I was analyzing the base score I got on my XPS and felt that RAM's score is not really impressive even though I bought the maximum available bandwidth. So, lets see if anyone got good scores (any sub score) and how? Let's share the score and any spl tweaking you did to get there.

If you want inside information, there is an article on Windows Vista team's blog titled Windows Experience Index: An In-Depth Look

Here is my PC's Base Score:

My 5,400 drive lets me down most...and I only have 1 GB RAM...lol my nVidia (7900 GSX) beats the XPS for gaming...

I notice your running 64 BIT...had any issues with it ie. software or anything?

my scores are:

CPU: 4,9
MEMORY: 4,5
GRAPHICS: 5,9
GAMING GRAPHICS: 5,8
HARDISK: 5,1

specs: M1710 core 2 duo 2ghz | 512mb 7900gtx | 2gb 667mhz | 100gb 7200rpm

4.7 as well on the M90 in the signature.

For whatever reason it keeps telling me that I have new hardware found. I have refreshed the score a zillion times and get the same thing. My CPU (being a 533Mhz FSB) and my RAM are my downfall here also.

***EDIT***
Fixed it! For some reason my date/time were wrong. Set it right, and it worked!

wow, im gonna have to install vista again... my index was 5.2 in 64bit. I wonder why some of your memory scores are so low... are you running stock Dell memory?

I have a 4.5 on ram aswell. Running and m90 with 2 gigs 667 ram.
Wierd refreshed my score with no success. Running Dell Stock RAM.


CPU: 4.9
MEMORY: 4.5
GRAPHICS: 5.9
GAMING GRAPHICS: 5.9
HARDISK: 5.0

One other thing I noticed when running DXDIAG from the RUN menu I get 766 megs of Video Ram. Seems vista increases my Video memory with System memory.

while i haven't tested it recently, some numbers from when i first installed it (RC2, though the version shouldn't matter too much, right?). it seems a bit strange that the memory is the lowest of a lot of your systems.

http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~cey/performance.jpg

this is obviously on my m90, because if my 700m was getting these kind of scores, the 5.9 point maximum would be kind of useless. anyway, it's good enough, except for the lack of hard drive space (when the dvd drive is in), and i still use xp primarily.

edit: whoops, i guess the limit on how much bandwidth i used displaying that image openly was more than my school account thing allows.
just for reference, if the link doesnt work
CPU: 4.9
Memory: 4.9
Graphics: 5.9
Gaming graphics: 5.8
Primary hard disk: 4.8

Base Score: 4.8

yee245 the Windows Experience index did change quite a bit over the different builds...your will be different than the finasl release version...

I think I could figure out why all of us are getting maximum RAM score of 4.7. The article, I included link for in first post, has some sample (hopefully expected too) benchmarks.

In that article, 1Gb DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz gives scores 4.1 and 2Gb DDR3 SDRAM at 800MHz gives 5.1. So, it seems that 4.7 is the maximum we can get with 2 Gigs at 667 MHz.

For those who didn't have time to read that article:

I ran 64 bit for some time but finally I removed that and loaded 32 bit. I feel that the industry is not yet ready for 64 bit for Home + Dev users. I am saying this because of the reason you mentioned. Its really difficult to get 64 bit applications.

What Vista does is that it allows installing 32 bit application and even maintains separate Program Files folder for them. And if I am running 32 bit application on 64 bit platform, the purpose is lost. I think thats even more to do for OS to run 32 bit on 64 bit. May be wrong but just a thought.

By the way, I have updated the sig.

I was running the first version of RC2 when I got the above # was kinda shocked when I saw it seeing my old Gen1 would only score in the 3's

As I mentioned above, the scores actually changed with various builds of Vista...dont go by anything except the final release for an accurate comparison.