Vista Experience is a 2.0


A common Picture of my Laptop I’m currently awaiting a new laptop at work, so in the interim I thought I would dust off my old ASUS W1J00GC laptop and see how Vista Ultimate would work under a low spec machine.


Now, before I begin, I should note that Windows Vista has a “System Assessment Tool“, built in. It essentially sits under the “Performance Information and Tools” menu and provides an indexed score on how the overall experience will be within Vista.


This laptop recieved a 2.0 (which suprised me as I thought it would be lower) which means the following:



A computer with a base score of 1 or 2 usually has sufficient performance to do most general computing tasks, such as run office productivity applications and search the Internet. However, a computer with this base score is generally not powerful enough to run Windows Aero, or the advanced multimedia experiences that are available with Windows Vista.


Althought it states that Windows Aero is most likely unable to run under this rating, I’ve found it works quite smoothly. I have a desktop also at home, which has a rating of 4.8 and which is basically “The perfect fit, or close to and it has so much power, that it needs water cooling”.



A computer with a base score of 4 or 5 is able to run all new features of Windows Vista with full functionality, and it is able to support high-end, graphics-intensive experiences, such as multiplayer and 3‑D gaming and recording and playback of HDTV content. Computers with a base score of 5 were the highest performing computers available when Windows Vista was released.


I’ll keep an eye on its performance all this week, and post back to the blow how it holds up under some fairly average specs.


The laptop has the following:



  • Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) M Processor 1.80 GHz 1.79 GHz

  • RAM: 1023 MB RAM

  • Video: Mobility Radeon 9600/9700 64MB

  • Screen: 15.4″ WXGA Color & Crystal Shine LCD

  • HardDrive: 100 GB, 5400 Rpm (Fujitsu MHV2100AH ATA)

I got this machine in late 2005 for about $2500 AUD. So its not to bad and has stood by me through thick and thin (It’s actually one of the best laptops I’ve had, and I also own an Alienware Area 51M which got about a 3.8 rating with Windows Vista – I’d actually not advise an Alienware as they are over-hyped machines – At the time of purchase, it cost me around $4000 AUD).


You can find out more about Performance and Vista, through Jeff’s blog (Yet to meet Jeff).


To view my Laptops Details via (shareyourscore.com) please click on the green button below.





2


Comments (8)

  1. scbarnes says:

    Done.

  2. michhes says:

    Since when was anything with 1GB of RAM classed as a low-spec machine?! Despite some major improvements over its predecessors, I can still install and run W2k3 on a lowly Pentium Pro with 128MB of RAM.

    I don’t usually criticise MS for producing bloatware because the features rich interaction are generally worth it but even with Aero turned off, there is no practical upgrade path from XP to Vista for a standard aussie machine running 256 or 512MB of RAM without adding more memory.

  3. scbarnes says:

    Sorry to offend, I just assumed 1gb was low-spec. I’ve had my fair share of laptops, and I can honestly say that 2gb has always been the minimum spec for me.

    These days (Microsoft aside) you need it, especially if you’re a developer or even a gamer.

    In fact more and more mainstream PC manufacturers are pushing for increased powered spec’d machines.

    I’m not privvy to the discussions held at Redmond when they decided to make Vista the way it is, but I upgraded this laptop today for $150 from being 1gb to 2gb.

    *shrug* its not that expensive.

  4. I’ve managed to get Vista Ultimate to run on a Thinkpad T42 (which isn’t supported by Lenovo), because it has a Mobility Radeon 7500 for which there are no drivers.

    I guess you’re lucky with a more recent graphicscard.

  5. scbarnes says:

    Actually no. Can’t get the ram I ordered. I put it in and nothing…. flatlined.

    So i’m stuck in 1gb land (bah humbug!)

  6. Axel says:

    how could you have 1023 MB ram, when every ram manufacturer produces 1024 Mb ram dimms?

  7. pARODY says:

    1023mb ram is usually when onboard video or sound or network is using 1mb of ram. its allocated during bios initialization and thus it doesn’t advertise physical ram size accurately.