looking at the scores is all well
and good but if it does what you want then the scores don't matter. If it
doesn't do what you want then the scores _still_ don't matter. So... does
it do what you want?

That score sounds somewhat normal. Drivers will definitely affect the
graphics score, but I don't know anybody really cares what the score says.

If you are getting good real world performance, don't worry about it.

"Dima" <> wrote in message
news:e1NDJK#...
> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
> graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
> very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
> How to improve the performance of the card?
> Sincerely.


Dima,

These are not low scores. Your system will perform very well with these
scores and this particular graphics hardware. Unless you are a serious gamer
expecting to squeeze every available ounce of performance out of your
graphics card, or you are into some serious, complicated graphics intensive
applications you do not need better graphics hardware.

C.B.


--
It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
and unfortunate among us.

It's a maximum of 6.0 so 4.9 isn't low. The XT versions of the HD graphics
cards are faster than the Pro versions.
--
Cari (MS-MVP) Printing & Imaging
www.coribright.com/windows

"Dima" <> wrote in message
news:e1NDJK%...
> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
> graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
> very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
> How to improve the performance of the card?
> Sincerely.

Dima,
That is a fairly good score.
Here's your card rating with respect to the other ATI cards.
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=2
Carlos

"Dima" wrote:

> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
> 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
> that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
> How to improve the performance of the card?
> Sincerely.
>
>

I have the same card, except half the ram as yours. Also my card is AGP, you
don't say if yours is PCI express.
My scores are 0.1 less than what you are reporting.
My processor is my lowest score with 4.1.
You might be able to use Catalyst to alter some settings. On my AGP card I
don't seem to be able to access these settings to change them. Might only be
available to the PCI express versions.


"Dima" <> wrote in message
news:e1NDJK#...
> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
> graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
> very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
> How to improve the performance of the card?
> Sincerely.

I just read an article about over clocking the GPU, at Toms Hardware.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...rd,1916-7.html

I downloaded and used RivaTuner. I mentioned that my graphics card was the
same as yours except mine uses AGP instead of PCI express. So far on an
initial try I have upped my Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero
score from a 4.7 to a 5.9. My Gaming graphics score is still only 4.8.

"Dima" <> wrote in message
news:e1NDJK#...
> Hello!
> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
> But:
> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
> graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
> very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
> How to improve the performance of the card?
> Sincerely.

Thanks Robert Moir for answer!
It does do what I want mostly.
"Robert Moir" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ ×
ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:uYpzit%...
>
> "Dima" <> wrote in message
> news:e1NDJK%...
>> Hello!
>> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
>> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
>> But:
>> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
>> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
>> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
>> which are very low,
>
> No. It isn't "very" low. The highest score is 5.9 at the moment, I
> believe. "very" low would be "1.0". What you've got is a nice card as far
> as it goes, but it's a nice "middle of the range" graphics card, and
> you've got a nice middle range score for it. A nice Radeon 3870 or even a
> 3870x2 or whatever it's called will fix that for you if you _must_ have a
> high score and you want to stick with ATI.
>
>> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
>
> 3 things can cause a low score for the graphics card, usually
> 1. the card is as fast as it's going to get.
> 2. the drivers are out of date.
> 3. the drivers are faulty.
>
> Note that for the last two items, this can include anything in the "chain"
> of devices that the graphics card needs to communicate with the rest of
> the system, you can't have a system work to its full potential if it's
> built on sand, kinda like trying to drop a racing-car engine into an old
> clunker car you purchased from a scrap dealer.
>
>> How to improve the performance of the card?
>
> 1. Update the drivers
> 2. Make sure they're working properly
> 3. get a new card
> .
> What are your expectations from this card? Looking at the scores is all
> well and good but if it does what you want then the scores don't matter.
> If it doesn't do what you want then the scores _still_ don't matter.
> So... does it do what you want?
>

Thanks Spencer!
"Spencer Scott" <Spencer > ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ ×
ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ:
news:E66810CE-2DEC-4AB9-B46F-...
> That score sounds somewhat normal. Drivers will definitely affect the
> graphics score, but I don't know anybody really cares what the score says.
>
> If you are getting good real world performance, don't worry about it.
>