Windows 7 6956 significantly slower than Windows 7 6801

After running both 6956 and 6801 on my computer, I can tell you that 6801 is a suitable Vista replacement. It being much faster, lower on the RAM, and in general more stable. It also *shock* has better backwards compatability than Vista. 6956 (which I am running right now) has a nicer taskbar. That's about it. As a tradeoff for that, it is 20-25% slower than 6801. True both are faster than vista, but if things keep slowing down at the speed they are, Windows 7 will be only marginally faster than Vista, if faster at all. And certainly not as stable.

I haven't run any *real* benchmarks yet, but when I have I will post them here. Right now I have 6956 installed and will bench that, then format that partition and run the same benches on 6801.

*DO NOT ASK ME FOR COPIES OF THE INSTALLER DISCS I USED* If you really want them that badly google them.

You are not supposed to be running those builds to begin with. Just wait till the public beta is out before you starts complaining.

The only way to really measure would be to use benchmarks. Seat of the pants can be very misleading.

As long as it is faster then Vista. I imagine the speed of the betas will shift back and fourth a few times before the actual release just because of adding and fixing things things. I've played with both betas in VMs and didn't notice a big difference in speed between them but they do feel a bit faster than Vista.

I have done *sorta* benchmarks. Not anything strenuous and I din't use software for it. I recorded boot times, time from login menu to desktop ready, and time to start various programs (on 6956, not 6801 yet). I will put them up here soon, I have them on a different partition somewhere...*searches through partitions looking for measurment file*

I thought they were scraping backwards compatibility. If the backward compatibility is better it's good news for me. Vista cant run lots of software required for my job and XP is starting to show its age.

I think they ought to scrap backwards compatibility to begin with, then implement it. Start with a stable, fast base, then add the old crud.

If MS has an open mind they could implement OSS solutions to make up for backwards incompatibility.

Actually Windows 7 has better backward compatability than Vista. Still working on the times...

6801 ran opengl games almost 50% faster than XP, but this may be due to the vista driver being better combined with less overhead than vista. build 7000 was a bit slower. This was a gma950.

Were the OpenGL tests done with Microsoft's device drivers? Because Microsoft's drivers don't support OpenGL very well by design, instead encouraging use of DirectX. You'd have to use the the drivers released by the GPU manufacturer to objectively measure OpenGL performance.

As for the slow-down: If it's that serious of a difference, it's probably going to be fixed. Either that, or Microsoft is more hurried than I think it is.