July 7, 2006 4:00 AM PDT

Vista's PC-rating tool gets a revamp

Microsoft has reworked the PC assessment tool in Windows Vista after fielding complaints from hardware makers--but the changes may not be enough to completely quell concerns.

In May, the software maker promised to make changes to the Windows System Performance Rating tool, which aims to assess how capable a machine is of harnessing the upcoming operating system's new features. Critics were unhappy with the way it presented scores and how it came up with its ratings.

The tool is designed to help consumers make sense of Vista's fairly complicated needs when it comes to memory, graphics performance and other internal components. It looks at five benchmarks and presents an individual score for each, as well as an overall rating for the system.

The newly renamed Windows Experience Index includes tweaks both in the built-in software and in the way that the assessment is described. Despite these, some partners still believe that the score generated by the tool is not a balanced reflection of a computer's abilities.

Officially, Intel said, "We continue to work closely with Microsoft to shape and influence (the rating tool), but we have no further comment at this time."

However, a source close to the chip giant said that it remains concerned that the tool places too much emphasis on the graphics and memory power needed to take full advantage of Vista's Aero user interface and advanced media features. "It's very heavily focused on graphics performance," the source said.

In contrast, Intel believes that the tool doesn't adequately account for important characteristics, such as whether a processor has more than one core, or the battery life offered by a notebook, the source said.

The source said the chipmaker applauds the notion of offering consumers a simpler system to understand PC performance, but argues that Microsoft's software does them a disservice by not reaching that goal.

"If this thing is promoted to consumers, they should understand what its strengths and weaknesses are," the source said.

Vista rates PC

Microsoft has made a number of changes to the software, though many of the tweaks won't be publicly visible until it releases the first near-final "release candidate" version of the operating system later this quarter. The oft-delayed Vista is scheduled to be in consumers' hands by January.

For starters, Microsoft redubbed the tool the Windows Experience Index, arguing the moniker better represents what it measures.

It has also given the new name "base score" to the overall rating generated by the tool. It's an effort to clarify that the main rating is the lowest score given to an individual component, rather than an average of each of the five subratings. The tool rates a system on its processor, memory, hard drive, graphics card and gaming graphics.

Chipmaker Advanced Micro Devices, which says it is generally supportive of Microsoft's effort, said that Microsoft's changes should make the tool better. The new name makes it clearer that it is not a raw measure of PC performance, but rather a Windows-specific assessment, AMD program manager Clarice Simmons said. She also praised Microsoft's move to rename the score generated by the tool.

"I know that several partners gave them some feedback that the overall rating was a little bit difficult to understand," Simmons said. She added that there is a natural tendency to assume the overall score is the average of the various components.

In another change, Microsoft is allowing the base score to be more varied. The earlier version offered decimal point ratings, such as "4.1", for assessments of the individual features, but relied on whole numbers for the overall score. The revamped index now uses decimals for the base score as well.

Good for graphics
The changes, though important to the partners that largely support the rating tool, don't appear to address the concerns of Intel and others.

Graphics chipmakers, meanwhile, are understandably pleased with the prominent attention given to their products, noting that Windows Vista relies heavily on graphics chip horsepower to generate its Aero user interface.

"It should be very clear to everyone how important graphics are," said Andrew Dodd, a software product manager at graphics specialist ATI Technologies.

CONTINUED: Getting a 6 on a 1-to-5 scale…
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
assessment, chip company, overall, Microsoft Windows Vista, component

47 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
An evolving benchmark?
They're well-intentioned, no doubt, but I just don't think it's for me, as is likely the case for most people who frequent this site. I can see the Average Joe using it, though, since he's not usually acquainted with the nuts and bolts of his brand new Best Buy computer.

I don't think people who can rattle off their hardware specs from memory, though, exactly fit into the target demographic. (Nor are we supposed to, I'd gather.)
Posted by Christopher Hall (1205 comments )
Reply Link Flag
An evolving benchmark?
They're well-intentioned, no doubt, but I just don't think it's for me, as is likely the case for most people who frequent this site. I can see the Average Joe using it, though, since he's not usually acquainted with the nuts and bolts of his brand new Best Buy computer.

I don't think people who can rattle off their hardware specs from memory, though, exactly fit into the target demographic. (Nor are we supposed to, I'd gather.)
Posted by Christopher Hall (1205 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Gaming the system
I can see one issue with this could be that hardware manufacturers start building their chips to "game" the rating system instead of concentrating on actual performance. This has been seen time and time again, from Deep Blue being programmed to defeat only one specific chess master to nVidia & ATI building in instructions that give them a higher benchmark score without really being much faster overall.

It would almost be better for Microsoft to not let on what their exact calculations are, but even if they did that (not likely, considering the likely outcry), reverse-engineering would still necessitate that they maintain constant vigilance in the face of potential abuse of the rating system by hardware manufacturers.
Posted by Neo Con (428 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No kidding...
You wouldn't be far off from the mark, and this wouldn't be the first time, either:

There was once a HUGE stink over a certain video card manufacturer who tweaked their Quake2 benchmarks (back when certain games and their FPS ratings were the definitive benchmarks) by having the chipset automatically override and downgrade certain barely-visible video options of the game. One of the hardware reviewers caught it (noticed the downgraded mipmapping, I think), renamed "quake2.exe" to "quack2.exe", ran the test again, and found the FPS numbers were far below the published benchmarks.

I can easily see certain makers (not just the CPU-making ones, either) tweaking firmware just to bounce the benchmarks in their favor...

It's bad enough that Vista is going to require some serious horsepower just to operate at anything near the user-perceived speed of its predecessors (...and for what, exactly? A knock-off Aqua clone at the UI and some half-patched attempts at security?) It's even worse given Microsoft's historical habit of seriously underestimating minimum requirements. But now... you get to contend with skewed benchmarks from manufacturers to boot.

Man, I'll readily admit that I'm not a fan of Windows (and rarely if ever have to use it @ work -- never at home)... but damn it's gonna be a rough and expensive ride for those who do use the thing on a regular basis.

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Gaming the system
I can see one issue with this could be that hardware manufacturers start building their chips to "game" the rating system instead of concentrating on actual performance. This has been seen time and time again, from Deep Blue being programmed to defeat only one specific chess master to nVidia & ATI building in instructions that give them a higher benchmark score without really being much faster overall.

It would almost be better for Microsoft to not let on what their exact calculations are, but even if they did that (not likely, considering the likely outcry), reverse-engineering would still necessitate that they maintain constant vigilance in the face of potential abuse of the rating system by hardware manufacturers.
Posted by Neo Con (428 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No kidding...
You wouldn't be far off from the mark, and this wouldn't be the first time, either:

There was once a HUGE stink over a certain video card manufacturer who tweaked their Quake2 benchmarks (back when certain games and their FPS ratings were the definitive benchmarks) by having the chipset automatically override and downgrade certain barely-visible video options of the game. One of the hardware reviewers caught it (noticed the downgraded mipmapping, I think), renamed "quake2.exe" to "quack2.exe", ran the test again, and found the FPS numbers were far below the published benchmarks.

I can easily see certain makers (not just the CPU-making ones, either) tweaking firmware just to bounce the benchmarks in their favor...

It's bad enough that Vista is going to require some serious horsepower just to operate at anything near the user-perceived speed of its predecessors (...and for what, exactly? A knock-off Aqua clone at the UI and some half-patched attempts at security?) It's even worse given Microsoft's historical habit of seriously underestimating minimum requirements. But now... you get to contend with skewed benchmarks from manufacturers to boot.

Man, I'll readily admit that I'm not a fan of Windows (and rarely if ever have to use it @ work -- never at home)... but damn it's gonna be a rough and expensive ride for those who do use the thing on a regular basis.

/P
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Cool
I didn't really understand that very much. But what I did sounded like Microsoft is making some big changes that will improve people's lives. Sounds like Microsoft is going to be doing a lot of good for people. I think all of the technicians should be recognized by Gates and be celebrated as heros.
Posted by lovejessii (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
wait till you've been 'round a while longer
your enthusiasm is refreshing and likely not the result of watching DOS evolve into winXP.

Unfortunately, the changes discussed here are only changes to the system measurement tool they've released for us lowly users to confirm how much new hardware we'll have to buy to support Vista.

Thus far, Microsoft's main concern has been doing a lot of good for Microsoft while giving lip service to the good of the user. Perhaps Vista will break the mold but more likely, it'll be another layer of programming code ontop of the all the other layers they've added to the onion called Windows since putting the first layer over DOS.

Like IE7, you can be sure that Vista will be pretty with all the rough edges smoothed over and polished. You can be sure that the hardware required to push the operating system alone will be huge jump from what your on now. You can be sure that there will be complicated license validation schemes in place. You can be sure that Vista will become quite usable by SP1 or SP2 when they get most of the whole plugged. But I base this all on having grownup with the history of the company.

I'm not going to tell you to buy a Mac or download Linux distributions. If you like Vista when it comes out, then use it; just please, read enough to know that they are not the only OS or Application provider in town.

Who knows, perhaps with Bill gone and the desk asignments shuffled around, M$ will prove us Tech folks wrong and you user folks right.
Posted by jabbotts (492 comments )
Link Flag
Classic
At least you openly admit that you don't understand this, which makes sense for a MS fan.

Vista is a poorly implemented knockoff of a 4-5 year old operating system(OSX) that requires way too much hardware just to run it. You have a computer that can barely handle Vista? Congrats, you won't be able to actually run anything on it, without upgrading hardware.

This in no way will improve anyones lives. Vista is already a failure and it hasn't been released. How can say that? Well, for starters the best features have been removed because they couldn't get things to work right, what other OS's have had for years and even decades. It is built on a unsecure platform, and most of the announced security features are extremely weak and amatuerish. There is simply nothing in Vista that someone else hasn't done already, and better.

Yeah, Gates is a hero if you value lying, stealing, illegal and unethical business practices.

Thank you for reinforcing my thoery that MS fans are ignorant about computers.
Posted by qwerty75 (1164 comments )
Link Flag
Cool
I didn't really understand that very much. But what I did sounded like Microsoft is making some big changes that will improve people's lives. Sounds like Microsoft is going to be doing a lot of good for people. I think all of the technicians should be recognized by Gates and be celebrated as heros.
Posted by lovejessii (5 comments )
Reply Link Flag
wait till you've been 'round a while longer
your enthusiasm is refreshing and likely not the result of watching DOS evolve into winXP.

Unfortunately, the changes discussed here are only changes to the system measurement tool they've released for us lowly users to confirm how much new hardware we'll have to buy to support Vista.

Thus far, Microsoft's main concern has been doing a lot of good for Microsoft while giving lip service to the good of the user. Perhaps Vista will break the mold but more likely, it'll be another layer of programming code ontop of the all the other layers they've added to the onion called Windows since putting the first layer over DOS.

Like IE7, you can be sure that Vista will be pretty with all the rough edges smoothed over and polished. You can be sure that the hardware required to push the operating system alone will be huge jump from what your on now. You can be sure that there will be complicated license validation schemes in place. You can be sure that Vista will become quite usable by SP1 or SP2 when they get most of the whole plugged. But I base this all on having grownup with the history of the company.

I'm not going to tell you to buy a Mac or download Linux distributions. If you like Vista when it comes out, then use it; just please, read enough to know that they are not the only OS or Application provider in town.

Who knows, perhaps with Bill gone and the desk asignments shuffled around, M$ will prove us Tech folks wrong and you user folks right.
Posted by jabbotts (492 comments )
Link Flag
Classic
At least you openly admit that you don't understand this, which makes sense for a MS fan.

Vista is a poorly implemented knockoff of a 4-5 year old operating system(OSX) that requires way too much hardware just to run it. You have a computer that can barely handle Vista? Congrats, you won't be able to actually run anything on it, without upgrading hardware.

This in no way will improve anyones lives. Vista is already a failure and it hasn't been released. How can say that? Well, for starters the best features have been removed because they couldn't get things to work right, what other OS's have had for years and even decades. It is built on a unsecure platform, and most of the announced security features are extremely weak and amatuerish. There is simply nothing in Vista that someone else hasn't done already, and better.

Yeah, Gates is a hero if you value lying, stealing, illegal and unethical business practices.

Thank you for reinforcing my thoery that MS fans are ignorant about computers.
Posted by qwerty75 (1164 comments )
Link Flag
How lame....
What dont they understand. Im running Vista B2 on a MacBook Pro which scored a 3..My pc at home Scored a 5.

It rated My Macbook like so:
Processor: 5
Memory: 4.5
HDD: 3.5
Graphics: 3.8
Gaming Graphics memory : 4.1

My PC Scored 4-5 on everything. There is nothing to the performance rating system that I dont understand. Hell, It even told me which drivers were causing windows to start slowly, shut down slowly, and which programs or drivers that were interfering with sleep mode..Id say its a pretty damn good tool, even in its beta stage..

Are people getting dumber'er? Or is it just me.

Besides that, The help documentation clearly states what the tool is for: Stating "The Windows System Performance Rating measures the capability of your computer's hardware configuration and expresses this measurement as a whole number. A higher performance rating means your computer will perform better and faster, especially when performing more advanced and resource-intensive tasks, than a computer with a lower performance rating. You can use the performance rating number to confidently buy programs and other software that are rated to match your computer's performance level. For example, if this computer has a System Performance Rating of 3, then you can confidently purchase any software designed for this version of Windows that requires a computer with a rating of 3 or less. Etc...."

Im not sure what everyone is complaining about..It makes plenty of sense to me and the ppl i've shown..My mom even understands it...So whats the damn problem?
Posted by SystemsJunky (409 comments )
Reply Link Flag
How lame....
What dont they understand. Im running Vista B2 on a MacBook Pro which scored a 3..My pc at home Scored a 5.

It rated My Macbook like so:
Processor: 5
Memory: 4.5
HDD: 3.5
Graphics: 3.8
Gaming Graphics memory : 4.1

My PC Scored 4-5 on everything. There is nothing to the performance rating system that I dont understand. Hell, It even told me which drivers were causing windows to start slowly, shut down slowly, and which programs or drivers that were interfering with sleep mode..Id say its a pretty damn good tool, even in its beta stage..

Are people getting dumber'er? Or is it just me.

Besides that, The help documentation clearly states what the tool is for: Stating "The Windows System Performance Rating measures the capability of your computer's hardware configuration and expresses this measurement as a whole number. A higher performance rating means your computer will perform better and faster, especially when performing more advanced and resource-intensive tasks, than a computer with a lower performance rating. You can use the performance rating number to confidently buy programs and other software that are rated to match your computer's performance level. For example, if this computer has a System Performance Rating of 3, then you can confidently purchase any software designed for this version of Windows that requires a computer with a rating of 3 or less. Etc...."

Im not sure what everyone is complaining about..It makes plenty of sense to me and the ppl i've shown..My mom even understands it...So whats the damn problem?
Posted by SystemsJunky (409 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I don't need it
because new computers with vista will cost more. Therefore I plan to buy a Mac.
Posted by paulsecic (298 comments )
Reply Link Flag
In the interest of fairness...
New macs ain't cheap, either (unless you want a Mini, which IMHO looks and feels severely crippled next to my dual G5 PowerMac).

Vista will certainly require hopped-up hardware, and cheap Dells with a Celeron, 256MB of RAM and a cheap GeForce2 clone ain't going to cut it this go 'round, either. OTOH, I suspect that Dell et. al. will find a way to lash together a cheap enough box for ~ $750 or so (initially) that will just barely cut the mustard.
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Why?
It runs on my Celeron 1.7 256 MB that I bought four years ago, and pre-release code is always bloated with de-bug and test features. Thus any computer bought in the last 2 years should be OK.
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
I don't need it
because new computers with vista will cost more. Therefore I plan to buy a Mac.
Posted by paulsecic (298 comments )
Reply Link Flag
In the interest of fairness...
New macs ain't cheap, either (unless you want a Mini, which IMHO looks and feels severely crippled next to my dual G5 PowerMac).

Vista will certainly require hopped-up hardware, and cheap Dells with a Celeron, 256MB of RAM and a cheap GeForce2 clone ain't going to cut it this go 'round, either. OTOH, I suspect that Dell et. al. will find a way to lash together a cheap enough box for ~ $750 or so (initially) that will just barely cut the mustard.
Posted by Penguinisto (5042 comments )
Link Flag
Why?
It runs on my Celeron 1.7 256 MB that I bought four years ago, and pre-release code is always bloated with de-bug and test features. Thus any computer bought in the last 2 years should be OK.
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
Of course Intel doesn't like it...
Things like "better graphics performance" can be had without
requiring the purchase of an entirely new system. "More cores" is
exactly what Intel wants, because it forces yet another
(unnecessary) system swap that Intel benefits greatly from.
Posted by chassoto--2008 (71 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Of course Intel doesn't like it...
Things like "better graphics performance" can be had without
requiring the purchase of an entirely new system. "More cores" is
exactly what Intel wants, because it forces yet another
(unnecessary) system swap that Intel benefits greatly from.
Posted by chassoto--2008 (71 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Is this an open door for synthetic benchmark abuse?
As was the case 5 years ago when the video card wars came to a head, are we going to see the return of specifically-tweaked drivers aimed at improving these "Vista" scores?

Why would they bother with broad hardware offerings when they can govern a driver to enforce market segmentation?

This really doesn't bode well unless Microsoft also randomizes the test.
Posted by MattLPMP (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Is this an open door for synthetic benchmark abuse?
As was the case 5 years ago when the video card wars came to a head, are we going to see the return of specifically-tweaked drivers aimed at improving these "Vista" scores?

Why would they bother with broad hardware offerings when they can govern a driver to enforce market segmentation?

This really doesn't bode well unless Microsoft also randomizes the test.
Posted by MattLPMP (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This should be open sourced
I'm sorry, but you just can't trust this rating if the source code isn't available for public inspection. Who's to say that Nvidia, say, haven't paid Microsoft to add 0.5 to the rating if it's an Nvidia card, regardless of how good that card is? It's akin to the driver tweaking that ATI/Nvidia are often accused of to boost their scores in 3D graphic benchmarks.

The actual idea of this isn't a bad one though (the way MS have implemented it is, of course, absolutely awful - it should be an average, not a base score). Maybe it's something some Linux distros should take up (i.e. release a open source Linux, Mac OS X and Windows score suite to analyse how suitable the hardware is to run Linux - including any 3D desktop stuff that's now the rage)? It'll be eye-opening for users how integrated 3D cards provide as good as (if not better) 3D desktop effects on Linux compared to the higher-powered separate 3D cards needed to run Vista's Aero.
Posted by rklrkl (143 comments )
Reply Link Flag
This should be open sourced
I'm sorry, but you just can't trust this rating if the source code isn't available for public inspection. Who's to say that Nvidia, say, haven't paid Microsoft to add 0.5 to the rating if it's an Nvidia card, regardless of how good that card is? It's akin to the driver tweaking that ATI/Nvidia are often accused of to boost their scores in 3D graphic benchmarks.

The actual idea of this isn't a bad one though (the way MS have implemented it is, of course, absolutely awful - it should be an average, not a base score). Maybe it's something some Linux distros should take up (i.e. release a open source Linux, Mac OS X and Windows score suite to analyse how suitable the hardware is to run Linux - including any 3D desktop stuff that's now the rage)? It'll be eye-opening for users how integrated 3D cards provide as good as (if not better) 3D desktop effects on Linux compared to the higher-powered separate 3D cards needed to run Vista's Aero.
Posted by rklrkl (143 comments )
Reply Link Flag
NONE of my 3 PC's will handle Vista...:-(
but...since APPLE will release Leopard about the same time that MSFT releases Vista, well...:-)

iMac here I come!

ps: with my NEW iMac I'll run Leopard & Linux, so, goodbye MicroSoft!
Posted by gary85739 (613 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Have you tried?
I have a four year old Celeron 1.7 with 256 MB that runs Vista. Anything that is under six years should be able to run Vista. Anything that was bought two years ago should run it good. Only if you want all of the flashy features then you will need a new computer. What do you have, PIIs?
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
NONE of my 3 PC's will handle Vista...:-(
but...since APPLE will release Leopard about the same time that MSFT releases Vista, well...:-)

iMac here I come!

ps: with my NEW iMac I'll run Leopard & Linux, so, goodbye MicroSoft!
Posted by gary85739 (613 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Have you tried?
I have a four year old Celeron 1.7 with 256 MB that runs Vista. Anything that is under six years should be able to run Vista. Anything that was bought two years ago should run it good. Only if you want all of the flashy features then you will need a new computer. What do you have, PIIs?
Posted by Andrew J Glina (1673 comments )
Link Flag
Vista Vista Vista
I'm not anti MS, but am I the only one who doesn't see too much new in the OS other than having become more system needy. No one has said what the operational differences really are that would intice anyone away from XP. I'd really like to know how they differ outside of Vista needing 4GB processors and 4GB of memory and a wopping big Video card and all the latest hardware. Buying a $3,000.00 dollar computer to run a $500.00 dollar OS certainly does not endear me to Vista.
Posted by aqvarivs (38 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Vista Vista Vista
I'm not anti MS, but am I the only one who doesn't see too much new in the OS other than having become more system needy. No one has said what the operational differences really are that would intice anyone away from XP. I'd really like to know how they differ outside of Vista needing 4GB processors and 4GB of memory and a wopping big Video card and all the latest hardware. Buying a $3,000.00 dollar computer to run a $500.00 dollar OS certainly does not endear me to Vista.
Posted by aqvarivs (38 comments )
Reply Link Flag
On operating systems and such...
Hellooo!
Reality Check!!!!
Excuse me... But isn't Windows (Vista included) supposed to be an OPERATING SYSTEM?! That is a software that "puts together" the computing system and ensures operation of input and output periferals, disk operation and launch of programs?!
So... if the programs using it don't need more resources why should the OPERATING SYSTEM need more?!
It's like you would need a bigger and better car each time you buy a new steering wheel and gearbox lever or a new dashboard!
Aren't things a little out of control?!
Hello? Microsoft? Anyone listening?!
Posted by Kostagh (57 comments )
Reply Link Flag
On operating systems and such...
Hellooo!
Reality Check!!!!
Excuse me... But isn't Windows (Vista included) supposed to be an OPERATING SYSTEM?! That is a software that "puts together" the computing system and ensures operation of input and output periferals, disk operation and launch of programs?!
So... if the programs using it don't need more resources why should the OPERATING SYSTEM need more?!
It's like you would need a bigger and better car each time you buy a new steering wheel and gearbox lever or a new dashboard!
Aren't things a little out of control?!
Hello? Microsoft? Anyone listening?!
Posted by Kostagh (57 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Good idea but needs to go farther
I think it's good to simplify user's decision making, given the vast number of permutations of graphics cards, processors, hard drive speed and space, memory space, etc.

However, what I'd like to see is the tool allow the user to choose how important various uses are (i.e. Email/web-browsing, gaming, HDTV recording, data mining) and then determine the performance numbers based on the user's priorities.

I know that would be an insane amount of permutations, but I think it would help people better gauge what they need than a one-size-fits-all score.
Posted by bluemist9999 (1020 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Good idea but needs to go farther
I think it's good to simplify user's decision making, given the vast number of permutations of graphics cards, processors, hard drive speed and space, memory space, etc.

However, what I'd like to see is the tool allow the user to choose how important various uses are (i.e. Email/web-browsing, gaming, HDTV recording, data mining) and then determine the performance numbers based on the user's priorities.

I know that would be an insane amount of permutations, but I think it would help people better gauge what they need than a one-size-fits-all score.
Posted by bluemist9999 (1020 comments )
Reply Link Flag
To think that no one realizes that WHEN the technology is "invented" or even more affordable Vista is much less of a hassle and is not this memory hungry graphics monster that everyone makes it out to be. I chose to build my PC from an Acer X1200 w/ Vista x86 (32bit). The X1200 is not a blow you out of the water computer, it can barely produce the results it was built for... Home Theater.

I used the Rating System as the weapon of my choice to determine which upgrade would produce the best results for a gaming platform and general multimedia use from budget components, I did however splurge here and there, eventually buying a used graphics card.

I have managed to produce a "Base Score" of 5.5. This is because I didn't replace the hard drive or disk drive, they both sufficed easily. All other scores are 5.9. I am NOT bragging, I am simply pointing out that SHOULD someone feel that they would like to upgrade their PC, they may do so w/o a degree in computers or related applications. Plus, should a person not care about how windows animates it is possible to simply turn things off, such as Windows Aero. I did that once before I began my upgrades and did raise the Base Score 0.3 points almost in all areas.

BTW, the program did not need to be developed, for any reason. It is just simply "convenient". Let's all try to remember that.
Posted by darker_zero (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.