If you've managed to get your hands on the latest copy of the September PC Authority magazine (on sale at your local newsagent), you'll have your own free full version of Windows 7 Release Candidate to install from our cover disc (without maxing-out your download quota).
Many have lauded Windows 7 for feeling much quicker than Vista. From snappy boot times, to judder-free Aero Glass effects, to responsive applications, the new operating system has impressed right from the first pre-beta. But does that feel-good effect translate into measurable performance gains?
How we tested
To deliver the definitive verdict on Windows 7's performance, we've turned to our suite of application benchmarks and tested across Windows XP, Vista, and both the beta and Release Candidate versions of Windows 7. We've also used the same system across all of our tests - a Core i7 920 rig with 3GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon HD 4550 graphics card - to ensure a level playing field.
 |
| As our benchmarks show, gaming performance for Windows 7 does not provide massive gains compared with Vista, though there are other benefits (see link at bottom). |
The raw numbers - compared to Vista and XP
A clean install of the Windows 7 Release Candidate scored 1.54 in our benchmarks, compared to 1.8 from a freshly-installed Vista system, and 2.1 from a fully-updated version of Windows XP - although it's worth bearing in mind that our audio encoding tests aren't directly comparable between XP and the other operating systems on test. It's also worth following Microsoft's advice and using a clean installation of Windows 7 RC rather than an upgrade: our system, when upgraded from Vista to Windows 7, scored a mere 1.3.
On the face of it, our results are a pretty damning indictment of Windows 7's performance. But closer inspection of individual benchmark scores reveal that most of our application tests were virtually as quick in Windows 7 as they were in Vista: the 2D graphics test saw Vista scoring 1.95 and Windows 7 outpacing it with a 1.98, with the encoding benchmark returning a similarly close result.
Further analysis of the scores revealed that the slower Office and multitasking results are caused by an issue between Windows 7 and Microsoft PowerPoint. The root of the problem lies within the new Windows Display Driver Model 1.1. The old model duplicated its memory demands across the GPU and system memory, whereas Windows 7 relies solely on the GPU. This means, according to Microsoft's Engineering Windows 7 blog, that the "CPU now has to read data back from the video memory", rather than having it easily accessible in the system's RAM.
The result is a slower benchmark score in PowerPoint, which, accordingly, drags down the Office and multitasking scores when compared to Vista, which uses WDDM 1. In real-world use, this problem will only be manifested in the occasional slide taking a second longer to render. It's really only those using demanding CAD and modelling software that could, conceivably, see performance suffer.
A final note
Despit the less-than-stellar results in this test, it's well known that Windows 7 does perform admirably on low-powered machines - one of the big achievements Microsoft has made with the new OS. In particular, netbooks users will notice much snappier responsiveness compared with Vista, which we'll cover in an upcoming post.
Next up: Boot times in Windows 7 vs Vista and XP.
Also in our series, Windows 7 the complete guide:
Part 1: good news for gamers?
Also see: The 30 Best Features of Windows 7