Windows 7 Build 695x revealed at WinHEC 2008 China


Recommended Posts

Hmm... nice looking screenshots. I would have loved to watch a stream of that keynote though, is it available on demand yet?

An on-demand webcast of the opening keynote is available here: http://focus.it168.com/200810/WinHEC/index.html

well i got 4GB of of performance rams and i cant seems to break 5.5 yet

overclocked by any chance ?

i get 6.7 with Q6600 @ 3 Ghz

it is the former , as far as i know

i do take what he say over outsiders source since he is affiliated/working for MS

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

The base scores currently range from 1 to 5.9. The Windows Experience Index is designed to accommodate advances in computer technology. As hardware speed and performance improves, higher base scores will be introduced. However, the standards for each level of the index stay the same. For example, a computer scored as a 2.8 will remain a 2.8 unless you decide to upgrade the computer's hardware.

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

Performance rating is bull****. Again they can't do simple thing right. Performance rating should be measured on scale from 1 to 10.

yea right , you are better of doing there jobs :rolleyes:

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

It takes time to build a 7.9 machine

Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So a Q6600 in 2006 should be a 9 or something. A 8800 GTX should be a 10 in 2006.

What happens now that more powerful CPUs and GPUs have taken their place? Should they have their scores bumped down? The help files for the WEI state:

What you're suggesting will cause confusion amongst customers who go "HEY, but my system was a 9.0 base system when I got it! Why is it all the way at 5 now?"

They anticipate this WEI indexing system will last us for Vista and 7... so end of 2006's best of the best was capped at 5.9, and possibly the best of the best at Windows 7's RTM is at 7.9 or higher.

I'm glad you bring this up which prooves that rating system in Vista is pointless, stupidest idea MS could came up with. I have nothing against benchmarking but they should presented in a way 3DMark Vantage does it. Better hardware higher score, slower hardware lower score and so there is no limit of what your upper score can be. Use that number to measure how fast your hardware is but do not measure your hardware against OS which runs on it. MS should set minimum requirements and if they are not met simply refuse installation, so you send clear message to some idiot who wants to run Vista on 1Gb for example, aint gonna happen buddy cause your machine sucks.

What you said is actually happening sort other way around. My graphic system gets score 5.9 but also 8800GT gets 5.9. Now average Joe goes, Crysis runs on my card really slow and i have same score like Mr. Me with SLI GTX280. It's all because MS way of thinking is so ****ed up...as i said it goes beyond comedy. I have feeling that good idea from somebody there shows up and then upper management ****s it up for who knows what reason.

Solution:

Remove Performance Scoring. Your hardware is either capable of running Vista or not. There is no gray area. Keep benchmarking tool in Vista, extended it and show visually tests to customer. Do scoring as 3DMark Vantage does. Faster hardware gets better score, slower hardware lower score. No upper limit. Average Joe goes, oh my card scores let's say 14 but Mr. Me graphic card scores 25. Average Joe goes, that makes sense...that's why he runs Crysis much faster.

Edited by jjrambo
Exactly, the way they do the WEI is the right way, your scores won't change now unless you get newer hardware. Your current score won't get dropped or change much when they raise the cap from 5.9 to 7.9, which is the smart thing about it.

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

So GTX280 scores let's say 7.9 but also GTX380. What the hell is smart there about? In short what i said above, if they really want to keep performance rating and scoring they have now, remove uppper limit. Faster hardware higher score, is that hard to grasp?

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

GTX380 wha? When did we get to the 380? Everyone understands a simple point system, 1-10 or 1-5 or w/e. Tossing out a fancy number like 3Dmark does it really doesn't register with everyone. If you just toss out a single score like that, then what? Or are you willing to break it down further and offer scores for every piece of the system like WEI does already?

And again, wtf, I mean WTF!!! Does the WEI have to do with Games? It's the WINDOWS experience Index, It's a score for how your system runs WINDOWS, it's got zero to do with overall game performance. If the top end last gen card scores a 5.9 and the newest card also does a 5.9 that just shows that both are at the top end when it comes to windows performance. It's not the damn Games Experience Index. Games have their own base requirement for running listed on their respected websites OR on the damn retail box. So people should READ those before they moan that some game doesn't run as good even if you have the same WEI as the next guy.

Now you're contradicting whole story about Windows 7. It means Windows 7 should have scoring from 1 to 3.9 since it's gonna run better on the same hardware running Vista, right?

Open Games Explorer and look at right pane bottom screen for each game you click.

I just took some random name like GTX380 referencing future Nvidia video card which will be faster then GTX200 series.

Score should not have upper limit. How stupid is your argument and MS idea is example of having now scale from 1 to 7.9 so quad 2.6Ghz shows 7.2 so i guess for Windows 7 that CPU is not enough to actually score 7.9, which means it seems that have even higher requirements then Windows Vista.

Seriously your argumentation is EPIC FAILURE.

Whoa, calm down and check your facts. WEI was created to help get away from those cryptic game requirements on boxes. Take a look in games explorer - you'll see that the base and recommend WEI for running the games are listed there. The intent was to have those scores on game boxes as well so customers can easily see if their computer can handle it.

jjrambo - you're blowing this issue way out of hand. The score never goes down for a given piece of hardware, but it can be bumped up by simply updating the WEI system to account for higher numbers. This can happen in new versions of WIndows or through a Windows Update. It's not a big deal that its hard limited, and if anything, is advantageous to the customer as it keeps the WIndows team from artificially inflating perceived performance of a component.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Exactly. Performance rating score is confusing customers about their hardware ability to run games. In my book 8800GT can't have score 5.9 and GTX280 SLI setup as well so when you cross reference that with WEI it seems that Crysis can run on both equally good which is far from truth.

I have no single problem with benchmark MS uses or logic behind getting those numbers as long as they remove upper limit cap. Faster hardware gets higher number, slower hardware lower number. Very simple.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

+1 as well

Crysis has a recommended rating of 5.0, that means that if you have WEI of above 5.0 you have the recommended requirements to play the game. The score does not tell you at what settings you'll be able to play the game and the tool was not made to compare how 2 different machines would play a certain game. So who cares if you have a score of 5.3, 8.9 or 36 billion.

If it's above 5.0, then you're set to play this game. It's a SIMPLE benchmark tool for people who don't know anything about hardware.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

Being able to play a game and playing a game at 2560x1600 with 16xAA/16xAF are two different things. Again, this is not targeted to hardcore gamers with self-built PCs, quad-SLI and Core i7s.

No. Again, that's not their target.

But since you're just another person who will criticize any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

I know it's not their target, i'm saying they are doing it wrong, absolutely wrong.

I don't criticize any **** MS is serving me. I will give you an example. Backup feature in Vista is absolutely perfect solution and as I can see they are adding option to save your Image to some location on network which was missing in Vista i talked about after first day of Vista release. I found myself in situation where i didn't have any media to save my image but network location. As I said Backup Feature is brilliant but it seems nobody talks about it here. Another brilliant feature in Vista? Ability to resize partitions through disk management in real time? It's something i was waiting for since Windows 2000 is released. Again, nobody ever said anything good about it. It seems that majority of people on this forum actually saying that some things are great but actually they are utter crap or really bad or just bad.

And since 8800GT gets 5.9 and actually barely runs that game in acceptable frames, so what is card with rating 5.0...tell you this -> absolute garbage which can't even run the game. Again you don't see point i want to make 8800GT and GTX280 can't have same score of 5.9 meaning benchmark or performance scoring in Vista is absolutely wrong and if you use it as crossrefence with Game Rating -> it's absolute wrong picture.

As I said Performance Rating should be used to measure performance of your hardware not against OS because that hardware as such is already Vista Capable, but to measure real time performance against benchmark apps/games as 3DMark Vantage does it then you can see that 8800GT is crap compared to GTX280 and as crossreference of such result people can get real picture of what they can expect in games such as Crysis.

But since you're just another person who will eat any **** MS is serving you...there is no point to discuss anymore.

As you seem to have completely missed the point yet again as you did with WARP10, allow me to spell it out for you.

The WEI is a simple benchmark tool to give users a basic indication of the performance of their PC, it's in no way intended to replace or even compete with a tool such as 3DMark.

Each release of 3DMark returns a lesser score on the same hardware, this is fine for powerusers, overclockers and etc, however it is NOT good for the generic joe bloggs.

I'm talking about almost minimum settings here.

Dude I can run Crysis with fine framerates on my 8600GTS @ 1280x1024, and my pc has a rating of 5.2 (medium settings). The ratings are quite good.

jjrambo, the scores are intended as a rough guide for how powerful your PC is. If Crysis' rating was incorrect, take it up with the people who rated it.

The system itself is fine, and makes perfect sense (as long as the ratings are worked out in a sensible fashion).

The idea is for it to be reasonably future proof - the ratings don't change as time passes. However, the upper bounds for the ratings increase. Hopefully the updated stats get backported to Vista (I don't see any reason why it wouldn't).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Ignoring the fact that this "colony" kicked the empire of King George's arse during those early years... You are confusing the First Industrial Revolution (which was clearly pulled out of some butt-hurt Brit historian's arse after the fact) with the Second Industrial Revolution (aka now called the Technological Revolution, undoubtedly by that same butt-hurt Brit), which transitioned the world from the UK/UPS Empire to the USA as the world's only superpower. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution I hope you realize that I am having big fun here.
    • OpenAI announces GPT‑5.6 Sol, its next-generation flagship model beating Claude Mythos 5 by Pradeep Viswanathan Credit: OpenAI OpenAI today announced a limited preview of its new GPT-5.6 model series, which includes the Sol, Terra, and Luna models targeting different price points. GPT-5.6 Sol is the flagship model targeted at demanding reasoning and agentic workloads. GPT-5.6 Terra is positioned as a balanced model for everyday work, featuring performance competitive with GPT-5.5 while being half the cost. GPT-5.6 Luna is the fastest and most affordable model, delivering strong capability at a lower price point. Unlike previous model releases from OpenAI, GPT-5.6 is starting with a limited preview for a small group of trusted partners due to U.S. government restrictions. As expected, OpenAI previewed its plans and the models' capabilities to the U.S. government ahead of launch, and the government asked OpenAI to limit the first wave of access to select partners. OpenAI also mentioned in the official announcement blog post that it does not believe this type of government access process should become the long-term default. OpenAI highlighted that GPT-5.6 Sol comes with a robust safety stack featuring improved protections for higher-risk activity, sensitive cyber requests, and repeated misuse. The company also spent several weeks pressure-testing the system and hardening it against real-world attacks. On the capability side, as expected, GPT-5.6 Sol is OpenAI’s strongest model yet. It delivers better results in agentic performance across coding, biology, and cybersecurity. On the Terminal-Bench 2.1 benchmark, which tests command-line workflows requiring planning, iteration, and tool coordination, GPT-5.6 Sol sets a new record with a score of 91.9%, beating Anthropic's Claude Mythos 5. Additionally, GPT-5.6 introduces a new "max" reasoning effort for even deeper reasoning. The new "ultra" mode uses subagents to accelerate complex work beyond what a single agent can handle. Pricing starts at $5 per million input tokens and $30 per million output tokens for Sol. Terra costs $2.50 for input and $15 for output, while Luna costs $1 for input and $6 for output. GPT-5.6 comes with more predictable prompt caching, including support for explicit cache breakpoints and a 30-minute minimum cache life. Sol will also launch on Cerebras in July at speeds up to 750 tokens per second for select customers. OpenAI plans to make GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna broadly available in ChatGPT, Codex, and the API in the coming weeks.
    • I'm not sure if you are trolling because I saw people saying this with the straight face, but there were no United States of America when industrial revolution started, just United Colonies 🤣 p.s. I'm not British, so I'm not offended.
    • Glad I uninstalled this incredibly buggy browser. Looking at that changelog, they clearly don't test their updates at all.
    • UniGetUI 2026.2.2 by Razvan Serea UniGetUI is an application whose main goal is to create an intuitive GUI for the most common CLI package managers for Windows 10 and Windows 11, such as Winget, Scoop and Chocolatey. With UniGetUI, you'll be able to download, install, update and uninstall any software that's published on the supported package managers — and so much more. UniGetUI features Install, update and remove software from your system easily at one click: UniGetUI combines the packages from the most used package managers for windows: WinGet, Chocolatey, Scoop, Pip, Npm and .NET Tool. Discover new packages and filter them to easily find the package you want. View detailed metadata about any package before installing it. Get the direct download URL or the name of the publisher, as well as the size of the download. Easily bulk-install, update or uninstall multiple packages at once selecting multiple packages before performing an operation Automatically update packages, or be notified when updates become available. Skip versions or completely ignore updates in a per-package basis. Manage your available updates at the touch of a button from the Widgets pane or from Dev Home pane with UniGetUI Widgets. The system tray icon will also show the available updates and installed package, to efficiently update a program or remove a package from your system. Easily customize how and where packages are installed. Select different installation options and switches for each package. Install an older version or force to install a 32bit architecture. [But don't worry, those options will be saved for future updates for this package] Share packages with your friends to show them off that program you found. Here is an example: Hey @friend, Check out this program! Export custom lists of packages to then import them to another machine and install those packages with previously-specified, custom installation parameters. Setting up machines or configuring a specific software setup has never been easier. Backup your packages to a local file to easily recover your setup in a matter of seconds when migrating to a new machine Devolutions UniGetUI 2026.2.2 changelog: This release marks the completion of UniGetUI's migration from WinUI to Avalonia. With the remaining WinUI components and dependencies now removed, UniGetUI is fully powered by Avalonia. This update also brings Windows 11 Snap Layouts support, refined styling throughout the application, improved log viewing, new illustrations, and significantly smaller release packages. Highlights Further refined the Avalonia user interface to better match WinUI styling and behavior across package lists, navigation elements, dialogs, and controls. Added support for Windows 11 Snap Layouts when hovering the maximize button, matching the behavior of native Windows applications. Added illustrations for empty and loading package list states, improving visual feedback throughout the application. Improved the operation log window so automatic scrolling no longer interrupts users when reviewing previous log entries. Reduced installer and application package sizes, resulting in smaller downloads and a significantly leaner Windows distribution. User Interface Improvements Improved package list styling, column headers, backgrounds, hover states, and selection indicators for a more polished and consistent experience. Refined sidebar navigation and segmented controls to better align with modern Windows design patterns. Improved package tag badges and icon presentation throughout the application. Updated several labels, placeholders, and interface elements for improved clarity and consistency. Removed the remaining WinUI-specific styling dependencies, further consolidating the application around Avalonia. Windows Improvements Added native Windows 11 Snap Layouts integration for the maximize button. Improved maximize button hover and pressed visual states to more closely match native Windows behavior. Performance & Reliability Reduced the size of Windows release packages by removing unnecessary runtime dependencies and optimizing published builds. Reduced installer size through improved compression settings. Simplified application dependencies and reduced overall maintenance complexity. Fixes Fixed log output auto-scrolling behavior when manually reviewing previous entries. Resolved various UI inconsistencies and styling issues across the Avalonia interface. Addressed several minor issues and edge cases throughout the application. Other Changes Dependency cleanup and project maintenance. Internal code refactoring and infrastructure improvements. Additional test coverage and build pipeline optimizations. Download: UniGetUI 64-bit | Portable | ~90.0 MB (Open Source) Download: UniGetUI ARM64 | Portable Links: UniGetUI Home Page | GitHub | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      441
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      197
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      154
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      71
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!