Windows Experience Index of 4.1

#1 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?

Thanks guys.

--
mspohLFC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
mspohLFC's Profile: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/member.php?userid=735
View this thread: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25042

#2 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

Memory is rated on operations per second, not on capacity. You'd have to
replace existing ram with a faster speed (assuming the motherboard supports
it) to increase that factor.

Personally, I wish they'd never put that tool in there. Too many waste too
much time worrying about silly numbers.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

"mspohLFC" <mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote in message
news:mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com...
>
> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?
>

Thanks guys.
>
>
> --
> mspohLFC
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> mspohLFC's Profile: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/member.php?userid=735
> View this thread: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25042
>

#3 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

"Rick Rogers" <rick@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:O9Elg%23oNJHA.1144@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Memory is rated on operations per second, not on capacity. You'd have to
> replace existing ram with a faster speed (assuming the motherboard
> supports it) to increase that factor.
>
> Personally, I wish they'd never put that tool in there. Too many waste too
> much time worrying about silly numbers.
>
> --
> Best of Luck,
>
> Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
> Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
> My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
>
> "mspohLFC" <mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote in message
> news:mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com...
>>
>> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
>> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
>> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?
>>

Thanks guys.
>>
>>
>> --
>> mspohLFC
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> mspohLFC's Profile: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/member.php?userid=735
>> View this thread: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25042
>>
>

Seconded..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

#4 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:16:40 +0530, mspohLFC
<mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote:

>
> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?

The index rates the RAM's speed, not its quantity.

My view is that what the index mostly does is confuse people, and it
would have been better if it weren't there at all.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

#5 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 07:20:27 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
<mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

> "Rick Rogers" <rick@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:O9Elg%23oNJHA.1144@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > Memory is rated on operations per second, not on capacity. You'd have to
> > replace existing ram with a faster speed (assuming the motherboard
> > supports it) to increase that factor.
> >
> > Personally, I wish they'd never put that tool in there. Too many waste too
> > much time worrying about silly numbers.
> >
> > --
> > Best of Luck,
> >
> > Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
> > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
> > Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
> > My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
> >
> > "mspohLFC" <mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote in message
> > news:mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com...
> >>
> >> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
> >> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
> >> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?
> >>

Thanks guys.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> mspohLFC
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> mspohLFC's Profile: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/member.php?userid=735
> >> View this thread: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25042
> >>
> >
>
>
> Seconded..

Thirded. Sorry Rick, I just sent my own message saying essentially the
same thing you did, without seeing your message or Mike's.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

#6 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 07:36:33 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP"
<kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:16:40 +0530, mspohLFC
><mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
>> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
>> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?
>
>
>The index rates the RAM's speed, not its quantity.

I can vouch for that: I increased my RAM from one to three gigs and
the score went DOWN. Turns out that my mobo (it's not cutting-edge)
actually reduces the bus speed when more than 2 gigs is installed.

>My view is that what the index mostly does is confuse people, and it
>would have been better if it weren't there at all.

For SURE.

--
Norman
If people concentrated on the really
important things of life, there'd
be a shortage of fishing poles.
Doug Larson

#7 (**permalink**) 10-25-2008

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:lkb6g4599lmguprpljeulsujuk852n9qvm@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:16:40 +0530, mspohLFC
> <mspohLFC.3htz42@winvistaclub.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I have recently added an extra 1gb of RAM to make my total RAM up to
>> 3gb. However, the Windows Experience Index score for RAM stayed at 4.1.
>> Is there any reason for this or is it just Vista being stupid again?
>
>
> The index rates the RAM's speed, not its quantity.
>
> My view is that what the index mostly does is confuse people, and it
> would have been better if it weren't there at all.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

Not only that, it seems to underrate high performance dual
core Xeon CPUs. I guess the Xeon's capabilities don't match
up with the algorithm Vista uses to measure CPU performance.

Windows Experience Index of 4.1

microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance maintenance