-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Windows 10 Threshold 2 FPS DROP
- Thread starter Kenrou
- Start date
I'm imagining previous versions of windows.
That said, yes, in synthetic benchmarks and with games, there are differences in scores and FPS between OSs. They do not go hand in hand however. The benching team has a good idea of this as we have specific OSs for specific benchmarks.
I believe some sites reviewed gaming performamce between w7/810, I would check that out for more details.
That said, yes, in synthetic benchmarks and with games, there are differences in scores and FPS between OSs. They do not go hand in hand however. The benching team has a good idea of this as we have specific OSs for specific benchmarks.
I believe some sites reviewed gaming performamce between w7/810, I would check that out for more details.
What is Threshold 2?
Edit: oh, their first major update
.
Same story though... with past versions of windows major updates (service packs) could do that. But is this 2 fps of 100 (so something more or less negligble) or we talking 2 of 30?
I don't bench on 10 so, I can't confirm/deny such differences.
Edit: oh, their first major update
. Same story though... with past versions of windows major updates (service packs) could do that. But is this 2 fps of 100 (so something more or less negligble) or we talking 2 of 30?
I don't bench on 10 so, I can't confirm/deny such differences.
OP
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2014
- Thread Starter
- #7
~10fps drop in Heaven and Valley maximum fps, don't know about 3DMark. So 10/100 I guess ? Still SP's are supposed to speed up the system not bog it down. Only wanted confirmation if I'm the only one.
3DMark CPU test show it 2fps faster in T2.
3DMark CPU test show it 2fps faster in T2.
But as i said 1st post its ~800 on graphics score
I wish I had the time to test it for you...
That said, I'm not really too worried about it, as it is what it is, since we are forced to update anyway. Its good to know for benching purposes though if other OSs aren't as fast and we are forced to use 10/its latest versions (for retail people).
EDIT: One thing I JUST noticed is that it appears your settings are actually different in these runs. Look at your screenshot... see how under settings two say Custom/Ultra/Extreme and the other two are just Extreme HD? I wonder if that has anything to do with it your results being different...try running both again with the different settings and see if you get the same results in the same OS.
That said, I'm not really too worried about it, as it is what it is, since we are forced to update anyway. Its good to know for benching purposes though if other OSs aren't as fast and we are forced to use 10/its latest versions (for retail people).
EDIT: One thing I JUST noticed is that it appears your settings are actually different in these runs. Look at your screenshot... see how under settings two say Custom/Ultra/Extreme and the other two are just Extreme HD? I wonder if that has anything to do with it your results being different...try running both again with the different settings and see if you get the same results in the same OS.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
I wish I had the time to test it for you...
That said, I'm not really too worried about it, as it is what it is, since we are forced to update anyway. Its good to know for benching purposes though if other OSs aren't as fast and we are forced to use 10/its latest versions (for retail people).
EDIT: One thing I JUST noticed is that it appears your settings are actually different in these runs. Look at your screenshot... see how under settings two say Custom/Ultra/Extreme and the other two are just Extreme HD? I wonder if that has anything to do with it your results being different...try running both again with the different settings and see if you get the same results in the same OS.
They look the same, one's valley and one's heaven, although CPU frequency is different by 100mhz
Oy... Good catch Janus... my fault. Disregard.
I doubt 100 Mhz will make much difference. It doesn't generally respond to it... at least, not the HWBOT version. I would still re-run to make sure the CPU match exactly for the testing.
Humor us though K, run them again with matching CPU speeds and see how much that does matter. We may be surprised (though I personally doubt it too).
EDIT: Then again it is an AMD processor and it can hold powerful GPUs back. You are also on 1080p a lowish CPU bound at time res (my experiences here were on Intel CPUs) so....................its def. worth a re-run at the same CPU speeds.
I doubt 100 Mhz will make much difference. It doesn't generally respond to it... at least, not the HWBOT version. I would still re-run to make sure the CPU match exactly for the testing.
Humor us though K, run them again with matching CPU speeds and see how much that does matter. We may be surprised (though I personally doubt it too).
EDIT: Then again it is an AMD processor and it can hold powerful GPUs back. You are also on 1080p a lowish CPU bound at time res (my experiences here were on Intel CPUs) so....................its def. worth a re-run at the same CPU speeds.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
Point being though, you're not comparing apples to apples.
Give it a shot with the speeds the same.
Also, running at program defaults will eliminate any question of settings being changed.
OP
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2014
- Thread Starter
- #19
I did when i had it installed, makes almost zero difference in Heaven and Valley, ~100 in 3DMark IF THAT. One thing i forgot though, for the 1st batch of tests i was still using the Crosshair and generally had a little higher GPU results then with the Saber but again still not enough to make this difference (also like i said i already re-installed 10 "normal").
