Performance difference between editions?

Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by rab2, Oct 25, 2009.

  1. rab2

    rab2 MDL Novice

    Jun 24, 2009
    27
    0
    0
    Is there supposed to be any performance difference between editions of windows 7?

    Samsung N110 netbook now ships with Windows 7 Starter (used to come with XP). I upgraded one today with ultimate and the performance is very poor compared with XP.
     
  2. mcbyte

    mcbyte MDL Junior Member

    Jul 26, 2009
    94
    1
    0
    It is obvious that Win7 on a netbook will be slower than XP.... putting Win7 ultimate is even worse.

    as you might know from the editions chart, starter edition has too few features compared to other edition, and will consume less ram and resources, so it might be faster than ultimate...
     
  3. rab2

    rab2 MDL Novice

    Jun 24, 2009
    27
    0
    0
    I was under the impression that Microsoft had put a lot of effort into making Windows 7 work well on netbooks, since Vista couldn't be used on them, and this particular netbook is now shipping with it.

    I can see why less features could equal less RAM (and disk space) but the OS is just horribly slow and not very responsive, which seems more like a CPU issue. Is that something that would really improve by moving down to starter edition?
     
  4. hailstorm

    hailstorm MDL Novice

    Oct 23, 2009
    24
    0
    0
    I dunno, you probably can make Win7 Ultimate run faster with some tweaks here and there, or turn off eye candy.

    Starter Edition is a crippled, watered down edition. If you're running a netbook might as well run Linux. Or wait for Chrome OS.

    Win 7 Home Premium is also too crippled IMHO, but that's only because I need XP Mode and Domain Join.
     
  5. Styrre

    Styrre MDL Novice

    Oct 18, 2009
    7
    0
    0
    Windows 7 Starter works just as well on my EeePC than XP, love it. :)
     
  6. poi2

    poi2 MDL Novice

    Mar 30, 2009
    39
    0
    0
    I'd keep in mind that right after you install / upgrade, it can be doing a lot with search indexing, defragmenting, etc. And if you have an antivirus, some will do full scans in the background when they first go in.

    Performance can easily slow down a lot for awhile with those things.
     
  7. mcbyte

    mcbyte MDL Junior Member

    Jul 26, 2009
    94
    1
    0
    yes, but they just can't make a vista or 7 be as fast as XP, xp worked well (but very slow) on machines with 256 MB ram, vista and 7 can't even load with that amount of ram... Win7 should be better for netbooks than vista, but not as good as XP... imho...
     
  8. Lich King

    Lich King MDL Addicted

    Sep 24, 2009
    500
    24
    30
    but technically, there isn't any performance difference between three versions except the features..
    I mean Windows 7 Home Premium, Professional and Ultimate
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  9. Dolorous Edd

    Dolorous Edd MDL Expert

    Aug 31, 2009
    1,054
    196
    60
    With that line of logic we should all be running Windows 95 OSR2.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  10. aim

    aim MDL Novice

    Oct 23, 2009
    2
    0
    0
    I'm using Lenovo Netbook S10 with Win 7 Enterprise 32bit

    RAM used 2GB, and it seems quite fast.

    I'm happy with this windows7 :)
     
  11. HSChronic

    HSChronic MDL Expert

    Aug 25, 2007
    1,213
    57
    60
    +1. I love 7 but I was looking at XP the other day, and just loathing at the fact that no matter what I turn off in 7 there is no way I can make it run reliably well on 256mb of RAM. With XP or 2K I can use 256mb of RAM for a VM with the only purpose of mail forwarding and never have an issue. Can't do this with 7. I know there is Server Core now, but the lack of a GUI and inability to run everything on it doesn't make it viable. Thus the only good successor to TinyXP and things like that is WinPE, which if hacked right can run almost anything.

    Back to your issue with the netbook though... The thing you want to do is load up resource monitor and see what application is using all your CPU then do the same with memory. You really need 1.4-2gb of RAM for 7 to run efficiently.
     
  12. rab2

    rab2 MDL Novice

    Jun 24, 2009
    27
    0
    0
    Turning off Aero has certainly improved the performance, better but still not exactly snappy. Further testing shows the netbook has lost about a third of it's battery life too. I'll run it for a couple more days and try tweaking what I can, but at the moment it's looking like XP might be getting restored.
     
  13. twiz

    twiz MDL Senior Member

    Jul 30, 2009
    401
    1
    10
    I seem to recall reading something that the battery monitor is different/changed/modified in Windows 7 and that you should let the battery run down nearly completely then let it charge fully to properly calibrate the monitor.

    Anyway you should do what you feel is best for your system.
    For my desktop, 7 seems to run better than XP did.
    You should also look at some of the tweak apps that are floating around on MDL... some are good, typically the ones you have to pay for / have a premium version are garbage. They can disable some of the things, like the mouseover preview.
     
  14. BuonaDomenica

    BuonaDomenica MDL Senior Member

    Aug 27, 2009
    255
    18
    10
    why not try to adjust for best performance under System, turn off indexing, turn off system restore if you don't need it.

    usually adjusting for best performance make a big difference on slower computers. Personally I can't stand all the fluff animation color crap anyways.

    Find a program called "Startup Control Panel" and install that. Then turn off programs that don't need to load at Startup.
     
  15. qwertywarez

    qwertywarez MDL Novice

    Aug 12, 2009
    28
    0
    0