Your Windows 7 ***WEI-SCORE***

[Deleted member 67555]

And it still gives you a 5.9....

Yeah it goes by the primary disk drive....Not sure if it actually accounts for actual speeds as I've seen SSD's with higher numbers in WEI with about the same speeds...
1 WD Black=5.9 in WEI and 2 in RAID0=5.9 LOL

 

[repman244]

Yeah it goes by the primary disk drive....Not sure if it actually accounts for actual speeds as I've seen SSD's with higher numbers in WEI with about the same speeds...
1 WD Black=5.9 in WEI and 2 in RAID0=5.9 LOL

I don't think it depends that much on sequential reads, after 5.9 you need low access times.

My main PC with single HDD:

 

[Deleted member 67555]

That makes sense....but after 8ns not that much real world difference..

EDIT: as pointed out I meant ms and not ns....

 

[repman244]

That makes sense....but after 8ns not that much real world difference..

Those are 8 ms not ns And believe me the difference is big, my SAS drive has almost double IOPS compared to my WD Black and I probably won't replace it with an SSD at all

 

[Capitan Harlock]

my score are
cpu:7,4 q9400@3.2 ghz oc
ram:7,4 8gb
gpu:7,9 6950 1gb
gpu:7,9
hd:5,3 old ide

total score: 5.3

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Ye ol' hard drives (going on 7 years old) holding me back as usual.


Edit: HMMMM! It detects Core i7 920 and FX-8150 as having 4 cores. Intriguing!

 

[Melvis]

Maybe there's some bottleneck on your system? Could it be that the PCI-e link is working at 4x to save energy and WEI doesn't bring it up to 16x?

As you said, even with a single 4870 you should at least get the same as my 3850.

I have no idea, i dont think it is god i would of picked that up yrs ago if it was lol, i know when i run benchmarks i get realy good scores so i guess im running at 16x?

Yea im guessing it would at least get the same, maybe you OC is just that dam good

Edit: Even Delta6326 with his 4850 scored higher then me, awww man something might be up then, shit! Meh ive got a new mobo here for my upgrade that might fix it?

 

[Delta6326]

Edit: Even Delta6326 with his 480 scored higher then me, awww man something might be up then, shit! Meh ive got a new mobo here for my upgrade that might fix it?

Well I am running 2x 4850's, but I just don't think WEI is a very accurate test. My Q6600 at stock gets close too some i7's

 

[Daimus]

It detects Core i7 920 and FX-8150 as having 4 cores.

It detects FX-8150 as having 4 cores because of MS patches for Bulldoser. Without patches - 8 cores.

 

[Melvis]

Well I am running 2x 4850's, but I just don't think WEI is a very accurate test. My Q6600 at stock gets close too some i7's

Yea i saw that and im running 2x4870X2's =/ but yes i agree just shows how bad this test realy is, like wow bad lol

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It detects FX-8150 as having 4 cores because of MS patches for Bulldoser. Without patches - 8 cores.

It implies that Bulldozer is using SMT and, does not, in fact, have 8 cores. 4 cores, 8 threads.


Yes, AMD insists on calling them "modules" instead of "cores" but, considering quad-cores with signficantly lower clock speeds (Core i5 2600) have no problem beating it, I would say that's proof enough Microsoft made the right call. No doubt the definition of "core" isn't as clear as it used to be.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Yea i saw that and im running 2x4870X2's =/ but yes i agree just shows how bad this test realy is, like wow bad lol

I don't think this is new...

MS bases the calculations/sec on a single threaded test. The "maximum" score is only attainable by disabling all other cores and using an exotic cooling system. My 3930k (down now, will post scores when I get the replacement) reads as a 7.8, despite beating a q9400 during encodes by a factor of 12 (2 hours on 3930 take 24 on a 9400).

The HDD is another sad joke. If there was a reasonable scale even the fastest mechanical drives would be topping out in the 4s, while even "cheap" SSDs should be near the top of the ratings. Look on TPU for five minutes and you'll see there's a huge performance gap between fast HDDs and slow SSDs, but only a small gap between slow SSDs and fast SSDs. This test obviously hides its eyes in the dirt to this very conclusion, for the purposes of just getting a number...

Graphics and RAM are simple instances of more is better. At least their rating has some grounding in reality. A tenuous grounding, but at least some.


So this is just another case of using a yard stick (or meter, pick your poison) to measure in tenths of an inch. The wrong tool might get you into the right ballpark, but it certainly doesn't give you accurate results.

 

[Jstn7477]

 

[fullinfusion]

My score. WEI is screwed cuz I clock the cpu to 5.4Ghz and still the cpu score is 7.8 pfft
I7-2700K 4.5GHz
Muskin 8GB 2133MHz ram
Ati 6990 bios #2
ocz Vertex 3 ssd

 

[v8ornot2v8]

7.4 - I gues it is not bad for a 2600k CPU:

 

[YautjaLord]

Here's mine:

The hard disk in question is Corsair's Force GS 240GB SSD. Probably will be rated 7.8 once i'll sit it on SATA III, otherwise 7.0 cause M4N98TD-EVO doesn't support SATA III, only SATA II. Nevermind, loads everything in seconds, Win 7 included.

 

[eskwy911]

i7 860 4.0ghz 8gb kingston hyperx 2133mhz xfx 7970 Ghz 3Gb 128gb OCZ vertex 4 (old firmware) not updated yet

 

[Jetster]

Here's mine:

The hard disk in question is Corsair's Force GS 240GB SSD. Probably will be rated 7.8 once i'll sit it on SATA III, otherwise 7.0 cause M4N98TD-EVO doesn't support SATA III, only SATA II. Nevermind, loads everything in seconds, Win 7 included.

Yep, The only difference I noticed was the start up with SATA III was about 15 sec faster. But everything else I don't think I could tell

 

[FreedomEclipse]

 

[hoax32]

holy shet! xD
I just received an email with a reply notification....its bee nforever guys haha common!
Who dares reviving this post lol!

Im in the air force so not much time to get online anymore

 

[fullinfusion]

7.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9

 

[FreedomEclipse]

While we're necro'ing the thread we might as well have some sort of meaningful debate - Not that WEI Scores mean much of anything anymore...Not that it ever did in the first place.

You could put it down to quite a few things -

1. Microsoft had the xbox so they didnt care about the pc anymore

2. Microsoft shut down or merged the studios that did make PC games and had them focus on making games for xbox

3. Games For Windows Live - another failed project to bring the whole xbox 'social networking' experience to PC that failed to deliver. GFWL was buggy and quite often it would 'block' you from running games that your pc was perfectly capable of running because horror of horrors - you didnt meet the WEI score. Not to mention the fact that it would occasionally delete your game saves on various games and when you contacted their support to try and get a PC game to run - 99% of the time they would say they cant help you because the game you need help with is not an xbox title - IMO this is no worse then Activision's hate for pc gamers Ghosts was a 1:1 port. They wouldnt even give the PC version a FoV slider and graphical settings were a little scarce if not totally non existent. Everybody knows about Activision's utter disrespect towards PC gamers. I used to think EPIC GAMES was bad with their bitching about the pc platform and all the whining about piracy and not wanting to release games for a platform whose market is already saturated with shooters. but that doesnt stop them making and continuously releasing Gears Of War titles then turning around and making a game for PC because they aint making enough money off the console market.


I posted an article about one of the top guys from microsoft saying that they lost their way then it came to PC and they wanted to make things right again. I respect the fact that they came out in the open about it but how much of it was just a PR stunt? How much of the stuff that came out of the guys mouth is utter BS?

Its cool and all that Microsoft finally came out and said they done goofed but I honestly dont see them changing their direction. The best thing they have done to date was get rid of GFWL

 

[fullinfusion]

What the hell are you ranting about freedom? This is about wei scores and not gfwl. And by the way I have a few gfwl games that never gave me a single issue even on my old wife's emachine that had horrible wei scores. But as I say thats just my opinion.

 

[RCoon]

I respect the fact that they came out in the open about it but how much of it was just a PR stunt? How much of the stuff that came out of the guys mouth is utter BS?

They employed a founder of the Steam service 6 months ago to get them back into the PC gaming business. It was in the news a couple of weeks ago, he no longer works for Microsoft. AKA, everything that guy said was marketing BS, and they have no intentions of being "nice" to PC gamers in any shape or form beyond what they currently do now.

Im in the air force so not much time to get online anymore

Nice to see an accidental thread necro brought somebody back into the fold

 

[FreedomEclipse]

What the hell are you ranting about freedom? This is about wei scores and not gfwl. And by the way I have a few gfwl games that never gave me a single issue even on my old wife's emachine that had horrible wei scores. But as I say thats just my opinion.

WEI is somewhat tied to GFWL, WEI score was meant to be some sort of 'benchmark' or rating system to say that your PC could play said game that you picked up at the store perfectly. However the industry never adopted this rating system and Microsoft never pushed it because they were releasing games for xbox and not PC. though this didnt stop them releasing ports that had that rating system that they eventually scrapped