1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Windows 8 xHCI Driver Performance Tested

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Mar 1, 2012.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,873 (11.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    With Windows 8, Microsoft is integrating an eXtensible Host Controller Interface (xHCI) driver, which serves as a common driver for USB 3.0 host controllers. Expreview put this driver to test with a Renesas USB 3.0 controller, and compared its performance to when the controller is backed by Renesas' own driver (ver. 2.1.28.0). The controller is a μD720200F1 found on ASUS P8P67 Deluxe motherboard. The reviewer used Orico UE3 16GB USB 3.0 flash drive that uses SLC NAND flash memory.

    The flash was put through four synthetic tests on a constant hardware setup, differences in performance were attributed to the drivers. Tests included HDTune, ATTO, AS SSD, and CrystalDiskMark. The xHCI driver provided by Microsoft trailed a tiny/insignificant notch behind the third-party driver provided by Renesas. In HDTune, the performance graph was smoother (fewer variations) with the Microsoft xHCI driver. In sequential speed tests, variation between the two drivers seldom exceeded 2%. The xHCI driver will ship with Windows 8, letting you run USB 3.0 host controllers and compatible devices right out of installation. The drivers pass through Microsoft's WHQL, although the update cycle of drivers provided by Microsoft is traditionally known to be slower, in some cases they have found to be more stable. Screenshots with "MS" markings (below) show results for the xHCI driver.

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    More results follow.

    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Source: Expreview
     
    cadaveca says thanks.
  2. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,493 (11.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,772
    win 7 really needs this driver. makes me sad when half the USB ports on a system i just built dont work in DOS/pre OS.
     
  3. wiak

    wiak

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,747 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    200
    Location:
    Norway
    yesterday i installed windows 8 customer preview using a Transcend Jetflash 700 16GB USB 3.0 stick on a USB 3.0 enabled port on a AMD A75 Chipset

    guess what it worked! :respect:
     
    WarEagleAU and Mussels say thanks.
  4. ironwolf

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    271 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL, USA, Earth
    Would love to see a installation speed test of Win8 using a USB 3.0 thumbdrive on both USB 2.0 and 3.0 ports.
     
  5. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,690 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,343
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    I'm willing to bet Microsoft will make a backport upgrade for Windows 7, like they did with the CPU scheduler.
     
  6. Prima.Vera

    Prima.Vera

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,271 (1.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    295
    I see...numbers.

    No comparison, no anything...
     
  7. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,690 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,343
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Do the math yourself, the images are side by side. They're not incredible improvements, but it shows you how software has a big impact on how hardware gets driven.
     
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,781 (1.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,004
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    Sorry, but such small difference is within error mergin. I get such differences if OS decides to do some task right in the middle of the test under the hood and it will skew the results by this much.
    I can get 2MB/s more by just tweaking stuff.
     
  9. Shinshin

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2010
    Messages:
    79 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Couldn't they wait for the benchmarks to finish? :confused:
     
  10. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,873 (11.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    That's kind of the point of this review (Microsoft's common xHCI drivers being as good as hardware vendors' drivers).
     
  11. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,101 (4.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,284
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    What I'm interested in is the differences in installation time between DVD media, USB 2.0, and USB 3.0.
     
  12. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,690 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,343
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Me too. If performance can get squeezed out by using improved drivers it makes you wonder how much more performance you can squeeze of out USB 3.0. After all, USB 3.0 is still a rather new technology and doesn't have perfected drivers yet.
     
  13. TerryChen New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    My easy test

    Please refer to attachment~
    The MS performance better than Renesas performance under my platform.
    But I know maybe resulting varies with different the system environment.
     

    Attached Files:

    Anusha and Mussels say thanks.
  14. TerryChen New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Sorry, add my platform as below,

    CPU : Intel Core i5 650
    M/B : ASUS P7H55-M/USB3
    Chipset : Intel H55
    RAM : 4GB DDR3
    Internal HDD : ST3500418AS 500G 3.5"
    OS : Win8 Consumer Preview x64
     
    Mussels says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page