Two computers, two different vista experiances

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by Ashton Crusher, Dec 20, 2007.

  1. I put Vista Ultimate on a computer that started with a very barebones
    XP installation. It worked but never seemed right and never had the
    speed it should have had for the hardware. It got a 5 on the Vista
    Performance test in all categories. Yet the interface still seemed
    slow. That computer used an Intel E6300 runing a little under 2 GHz
    and had a 256K ATI PCIe Video with 1900GT chipset.

    I bought an HP Pavilion (too good a price to pass up with the included
    24" monitor, which is fabulous) that runs an Intel Core Duo of 2.33
    GHz. It has a nVida PCIe with 256 but not as powerful as the other
    computers ATI board. This computer gets a 5 rating on all but the
    video which is about 3.5 on the "windows vista experience" scale.

    Yet the new computer interface run rings around the old one and the
    whole system seems much better.

    Point being, Vista CAN work quite well as it's doing on my second
    machine.

    One thing I did notice is that on both machines, the sleep function
    worked flawlessly UNTIL the first batch of "updates" was installed and
    after that the sleep never worked right on either of them. Something
    in one of the windows updates is breaking the sleep function.
     
    Ashton Crusher, Dec 20, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. For the first computer...
    If windows Vista was an upgrade, try a Clean installation.
    Also make sure all your hardware and software is compatible with
    Windows Vista.
    Get the latest Windows Vista drivers for the hardware.

    If anything is not Windows Vista compatible, remove it before
    installing Windows Vista.
     
    Jupiter Jones [MVP], Dec 20, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ashton Crusher

    philo Guest


    Good advice...

    I am also curious if the reason the 2nd machine runs better is due to the
    dual core CPU.
     
    philo, Dec 20, 2007
    #3
  4. Ashton Crusher

    Ian D Guest

    The E6300 CPU on the first machine is a 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo. I
    think that CPU has only 2 MB of L2 cache, and although the OP
    didn't identify the second CPU by part number, it probably has
    4 MB of L2. The OP could overclock the E6300 to around 2.3 GHz
    for a better comparison. Incremental speed increases in Core 2
    Duos produce larger performance gains than identical increments
    in P4 or D CPU speeds.
     
    Ian D, Dec 20, 2007
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.