What's your windows experience index?

[Timmah!]

I wonder, how the f gets the 980x/990x 7,8 only? Why not 7,9? You cant have better CPU than that?

Anyway my WEI is overall 7,8 for:

CPU: i7 980x @ 3,78......................... 7,8
RAM: 12GB 1333 ............................. 7,8
Graphics and Gaming: Nvidia gtx590..... 7,9
HDD: Intel G2 80GB SSD as system.......7,8

 

[khon]

I wonder, how the f gets the 980x/990x 7,8 only? Why not 7,9? You cant have better CPU than that?

You could overclock it to more than 3.78GHz

 

[alkemyst]

You could overclock it to more than 3.78GHz

and should have bought the 990x to get that CPUID in place.

 

[Timmah!]

You could overclock it to more than 3.78GHz

Quoting the words of Carol Beer, the Hospital Receptionist from Little Britain USA: I couuuuuld, but....

Seriously i do not need it anymore, as i moved from CPU based rendering to CUDA based stuff.

 

[Timmah!]

and should have bought the 990x to get that CPUID in place.

Nah, 990x is too late to the party. If i was buying the computer now, i would either get 2600k and be happy with it, or wait the half year for Sandy Bridge E.

 

[nemesismk2]

Windows 8 will be out before it gets to the desktop. :biggrin:

found that very funny

 

[Farmer]

5.4, HDD limited.

 

[Timmah!]

Just out of curiousity if one more speedbin overclock will improve the CPU WEI index, i overclocked the 980x from 3,78 to 3,91 GHz, it did not help, LOL...
Here is the question for you though... i did all this overclocking only on stock Vcore (set on Normal in BIOS, CPU-z reads 1,184V as before)...CPU passed 5 runs of Intel Burn Test with maximum RAM amount, so i suppose its stable... i wonder is this normal for 980x to be able to overclock from 3,33 to 3,91 on stock vcore? Does this signal i have a good chip for overclocking, when the "limit" at which CPU needs to have vcore bumped to be stable, comes at higher frequencies? Or is this completely non-linear, meaning i could (just hypothetically) have it stable on stock even at 4,2 GHz, but it would not be stable at 4,3GHz, no matter how much i bump the voltage?
EDIT: To clear it up a little, i do not care, if my chip might be a benchers wet dream, capable of doing 7GHz under LN2, i would rather like to know, if its stock vcore oveclockability to almost 4GHz inidicates, it might be able to run lets say at 4,5GHz under less voltage compared to other 980x, which needs more juice to be stable at lower frequencies?

As i said, I do not plan to overclock it more, but this kind of interests me. Sorry for going slightly offtopic.

 

[alkemyst]

You will find all your answers in tons of topics on this. In general, no chip is 'supposed' to overclock, but many will hit a certain percentage almost all the time. Like the 300A Celeron able to hit 450 almost always...some still couldn't do it.

With voltage (and cooling that goes with it) sometimes a chip just will not be stable beyond a certain speed no matter how much volts. Hyper-cooling though usually allows more headroom, not everyone wants to play with liquid nitrogen though.

 

[prtuc2]

Q9650 @4.05GHZ
GTX 260
Mushkin Ascent @900MHZ
Intel 320 SSD 80GB

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Bizarre. Why does your 260 get 7.3, but my 4870 gets 6.6?

 

[stahlhart]

Am I being held back more by lack of hyperthreading or by 1333 RAM? Or number of cores?

 

[Majic 7]

Weird that my SSD is the weakest link.
7.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.7

 

[tweakboy]

Its lame and means nothing. Microsoft gives your score based on the lowest score.. stupid... So you can be 7.7 but if your hard drive says 5.9 , that is your score, sighs

 

[mv2devnull]

It is a crude measure and nothing more. Using minimum is not stupid; its a simple weakest link approach. Sure, weighted average would "look better", but since there is no right way to set the weights, then why bother?


I wonder what is the fastest graphics card that gets "1.0"? Every card without drivers?

 

[IndianScout]

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Weird that my SSD is the weakest link.
7.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.7

not surprised, its only a second generation SSD and far from the fastest relative to SandForce or Micron, in fact I'm a bit surprised its that high, although maybe not too surprised as I'm sure Intel made sure Microsoft would score it high

I'm also surprised your memory is that high considering my triple channel CAS9 DDR 1600 only scores a 7.8 but you somehow achieved 7.9 with dual channel CAS9 DDR 1066

of course maybe that's just yet another WEI shortcut giving SandyBridge memory controller a 7.9 default memory score, I'll have to check my own 2600K rig WEI scores when I get home.

Bizarre. Why does your 260 get 7.3, but my 4870 gets 6.6?

I've heard nVidia cards get a boost from PhysX support, lame but whatever

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I wonder, how the f gets the 980x/990x 7,8 only? Why not 7,9? You cant have better CPU than that?

Anyway my WEI is overall 7,8 for:

CPU: i7 980x @ 3,78......................... 7,8
RAM: 12GB 1333 ............................. 7,8
Graphics and Gaming: Nvidia gtx590..... 7,9
HDD: Intel G2 80GB SSD as system.......7,8

yes you can get better processing power, there are CPUs with more than 6 cores and there are also multi CPU rigs. IIRC the WEI requires at least 8 real cores (Hyper threading doesn't count) to achieve 7.9 for CPU score

 

[Majic 7]

Actually when the SSD was new it got 7.8. What I was really surprised at was how quickly other components leap-frogged it. When I installed W7 in Oct. 09 the SSD was the highest rated component I had. E8500 and DDR@ 1066 ram with a 4870X2. Don't care what the WEI rating is really but I think they need to add "a but this goes all the way up to 11" button.

 

[swing848]

7.6
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9

Faster overclock yields more on the CPU, however, 4GHz at 1.1v on all 4 cores provides all I need for now. i5 3750K

 

[ther00kie16]

shouldn't there be a windows 8 thread? the # to shoot for is 9.9

 

[Rhoxed]

7.6
7.7
7.3
7.3
7.9

 

[Arkaign]

7.8 for CPU, 7.9 for everything else. WEI is dumb though

 

[NTMBK]

It's over 9000

 

[mikeymikec]

PC spec:

AMD Phenom II X4 960T (3.0GHz with 3.4GHz turbo mode) with two unlockable cores to make it an X6 (currently locked)
ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3
Kingston 4GB (2x2GB) HyperX DDR3-1600
Gigabyte Radeon HD 5770 1GB
Seagate 500GB 7200.12 SATA
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit SP1

Scores:
7.5
7.5
7.4
7.4
5.9

I'm sure that at least the memory score isn't so much calculated by a benchmark but rather a case of "4GB adds this much to the score, 1333 adds another, 1600 adds another" and goes up like that. When I mess around with RAM speeds and quantities, the score jumps up/down in very odd ways, which don't in any way reflect their effect on how Windows 7 runs.

I only use WEI to spot an obvious problem, like an absurdly low graphics score (1 or 2) being a driver problem or a seriously crap graphics chip.