why is my Win7 Subscore so low?

M1kkelZR

M1kkelZR

Active Member
i prefer the 460 over a 560 ti anyday. because of the fact that i know they are reliable, im not saying a 560 + aren reliable but from what ive seen, the 460 is just better. before you ramble, no i havent owned any GTX's but i have played on a 460, 550ti, 560ti and 580. i still preferred the 460. granting this werent on 1080p resolution, still liked the 460.

this all comes down to choice and who wants to play games on the highest setting at 1080p is there choice, but i dont see why i would do that if i can play it at 1024x720 and still looks nice.
 
demonikal

demonikal

New Member
:mad:I think you guys need to give it a rest. I was the one who started this post about the Windows 7 subscore and now you're all fighting over who has got the better rig. Definitely unsubscribing from my own post. I may not be a gigabyte member or a terabyte member or whatever, but totally sick and tired of getting these in my email inbox, thinking it may be something that defines the subscore a little clearer. The whole thing about the Windows 7 subscore was solved a lonnnnng time ago. However, feel free to keep bickering.:D
 
M1kkelZR

M1kkelZR

Active Member
demonikal said:
:mad:I think you guys need to give it a rest. I was the one who started this post about the Windows 7 subscore and now you're all fighting over who has got the better rig. Definitely unsubscribing from my own post. I may not be a gigabyte member or a terabyte member or whatever, but totally sick and tired of getting these in my email inbox, thinking it may be something that defines the subscore a little clearer. The whole thing about the Windows 7 subscore was solved a lonnnnng time ago. However, feel free to keep bickering.:D
Click to expand...

yes true it may be solved, but if there is something to talk about, that started in this thread then its not our problem then that you subbed to a thread, and wanted emails to show you that people replied.
 
xxmorpheus

xxmorpheus

Member
yeah i know what you guys mean, mine WEI shows 7.8 for cpu, 7.8 ram, 7.9 gpu and 7.9 graphis performance, but only 7.1 disk transfer :(
 
spirit

spirit

Moderator
Staff member
I get 7.3 (stock i5 760), 7.5 (8GB DDR3 1333MHz), 7.3 (GTS 450 1GB overclocked), 7.3 (same) and 7.3 (Crucial M4 SSD on SATA II). What's funny is I get 7.5 for my 8 gigs of 1333mhz DDR3 on this system, yet on another system I only got 5.9 for 4GB of the same RAM! And it was in dual-channel! bizarre.
 
8

87dtna

Active Member
What cpu is in the other system? Memory controller makes a ton of difference, an I5 760 has an excellent memory controller. If you were using it in AMD, I would expect a drop, but not that much. A 5.9 would be expected from a DDR3 socket 775 board though.
 
Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
Its a dumb argument, my subscore is 7.5 and my machine would probably smash anything on this forum. Its a guide only.
 
8

87dtna

Active Member
lol. I do believe someone has a 3930k on here so you aren't really the ''big cheese'' with only a 2600k.
 
Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
87dtna said:
lol. I do believe someone has a 3930k on here so you aren't really the ''big cheese'' with only a 2600k.
Click to expand...

If you do something massively threaded yes, but show me something in the real world that we do that beats my cheese thats worth the premium cost? $800 less too. Dont forget you have recently told me a 460 and your system is perfectly good, so make sure you're consistent. Suddenly the 2600K looks good. As I knew it always would. Under standard use, at best (bench) 3930k 15% better, real world 2% better. Plus at 4.5 - 5GHz there is no question the 2600K owns. So Mr No-Cheese, back in your box.

While we don't want to give the impression that the i7-3930K is a slow CPU for consumer applications and games, it isn't significantly faster than the Core i7-2600K.
Click to expand...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/11/14/intel-sandy-bridge-e-review/12

And as this directly relates to my situation...

If you’re gaming with one (or even two) high-end graphics cards in your system, the 2600K is a better bet
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3930k-3820-test-benchmark,3090-14.html

Hardware purchasing is like the stock market, you gotta know when to spend big, and when to opt out.

Finally I haven't even discussed the option of Ivybridge yet, meaning I can sell my 2600K for say 200, spend another 100 and be back on top. Not going to happen on an AMD or pretty much any other platform. Not that I need to actually, however the extra PCIe lanes would be nice. But never seen my 2600K maxed - yet. But I can upgrade, very rare these days.

But yet again mate, we've detracted from this thread. Post a new thread or a message on my PM and we can discuss.
 
Last edited:
8

87dtna

Active Member
Ahh yes but I didn't make the statement that my PC would ''smash'' anything on this forum. When you say smash, it assumed it means for any PC purpose not just gaming.

If you want to talk just gaming now, a 2500k games just as well as a 2600k, there is zero difference and costs $100 less. So if your main purpose was gaming, you literally flushed $100 down the toilet by buying a 2600k over a 2500k.

OK so you are running 4.5ghz? Is the 3930k not overclockable or something? It was last I checked :rolleyes:

Where are you getting the 2600k is $800 less? The 3930k is $600, so it's $300 more than the 2600k. And also, when did this become a bang for the buck argument? You stated that your PC would ''smash'' everything on this forum, and thats simply incorrect. But you always want to shift the conversion in your favor instead of backing up your blanket statement.
 
Okedokey

Okedokey

Well-Known Member
87, you need a new motherboard too if you want to upgrade to the 3930K, and those mobos are expensive. Thus the 800 bucks. Whereas I can sell my 2600K for say, 200? and spend another 100 presumably in a few months and have a whole upgrade. This cannot be said for the 3930k system. Secondly the 2600K competes at stock.
 
FuryRosewood

FuryRosewood

Active Member
the x79 boards are indeed expensive...tho the quad channel ram is sorta tasty...32 gigs of cheap ram...sure, but to spend bout 800 bucks to swap board/cpu and add more ram? i cant really legitimize the cost...1155 is far cheaper...tho is ivy bridge going to be quad channel or dual?
 
8

87dtna

Active Member
Guess I'll have to repeat my previous statement.


87dtna said:
And also, when did this become a bang for the buck argument? You stated that your PC would ''smash'' everything on this forum, and thats simply incorrect. But you always want to shift the conversion in your favor instead of backing up your blanket statement.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top