Windows experience index base score and Logos 4

Wondering if the windows experience index base score would be a good indicator of how fast v4 will run on your computer, or how happy you will be with v4 on your system. I searched for this topic to see if anyone had already talked about it, so if I missed it, forgive me and give me a link please.

The score in vista goes to 5.9, the highest score in 7 is 7.9 (I think these are correct).

As a start, I have 3 computers with logos 4, desktop at home, desktop and work, and laptop.

Home has vista, quad core, 2.3 ghz, 64 bit, 8 gb, gaming video card, and 5.9 rating, and logos flies.

Work desktop has win 7, dual core, 1.8 ghz, 4 gb, 32 bit, good video card (1 gb onboard), 4.6 rating, and logos is very good. I fixed this one when logos 4 came out, it had a 256 video card, and rating of 2.3, so I replaced the video card and that really revved up logos. 2.3 was too slow to be happy with logos 4.

Laptop is a tablet model, win 7, 32 bit, 3 gb, 1.8 ghz, a built in video card, rating of 3.0. It is noticably slower than the other 2 but not intolerable. If this was my only machine, I could live with it.

From my experience, anything below a 3.0 rating might not be able to run logos 4 fast enough to keep most people happy.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

Sounds reasonable, especially with Video cards that use main memory which will drag down that score. I think my laptop is around 3 in Vista but L4 performs quite well in XP.

TCBlack

From my experience, anything below a 3.0 rating might not be able to run logos 4 fast enough to keep most people happy.

I think you're among the first to broach this topic which to me appears to be quite a good idea.

I also believe that your observation is fairly accurate in that a computer lower than an overall rating of 3 is probably too underpowered to adequately handle Logos without Lags. But I think it's not the overall score but the component scores that matter most.

Remember that the overall score is both a composite of all the individual scores in a system as well as a representation of the lowest score in the system.

For instance my score of 3.2 is set by my graphics card which is holding me back at the same number. My CPU is 4.9, RAM 4.9, HD 5.9. If I were to bring in a more robust Video card I would get a better score but certainly no better than 4.9 which is the next best number from my processor.

I believe someone with a 7.0 graphics card and a 3.0 processor is going to be less happy than someone with a 4.0 processor and a 3.2 graphics card.

Overall I'm quite happy with L4 on my system at a 3.2 base score with Win7.

Kevin Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/41699#Comment_41699

The problem with the Windows Experience scores is that they are somewhat subjective. You can lose major points for not having a single component up to par yet have a machine fully capable of running L4.

For instance, my gaming laptop has 4gigs of DDR3 Ram and a class 1 video card that is probably a top 6 vid card [Geforce 9800M GTS 1 gig DDR3 Ram]. When I first installed Win 7 x64 my graphics drivers were not up to date and therefore my score suffered by several points. The truth is my machine was fully able to run at break neck speeds but the Win Exp score does not account for "incidentals". I think in the case of L4 that a class 1 card is not nearly as important as say a higher end Duo Core or Quad processor with sufficient Ram.

For gaming I think the scores are much more reliable because gaming requires much more than L4. The score is a "guide" at best in the case of L4 but I think this is because it is designed with games and multimedia in mind.

I have L4 also running on a 5 y/o Celeron 2.2 Ghz proc running a mediocre vid card and only 2 gigs of SDRAM on Win 7 x86. L4 runs slower compared to my gaming laptop but it is highly usable and if not for my little high end laptop, I think I could use it happily for study. [:)]

You don't even want to know the Win Exp score on that Celeron box lol....

Daniel Bender

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/41699#Comment_41699

. . . my score of 3.2 is set by my graphics card which is holding me back at the same number. My CPU is 4.9, RAM 4.9, HD 5.9. If I were to bring in a more robust Video card I would get a better score but certainly no better than 4.9 which is the next best number from my processor.

Thomas does your score include a gaming graphics score? My CPU is 5.5, RAM 5.5, HD 5.3, Gaming graphics 5.8, and graphics (desktop performance for Aero) is 4.4. I'm puzzled.

Thanks for your comments. . . though not necessary

David Gullick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42059#Comment_42059

The Aero rating measures your graphics card actual speed, not necessarily the memory. So for most this would be the lowest score. My Aero score is 4.3, the next lowest is 5.5 (gaming graphics), and highest is 6.2 - processor and memory.

Daniel Bender

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42059#Comment_42059

Thank youi David.

Kevin A. Purcell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42071#Comment_42071

I'd love to hear from the Logos folks if you think this is a significant issue. I do not. Overall score doesn't matter as much as processor speed and memory. But does a high speed graphics card make much difference with L4? I doubt it.

Eric Ruhnow

Windows Experience Index is not a reliable indicator as to how well L4 will run.

I run two different computers at home: A one year old laptop running Vista Home Premium 32bit with 2GB that has a WEI of 3.0 and a brand new nettop running Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit with 4GB that has a WEI of 3.3.

While the laptop is sluggish, it is usable. The nettop is so sluggish that L4 is almost useless on that system. Most of my other programs run better on the nettop, but L4 brings it to it's knees.

Michael Birney

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42093#Comment_42093

When I downloaded L4 last week on my work machine, I had a low end graphics card, maybe 256 memory, and dual monitor output. It was the one component under 3 on the windows score. It ran L3 fine, and ran all the other stuff I do (mostly excel, word, e-mail) great. But it was painfully slow with with L4. So I sprung for 75.00 for a 1 gb card (I went one generation old, the new version of the card is over 200.00). Rating went from 2.3 to 4.6. Now L4 is very good on that machine. From my experience a high speed graphics card makes a lot of difference in L4.

For any of you thinking of upgrading video cards, just keep in mind that the very high end gaming video cards are about 2 inches thick, and require more power than most stock machines can give them, you need at least a 500 watt power supply. ( A new off the rack dell or HP probably has 350, older maybe only 300). But , there are some very good video cards that will work with a 350 watt power supply, and fit much easier into a standard box.

Jon

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42302#Comment_42302

But does a high speed graphics card make much difference with L4? I doubt it.

I'm
not so sure about that; as I recall looking at some of the lag problems
you have been having, the graphics card was definitely the weakest link
in your system; and the WPF which Logos 4 displays on seems to be quite
graphically intensive as far as a text based program goes.

FWIW,
I suspect the GPU itself and RAM speed rather than the amount of video
memory is what is making a difference; large amounts of video memory
become important for processing large textures in gaming but I don't
think that's an issue here[:)]

Michael's case is a great example of what the Windows experience index is usual for - it helps to identify if there's one thing holding your system back...

Kevin A. Purcell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42318#Comment_42318

But does a high speed graphics card make much difference with L4? I doubt it.

I'm
not so sure about that; as I recall looking at some of the lag problems
you have been having, the graphics card was definitely the weakest link
in your system; and the WPF which Logos 4 displays on seems to be quite
graphically intensive as far as a text based program goes.

FWIW,
I suspect the GPU itself and RAM speed rather than the amount of video
memory is what is making a difference; large amounts of video memory
become important for processing large textures in gaming but I don't
think that's an issue here

Michael's case is a great example of what the Windows experience index is usual for - it helps to identify if there's one thing holding your system back...

This is why I would very much like to hear something official instead of just speculation from users. Not to be insulting. I just doubt that is the issue. For me, when I reformatted and reinstalled, it began running much better. I think there was some leftovers that were causing problems. One Logos official said that clearing out the temp files has been helping with some people in their support calls. I reformatted and that would of course clear out temp files. I do have 512 MB of ram on my GPU and a Geforce 9400 is not that bad a card. It isn't top of the line now, but if this program needs a very high end graphics card to run reasonably well, then Logos is in trouble. My experience interacting with the kinds of people who run Logos (not geeks but ordinary pastor, teachers, bible students) is that most of them are running older or cheaper systems. To design a program for these kinds of people that requires a $1,000 gaming PC is a HUGE lapse in judgment. I don't believe that is what they did. The Pritchett's and Friends are smarter than that.

Michael Birney

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/42322#Comment_42322

I agree, it would be nice to hear from the techies at Logos on this, instead of all just speculating.

But because speculation is sort of like gossiping without sin [:D] - They do say that they have built it for the future, which to me means that they are considering computers will have more speed and power.

My work computer is a hp 299.00 frys.com refurbished special, now with a 75.00 graphic card. A 1 generation old processor with 1 generation old 1 gb video card computer for under 400.00 seem reasonable to expect from most users.

(1 generation is pretty vague - dual core with under 2.0 ghz speed with at least 3gb memory just for the sake of argument). There are several for 329 or under on there now, and a 1 GB video card for 59.99.