Windows XP much lower performance the Win98 on same system

[Anonymous]

We are working on switching some systems from Win98se to XP and have noticed how much slower XP is on even some simple applications we have.
So I have run Performance test 5.0 on the same computer running XP and then Win98.

I am surprise to see many of the CPU ratings like integer math, floating point math, MMX are HALF the value in XP as compared to Win98.

Many of the Graphic 2D ratings are also much lower like GUI.

I also found some cases where XP tested much higher like in the Memory -Allocate small block.

So has anyone else seen this? Is this typical to see the display and CPU to ratings decrease so much in XP?


Thanks
Tom

[David (PassMark)]

I don't think this is normal. For tests like the CPU tests there should be almost no difference between W98 and XP. What CPU do you have? Maybe there is a CPU feature that XP is using that was not available in W98. (Like Dual CPUs or hyper threaded CPUs). Maybe you are on a Laptop that is trying to conserve power by throttling CPU speed.

For some of the graphics tests a difference can be expected becuase of different device drivers and the more intense graphics requirements of the XP user interface.

For the allocate memory test some difference can also be expected becuase this is a task that is performed by the operating system and memory mangement is very different (internally) in XP compared to W98.

-----
David
PassMark

[Anonymous]

RE: Windows XP much lower performance the Win98

Here are the results of the Win98 vs XP testing. This is on an Via C3 400 MHz processor with a Via Twister S3 display chip ( this is a embedded computer module we use.)

Do you think I should look for some settings to tweak in the graphics driver in XP to speed up the display or is this typical and just all I will get?



Test Name Window 98SE results
CPU - Integer Math 16.56
CPU - Floating Point Math 14.39
CPU - MMX 20.25
CPU - SSE/3DNow! 5.26
CPU - Compression 147.51
CPU - Encryption 0.76
CPU - Image Rotation 7.85
CPU - String Sorting 97.93
Graphics 2D - Lines 9.79
Graphics 2D - Rectangles 18.91
Graphics 2D - Shapes 3.67
Graphics 2D - Fonts and Text 0.04
Graphics 2D - GUI 126.18
Graphics 3D - Simple 8.89
Graphics 3D - Medium 20.62
Graphics 3D - Complex 6.14


Test Name Window XP results
CPU - Integer Math 6.76
CPU - Floating Point Math 7.45
CPU - MMX 8.83
CPU - SSE/3DNow! 5.08
CPU - Compression 62.55
CPU - Encryption 0.37
CPU - Image Rotation 5.47
CPU - String Sorting 73.54
Graphics 2D - Lines 21.20
Graphics 2D - Rectangles 15.52
Graphics 2D - Shapes 4.11
Graphics 2D - Fonts and Text 15.44
Graphics 2D - GUI 45.68
Graphics 3D - Simple 7.71
Graphics 3D - Medium 15.36
Graphics 3D - Complex 5.34
2D Graphics Mark 22.96
3D Graphics Mark 9.47
PassMark Rating 4.35

CPU Manufacturer:CentaurHauls
Number of CPU: 1
CPU Type: 686 Gen
CPU Speed: 400.9 MHz
Cache size:Unknown
O/S: Windows XP
Total RAM:125288448 Bytes
Available RAM:67166208 Bytes
Video settings: 800x600x32
Video driver
DESCRIPTION:
S3 Graphics Twister
MANUFACTURER:
S3 Compatible Display Adapter
BIOS:
14.00.11
DATE:
10/04/02
Drive Letter: C
Total Disk Space: 4.0 GBytes
Cluster Size: 4 KBytes
File system:NTFS


I also ran a some test with the FreshDiagnose software. It listed the CPU performance about the same for Win98 vs XP at Whetstone FPU 5 Mwips and DyryStone ALU 624 Mdips. It also listed the XP as slower in some graphic tests

XP Benchmark Result
Random Pixels 133 KPixels/s
Lines 6,666 Lines/s
Circles 4,777 Circles/s
Rectangles 21,791 Rectangles/s
Texts 179,179 Chars/s
FloodFills 500,960 KPixels/s
Draw 2,422 KPixels/s



Win 98 Benchmark Result
Random Pixels 200 KPixels/s
Lines 145,666 Lines/s
Circles 2,678 Circles/s
Rectangles 9,360 Rectangles/s
Texts 131,261 Chars/s
FloodFills 1,856,640 KPixels/s
Draw 7,884 KPixels/s


Thanks for your help
Tom

[David (PassMark)]

First of all let me admit that we haven't tested PerformanceTest on the rather rare VIA C3 CPU. I just read a bit about it. Aparently is uses, "electrical noise on the CPU to generate market-leading quantities of high quality entropy for use in the creation of security keys" and has built in AES. Very cool, but rather off topic

As the main feature of the C3 is low power consumption and low heat output I am guessing that there is somethng extra happening in Windows XP that is lowering the performance of he CPU (maybe to 'better' manage the power comsumption or lower the heat?).

Parts of the C3 are powered down when not in use. From the C3 specifications, "In the normal state, the on-chip arrays, selected datapaths, and the associated control logic are powered down when not in use. In addition, units which are in use attempt to minimize switch-ing of inactive nodes.". Maybe this happens more often in XP?

In short. We really don't know the answer and can't do experiments becuase we don't have a C3 CPU. You might want to ask VIA for their input. One would hope they would have something intelligent to add.

-----
David
PassMark