Ken,

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I think the original poster is fully
cognizant of the boilerplate information you posted. He's asking for
specific reasons why his two 10K SCSI drives are receiving, to his mind,
such a wide variance in WEI scoring. (5.6 to 4.7)

Shane - the only thought I have on this is: not all hw that claims to be "X"
delivers "X" performance. Honestly, I don't have much experience with SCSI,
but your two drives, Fujitsu and IBM, are going to have different drivers
for each drive, right? Unless they're both using a generic MS driver...
and... different drivers could very easily mean different performance.
Disclaimer: SWAG!

Lang


""Ken Zhao [MSFT]"" <v-kzhao@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:dnm87QIZHHA.544@TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl...
> Hello Shane,
>
> Thank you for using newsgroup!
>
> From your post, it is hard to determine why the rate is dropping. The base
> score of your computer is determined by reviewing a collection of
> "subscores" assigned to various hardware components within your computer.
> Subscores are assigned to the following components:
>
> RAM random access memory
> CPU central processing unit
> Hard disk
> General graphics performance on the desktop
> 3D graphics capability
>
> Your computer's base score is determined by the lowest subscore. For
> example, if the lowest subscore of a hardware component in your computer
> is
> 2.6, then the base score of your computer will be 2.6. The base score is
> not an average of the combined subscores.
>
> For more related information, please refer to the following articles:
> Windows Experience Index
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...grade/experien
> ceindex.mspx
>
> Windows Vista Help: Understand and improve your computer's performance
> using the Windows Experience Index
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/win...unity/wei.mspx
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Ken Zhao
>
> Microsoft Online Support
> Microsoft Global Technical Support Center
>
> Get Secure! - www.microsoft.com/security
> <http://www.microsoft.com/security>
> ================================================== ==
> When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader so
> that others may learn and benefit from your issue.
> ================================================== ==
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------
> | From: "no spam" <nospam@hotmail.com>
> | Subject: Windows Experience Index
> | Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:17:23 +1000
> | Lines: 39
> | Message-ID: <12A05FDB-8525-43C1-B801-F193D7A12914@microsoft.com>
> | MIME-Version: 1.0
> | Content-Type: text/plain;
> | format=flowed;
> | charset="iso-8859-1";
> | reply-type=original
> | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> | X-Priority: 3
> | X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> | X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16386
> | X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16386
> | X-MS-CommunityGroup-MessageCategory:
> {E4FCE0A9-75B4-4168-BFF9-16C22D8747EC}
> | X-MS-CommunityGroup-PostID: {12A05FDB-8525-43C1-B801-F193D7A12914}
> | Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices
> | Path: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
> | Xref: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl
> microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices:78 51
> | NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGHUB02.phx.gbl 127.0.0.1
> | X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices
> |
> | Hello,
> |
> | I have an Intel C2D E6600 CPU installed on an Asus P5W DH Deluxe
> | motherboard. I recently installed Vista Home Premium (32bit) with a
> hard
> | drive configuration of one Western Digital 10k SATA drive (for system
> and
> | application files) and two Seagate 320gig SATA2 drives. I had a spare
> SCSI
> | Fujitsu 10K 36gig drive (I connected it to a LSI SCSI adapter), so I
> thought
> | that I would configure a dual boot system with Windows XP and Vista -
> one
> OS
> | on each 10K drive. I did not have much success with getting the dual
> boot
> | function to work. However, I was able to install Vista on the 10K
> Fujitsu
> | SCSI drive and, provided the Fujitsu was set as the boot drive in the
> | motherboard's bios, I was able to boot into Vista. If I set the 10K
> SATA
> | drive as the boot device in the bios, I was also able to then boot into
> XP.
> |
> | When running Vista with this configuration, I noted that the Windows
> | Experience Index was rated at 5.6. I guess if I persevered with this
> | configuration I would have been able to get the dual boot function to
> work
> | (I had used VistaBoot Pro). Anyway, I thought that if both drives were
> on
> | the same interface, dual booting would be easier to achieve. So I took
> out
> | the 10K SATA drive and replaced it with a 36gig (10K) IBM SCSI drive
> | configured off the same SCSI PCI adapter. Both drives have seperate
> SCSI
> | IDs and are on the same channel with an active terminator at the end of
> the
> | connecting SCSI cable. I was able to install Win XP on the replacement
> | drive (IBM SCSI) and eventually was able to get the PC to dual boot to
> Vista
> | and XP (Vista being the default OS).
> |
> | Now after all that rambling, I was surprised to see that the Windows
> | Experience Index, with this configuration, drop to 4.7(being the primary
> | hard disk reading)! Considering that both drives are 10K drives as
> well
> as
> | being SCSI (which I though was the faster interface compared to IDE and
> | SATA), I am stumped as to why this is so.
> |
> | Would the installation of the PCI SCSI card itself which slows down the
> boot
> | process have anything to do with this drop in performance?
> |
> | Thank you,
> |
> | Shane
> |
> |
>