Seventh Son Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 The WinSAT/WEI stuff is useless, I really can't comprehend why people even bother running it anymore. Case in point:I have two 80GB Velociraptors in RAID 0 and I get the performance you can see in the attached image. Windows 7 x64 7057 (and the other builds too, actually, x86 and x64 both) basically put on the brakes and tell me the hard drive score is 5.9 which is absolutely absurd. These are the fastest hard drives you can buy aside from 15K rpm SCSI or Fiber Channel hardware, and even though they're not SSDs, they are - when tied together - most certainly well above that 5.9 rating. So again, as it always has been, the WinSAT/WEI is useless as a performance comparison - it was never meant to be a benchmarking tool anyway, but a way for an owner to have a simplified method of knowing if a given piece of entertainment software would run "adequately" on a given machine based on that score. 5.9... yeah, right... under Vista maybe since it can't go higher... but Windows 7... I don't see why they come up with these stupid arbitrary ratings anyway. 1 to 5.9? What is this, an OS or a figure skating competition? And 1 to 7.9? Use something everyone on the planet understands: 1 to 10, period, done, kaput, finito, end of story. Bleh. Has it occurred to you that there are other parameters besides raw read/write speed? Like access time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fix-this! Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 whoohoo.... 1 hour to go and ill have it downloaded! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luis Mazza Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Has anyone found the bugs listed below? 1. Sometimes pasting files (cut) to a folder does not update them visually. You have to refresh the window to see them. 2. The wallpaper slideshow acts pretty weird with lots of files. I have over 300 files and sometimes the slideshow stops working and sticks with one image as Unsaved theme. This problem is around since build 7000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonicHawk Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Anyone else encounter this? Pretty cool bug :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastage Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Has anyone found the bugs listed below?1. Sometimes pasting files (cut) to a folder does not update them visually. You have to refresh the window to see them. 2. The wallpaper slideshow acts pretty weird with lots of files. I have over 300 files and sometimes the slideshow stops working and sticks with one image as Unsaved theme. This problem is around since build 7000. Bug number 2 only appeared with 7048 with me and it still here with 7057. I did upgrade from clean 7000 to 7048 to 7057 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luciano R Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Did not like the version 7057 x64, I found very slow, I'm going back to 7000 or 7048 version, which of the two has better performance? Do you have a visible problem in version 7000? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matw01 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 i dont know about anyone else but this build seams slighter slower at logging in and it also uses more ram than 7000 or 7048... typing this i have ie,avg and utorrent running and its using 1.33GB which seams excessive, anyone having a similar experience. also in other builds if i pinned recyling bin to the superbar it appeared in the windows explorer icon jumplist which it still does, but now i can't empty it from its right click menu, anyone know how to fix this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dujun Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Anyone else encounter this? Pretty cool bug :p Yep, I was just about to post it actually :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belazor Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 @Belazor I'm not having having any delay in opening programs. Did you do an upgrade from 7048 to 7057, or a fresh install? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGHammer Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 yep! And now, with 7057 x64, I've a very looooong boot time.Build 7000 and 7048 boot in about 40 seconds...7057 boot in more than 1 minute. Besides I've same bug as x86 7057 in taskmanager.... :( A one minute boot time in 7057 x64? Sounds like there are some serious issues somewhere (considering that I have but a single gigabyte of RAM, and the same build, and I don't have a one-minute trip to the desktop (from a cold start), and that's even with McAfee 2009 beta and Yahoo Messenger 9). What do you have starting with 7057? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuttle Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 A one minute boot time in 7057 x64? Sounds like there are some serious issues somewhere (considering that I have but a single gigabyte of RAM, and the same build, and I don't have a one-minute trip to the desktop (from a cold start), and that's even with McAfee 2009 beta and Yahoo Messenger 9).What do you have starting with 7057? I never had a boot time like this. Never in XP x64 or vista x64. I'm running a 7057 fresh install on a quad core with 8GB of RAM. More than 1 minute to logon screen. The system seems to freeze for about 40 seconds on black screen with MS logo. During this time I've no disk activities. After this the system boot up in other 30 seconds. No antivirus at startup. Besides this problem I've a general drop in performance. So I really think this build introduces more issues than improvements. Ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Observer Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 wasnt happy with the lastest build 7057. Found it really slow, took about 45mins to install and when booting up about another 1min, still this sit still on the loading windows part. then when i got into windows, everything took forever to load. also had the bug to do with "write caching" could not turn it on. went back to 7022.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windows7even Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 wasnt happy with the lastest build 7057. Found it really slow, took about 45mins to install and when booting up about another 1min, still this sit still on the loading windows part. then when i got into windows, everything took forever to load. also had the bug to do with "write caching" could not turn it on. went back to 7022.... you should try 7048 how long does it take for them to compile these builds? i am guessing they use a server cluster to speed things up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wguimb Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 They usually compile a new build each business day. Slow boot time can indicate that the OS is waiting on hardware and most likely it eventually times out. Check the Event Log for errors or warnings. Get the latest 64bit drivers for your motherboard and other devices. Unplug any external hardware when booting to see if you can isolate the issue. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuttle Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 They usually compile a new build each business day. Slow boot time can indicate that the OS is waiting on hardware and most likely it eventually times out. Check the Event Log for errors or warnings. Get the latest 64bit drivers for your motherboard and other devices. Unplug any external hardware when booting to see if you can isolate the issue. Just my 2 cents. the hardware in this PC is really standard. Q6600 on P5k. Nothing special. No extra hardware. No external devices. In the event log I've no errors (in diagnose Performance). Never had any kind of problem with build 7000, 7022 and 7048. I think this build have something wrong. The boot time is not the only problem I have with this build.... ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Tyranade Subscriber² Posted March 15, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted March 15, 2009 Did you do an upgrade from 7048 to 7057, or a fresh install? Fresh Install allways with beta OS's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharpGreen Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 It seems that I to, am having the perf issues with this build. Running a Quad core with 6GB of memory. Previously ran 7048 just fine :| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belazor Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Fresh Install allways with beta OS's. I see. Must be something that buggered with the upgrade, then. 7000 -> 7022 -> 7048 was fine... Now I have to decide whether it's worth doing a reinstall for a build that has so many people buggered about various issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fix-this! Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 this build installed for me in 20 minutes, it's pretty fast but there are alot of bugs to be worked out yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPressland Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Well, for me, 7057 has been a royale pain compared to 7048. But I put that down to it being an upgrade install. Going to do a clean install tomorrow. Just a heads up, when I done a clean install from Vista to 7 I ended up having to delete my vista partition because of the 200MB recovery partition it makes. I wont have the same issue with a clean install of 7 to 7 will I? I'd rather not format and just end up with a Windows.old directory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fix-this! Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 im going to skip all other leaks and just wait for the official RC build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiak Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 didnt you guys get the "memo" that reads "fresh install DO NOT UPGRADE on Windows beta" ? allways do a fresh install, the upgrade option is made for older versions of windows not 7* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPressland Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 Well, the exact same disc I've used to do three clean installs with today, will not run on my Main Rig... how odd. Because it wants to format the drive, when I get the message about moving windows to a Windows.old folder it just errors.. How odd. didnt you guys get the "memo" that reads "fresh install DO NOT UPGRADE on Windows beta" ?allways do a fresh install, the upgrade option is made for older versions of windows not 7* Erm, because doing a clean install every two weeks for a BETA OS is pointless. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fix-this! Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 this build installed for me in 20 minutes, it's pretty fast but there are alot of bugs to be worked out yet. i always do a fresh install, i never upgrade any os. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ba'al Posted March 15, 2009 Share Posted March 15, 2009 yep! And now, with 7057 x64, I've a very looooong boot time.Build 7000 and 7048 boot in about 40 seconds...7057 boot in more than 1 minute. 7057 x64 boots just fine here :cool: WinSat is still acting up, however :blink: Aero Graphics plummeted from 7.9 (7000 and 7048) to 5.9 :x Gaming Graphics is almost back to nomal with 6.8 (was 6.9 in 7000 and 6.0 in 7048). Memory is now a little better with 7.0. HD is unchanged at 5.9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts