Windows shows low graphics perfofmance score

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Dima, Apr 21, 2008.

  1. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Hello!
    My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    But:
    Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
    3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    How to improve the performance of the card?
    Sincerely.
     
    Dima, Apr 21, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dima

    Robert Moir Guest

    "Dima" <> wrote in message
    news:e1NDJK%...
    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    > graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
    > very low,


    No. It isn't "very" low. The highest score is 5.9 at the moment, I believe.
    "very" low would be "1.0". What you've got is a nice card as far as it goes,
    but it's a nice "middle of the range" graphics card, and you've got a nice
    middle range score for it. A nice Radeon 3870 or even a 3870x2 or whatever
    it's called will fix that for you if you _must_ have a high score and you
    want to stick with ATI.

    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?


    3 things can cause a low score for the graphics card, usually
    1. the card is as fast as it's going to get.
    2. the drivers are out of date.
    3. the drivers are faulty.

    Note that for the last two items, this can include anything in the "chain"
    of devices that the graphics card needs to communicate with the rest of the
    system, you can't have a system work to its full potential if it's built on
    sand, kinda like trying to drop a racing-car engine into an old clunker car
    you purchased from a scrap dealer.

    > How to improve the performance of the card?


    1. Update the drivers
    2. Make sure they're working properly
    3. get a new card
    ..
    What are your expectations from this card? Looking at the scores is all well
    and good but if it does what you want then the scores don't matter. If it
    doesn't do what you want then the scores _still_ don't matter. So... does
    it do what you want?
     
    Robert Moir, Apr 21, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. That score sounds somewhat normal. Drivers will definitely affect the
    graphics score, but I don't know anybody really cares what the score says.

    If you are getting good real world performance, don't worry about it.
     
    Spencer Scott, Apr 21, 2008
    #3
  4. Dima

    C.B. Guest

    Re: Windows shows low graphics performance score

    "Dima" <> wrote in message
    news:e1NDJK#...
    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    > graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
    > very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.



    Dima,

    These are not low scores. Your system will perform very well with these
    scores and this particular graphics hardware. Unless you are a serious gamer
    expecting to squeeze every available ounce of performance out of your
    graphics card, or you are into some serious, complicated graphics intensive
    applications you do not need better graphics hardware.

    C.B.


    --
    It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
    and unfortunate among us.
     
    C.B., Apr 21, 2008
    #4
  5. It's a maximum of 6.0 so 4.9 isn't low. The XT versions of the HD graphics
    cards are faster than the Pro versions.
    --
    Cari (MS-MVP) Printing & Imaging
    www.coribright.com/windows

    "Dima" <> wrote in message
    news:e1NDJK%...
    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    > graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
    > very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
     
    Cari \(MS-MVP\), Apr 22, 2008
    #5
  6. Dima

    Carlos Guest

    Dima,
    That is a fairly good score.
    Here's your card rating with respect to the other ATI cards.
    http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=2
    Carlos

    "Dima" wrote:

    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
    > 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    > that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
    >
    >
     
    Carlos, Apr 22, 2008
    #6
  7. Dima

    Gary Mount Guest

    I have the same card, except half the ram as yours. Also my card is AGP, you
    don't say if yours is PCI express.
    My scores are 0.1 less than what you are reporting.
    My processor is my lowest score with 4.1.
    You might be able to use Catalyst to alter some settings. On my AGP card I
    don't seem to be able to access these settings to change them. Might only be
    available to the PCI express versions.


    "Dima" <> wrote in message
    news:e1NDJK#...
    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    > graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
    > very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
     
    Gary Mount, Apr 22, 2008
    #7
  8. Dima

    Gary Mount Guest

    I just read an article about over clocking the GPU, at Toms Hardware.
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-graphics-card,1916-7.html

    I downloaded and used RivaTuner. I mentioned that my graphics card was the
    same as yours except mine uses AGP instead of PCI express. So far on an
    initial try I have upped my Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero
    score from a 4.7 to a 5.9. My Gaming graphics score is still only 4.8.

    "Dima" <> wrote in message
    news:e1NDJK#...
    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    > graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are
    > very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
     
    Gary Mount, Apr 25, 2008
    #8
  9. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Robert Moir for answer!
    It does do what I want mostly.
    "Robert Moir" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ ×
    ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:uYpzit%...
    >
    > "Dima" <> wrote in message
    > news:e1NDJK%...
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
    >> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
    >> which are very low,

    >
    > No. It isn't "very" low. The highest score is 5.9 at the moment, I
    > believe. "very" low would be "1.0". What you've got is a nice card as far
    > as it goes, but it's a nice "middle of the range" graphics card, and
    > you've got a nice middle range score for it. A nice Radeon 3870 or even a
    > 3870x2 or whatever it's called will fix that for you if you _must_ have a
    > high score and you want to stick with ATI.
    >
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?

    >
    > 3 things can cause a low score for the graphics card, usually
    > 1. the card is as fast as it's going to get.
    > 2. the drivers are out of date.
    > 3. the drivers are faulty.
    >
    > Note that for the last two items, this can include anything in the "chain"
    > of devices that the graphics card needs to communicate with the rest of
    > the system, you can't have a system work to its full potential if it's
    > built on sand, kinda like trying to drop a racing-car engine into an old
    > clunker car you purchased from a scrap dealer.
    >
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?

    >
    > 1. Update the drivers
    > 2. Make sure they're working properly
    > 3. get a new card
    > .
    > What are your expectations from this card? Looking at the scores is all
    > well and good but if it does what you want then the scores don't matter.
    > If it doesn't do what you want then the scores _still_ don't matter.
    > So... does it do what you want?
    >
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #9
  10. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Spencer!
    "Spencer Scott" <Spencer > ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ ×
    ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ:
    news:...
    > That score sounds somewhat normal. Drivers will definitely affect the
    > graphics score, but I don't know anybody really cares what the score says.
    >
    > If you are getting good real world performance, don't worry about it.
    >
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #10
  11. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Re: Windows shows low graphics performance score

    Thanks C.B.!
    "C.B." <> ñîîáùèë/ñîîáùèëà â íîâîñòÿõ
    ñëåäóþùåå: news:...
    >
    >
    > "Dima" <> wrote in message
    > news:e1NDJK#...
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
    >> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
    >> which are very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my
    >> computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.

    >
    >
    > Dima,
    >
    > These are not low scores. Your system will perform very well with
    > these scores and this particular graphics hardware. Unless you are a
    > serious gamer expecting to squeeze every available ounce of performance
    > out of your graphics card, or you are into some serious, complicated
    > graphics intensive applications you do not need better graphics hardware.
    >
    > C.B.
    >
    >
    > --
    > It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
    > and unfortunate among us.
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #11
  12. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Cari!
    "Cari (MS-MVP)" <> ñîîáùèë/ñîîáùèëà â íîâîñòÿõ
    ñëåäóþùåå: news:...
    > It's a maximum of 6.0 so 4.9 isn't low. The XT versions of the HD
    > graphics cards are faster than the Pro versions.
    > --
    > Cari (MS-MVP) Printing & Imaging
    > www.coribright.com/windows
    >
    > "Dima" <> wrote in message
    > news:e1NDJK%...
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
    >> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
    >> which are very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my
    >> computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.

    >
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #12
  13. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Carlos!
    I wrote because my RAM, which costs two times less than the graphics card,
    scored 5.9 and my HDD WD Green (low energy consumption) scored 5.8!
    "Carlos" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
    ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:...
    > Dima,
    > That is a fairly good score.
    > Here's your card rating with respect to the other ATI cards.
    > http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=2
    > Carlos
    >
    > "Dima" wrote:
    >
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics:
    >> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    >> graphics:
    >> 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    >> that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.
    >>
    >>
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #13
  14. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Gary!
    "Gary Mount" <> ñîîáùèë/ñîîáùèëà â íîâîñòÿõ ñëåäóþùåå:
    news:%...
    >I just read an article about over clocking the GPU, at Toms Hardware.
    > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-graphics-card,1916-7.html
    >
    > I downloaded and used RivaTuner. I mentioned that my graphics card was the
    > same as yours except mine uses AGP instead of PCI express. So far on an
    > initial try I have upped my Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero
    > score from a 4.7 to a 5.9. My Gaming graphics score is still only 4.8.
    >
    > "Dima" <> wrote in message
    > news:e1NDJK#...
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
    >> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
    >> which are very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my
    >> computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.

    >
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #14
  15. Dima

    Dima Guest

    My card is PCIE
    "Gary Mount" <> ñîîáùèë/ñîîáùèëà â íîâîñòÿõ ñëåäóþùåå:
    news:...
    >I have the same card, except half the ram as yours. Also my card is AGP,
    >you don't say if yours is PCI express.
    > My scores are 0.1 less than what you are reporting.
    > My processor is my lowest score with 4.1.
    > You might be able to use Catalyst to alter some settings. On my AGP card I
    > don't seem to be able to access these settings to change them. Might only
    > be available to the PCI express versions.
    >
    >
    > "Dima" <> wrote in message
    > news:e1NDJK#...
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics: Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and
    >> "Gaming graphics: 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9
    >> which are very low, that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my
    >> computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.

    >
     
    Dima, Apr 30, 2008
    #15
  16. Don't worry about your score, it itsn't bad. I have the Radeon Mobility 3650.
    My graphics score is 5.5 and gaming score is 5.1
    Your scored are more than good enough, even for gaming. You say that you
    think it's low as your RAM gets a score of 5.9 and HD around the same. Those
    scored shouldn't be compared to your graphics as they are completely
    different. It simply means that you have a high performance HD and RAM. score
    4-5 is a good score for a GPU

    Also, Vista would do any office need sufficiently with a base score of 3 , a
    base score of 4 would be suitable for most gaming needs, your score is close
    to 5 which means you shouldnt have any problems running demanding 3d
    applications.
    Hope this cleared it up :)

    "Dima" wrote:

    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
    > 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    > that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
    >
    >
     
    calvin91-vista-business, May 29, 2008
    #16
  17. Dima

    Rob Guest

    Hi Dima,
    I've also got the 2600 PRO. After installation i scored a 4,9.... but after
    using ATI's Auto Tune in the Overdrive section I climbed to 5,3.
    Knowing that 5,9 is the highest you can score I would't worry at all if I
    was you.

    Sincerely

    "Dima" wrote:

    > Hello!
    > My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    > Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    > But:
    > Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that "Graphics:
    > Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming graphics:
    > 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    > that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    > Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    > How to improve the performance of the card?
    > Sincerely.
    >
    >
     
    Rob, May 31, 2008
    #17
  18. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks calvin91-vista-business for your reply!
    "calvin91-vista-business" <>
    wrote in message news:...
    > Don't worry about your score, it itsn't bad. I have the Radeon Mobility
    > 3650.
    > My graphics score is 5.5 and gaming score is 5.1
    > Your scored are more than good enough, even for gaming. You say that you
    > think it's low as your RAM gets a score of 5.9 and HD around the same.
    > Those
    > scored shouldn't be compared to your graphics as they are completely
    > different. It simply means that you have a high performance HD and RAM.
    > score
    > 4-5 is a good score for a GPU
    >
    > Also, Vista would do any office need sufficiently with a base score of 3 ,
    > a
    > base score of 4 would be suitable for most gaming needs, your score is
    > close
    > to 5 which means you shouldnt have any problems running demanding 3d
    > applications.
    > Hope this cleared it up :)
    >
    > "Dima" wrote:
    >
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics:
    >> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    >> graphics:
    >> 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    >> that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.
    >>
    >>
     
    Dima, Jun 21, 2008
    #18
  19. Dima

    Dima Guest

    Thanks Rob for your reply!
    After using ATI's Auto Tune in the Overdrive section my 2600 PRO score did
    not climb, but tearings appeared.
    Sincerely.
    "Rob" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi Dima,
    > I've also got the 2600 PRO. After installation i scored a 4,9.... but
    > after
    > using ATI's Auto Tune in the Overdrive section I climbed to 5,3.
    > Knowing that 5,9 is the highest you can score I would't worry at all if I
    > was you.
    >
    > Sincerely
    >
    > "Dima" wrote:
    >
    >> Hello!
    >> My video card is DirectX 10 ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 512mb. The latest
    >> Catalyst driver 8.4 is installed.
    >> But:
    >> Windows Vista 64 "Performance Information and Tools" shows that
    >> "Graphics:
    >> Desktop performance for Windows Aero" has 4,8 Subscore and "Gaming
    >> graphics:
    >> 3D business and gaming graphics performance" has 4,9 which are very low,
    >> that the HD 2600 Pro is the bottleneck of my computer.
    >> Why does Windows Vista score the card so low?
    >> How to improve the performance of the card?
    >> Sincerely.
    >>
    >>
     
    Dima, Jun 21, 2008
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Daniel Walzenbach
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    669
    Daniel Walzenbach
    Nov 9, 2003
  2. Harvey Gratt

    Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 Graphics

    Harvey Gratt, Oct 8, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,130
    pcbutts1
    Oct 9, 2005
  3. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,551
    Silverstrand
    Mar 5, 2007
  4. sharonf
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,396
    Jerry Attic
    Mar 27, 2007
  5. Mrs. Chickpea
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    2,041
    Sharon
    May 26, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page