Okay, so there's been a lot of talk about which is better, which runs leaner, which takes more space, etc.
So I decided; Hey! Why not test them all, in a controlled environment, allowing them the exact same treatment to get as accurate a result as possible? Good Idea?
I think so too. So here comes Kyle's Windows XP/Vista/7 Resource Test + More!
Environment
First things first, the environment I used.
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ stock (2.4 GHz, I reset the clock to get an accurate test)
3 GB System RAM (800 MHz DDR2)
ATI Radeon HD 3450 256 MB @ Stock (Again, reset)
Asus Motherboard
Integrated 10/100/1000 LAN connection
Windows 7 Build 7000 Ultimate x64 as the base OS
Then, I installed Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 (64 Bit installer) on that platform, with nothing running in the background.
I then allocated 1 GB of RAM for the Virtual PC
I then set up three disks, One 10 GB disk for XP, and two 20 GB disks for Vista and 7.
The virtual machine itself only uses one core, so I let it have the full 2.4 GHz core.
I then installed each OS (Using XP Pro SP3, Vista Ultimate SP1, and The Windows 7 Ultimate Beta, all 32 Bit OS')
Then, I booted into each separately and ran the First boot memory tests.
Memory Test Results:
Windows XP Professional SP3 Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/6011/xpsp31ncfp1.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/7503/xpsp32cfk5.jpg
Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6092/vistasp11ncyx8.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/5572/vistasp12ckx0.jpg
Windows 7 Beta (Build 7000) Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/6951/7beta1ncwl2.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/6461/7beta2cxi1.jpg
---------------------------
Conclusion:
That's it so far, showing that (obviously) XP SP3 has the lead in RAM usage (76-82 MB), followed by 7 Beta (288-320 MB) and Vista SP1 (295-347 MB). Overall XP also has the least bloat, with 6.3%, followed by Seven with 10% and Vista bringing up the rear with 15%.
---------------------------
Hard Disk Space Test:
Windows XP Professional SP3 Results: http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4320/xpsp3hdfitestmy5.jpg
Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 Results: http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1181/vistasp1hdfitestgm4.jpg
Windows 7 Ultimate Beta Results: http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/3/7betahdfitestbk0.jpg
---------------------------
Conclusion:
Again, XP comes out on top, its clean install footprint only being 3.68 GB. Second place is 7 Beta, with 6.09 GB, and Vista comes in last with 7.34 GB. Seems like Vista has the most bloat on the hard disk as well. As for direct comparison, if XP = 100%, 7 Beta comes in at just over 65% more bloat, and Vista brings up the rear with over 99% over-sized.
--------------------------
More tests coming soon, suggestions?
They can't be graphic based, due to the limitations of a virtual machine, but any other test I can administer easily.
.
So I decided; Hey! Why not test them all, in a controlled environment, allowing them the exact same treatment to get as accurate a result as possible? Good Idea?
I think so too. So here comes Kyle's Windows XP/Vista/7 Resource Test + More!
Environment
First things first, the environment I used.
Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ stock (2.4 GHz, I reset the clock to get an accurate test)
3 GB System RAM (800 MHz DDR2)
ATI Radeon HD 3450 256 MB @ Stock (Again, reset)
Asus Motherboard
Integrated 10/100/1000 LAN connection
Windows 7 Build 7000 Ultimate x64 as the base OS
Then, I installed Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 (64 Bit installer) on that platform, with nothing running in the background.
I then allocated 1 GB of RAM for the Virtual PC
I then set up three disks, One 10 GB disk for XP, and two 20 GB disks for Vista and 7.
The virtual machine itself only uses one core, so I let it have the full 2.4 GHz core.
I then installed each OS (Using XP Pro SP3, Vista Ultimate SP1, and The Windows 7 Ultimate Beta, all 32 Bit OS')
Then, I booted into each separately and ran the First boot memory tests.
Memory Test Results:
Windows XP Professional SP3 Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/6011/xpsp31ncfp1.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/7503/xpsp32cfk5.jpg
Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6092/vistasp11ncyx8.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/5572/vistasp12ckx0.jpg
Windows 7 Beta (Build 7000) Results:
No Optimization (Untouched): http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/6951/7beta1ncwl2.jpg
Optimized (All unnecessary processes and services disabled): http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/6461/7beta2cxi1.jpg
---------------------------
Conclusion:
That's it so far, showing that (obviously) XP SP3 has the lead in RAM usage (76-82 MB), followed by 7 Beta (288-320 MB) and Vista SP1 (295-347 MB). Overall XP also has the least bloat, with 6.3%, followed by Seven with 10% and Vista bringing up the rear with 15%.
---------------------------
Hard Disk Space Test:
Windows XP Professional SP3 Results: http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4320/xpsp3hdfitestmy5.jpg
Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 Results: http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1181/vistasp1hdfitestgm4.jpg
Windows 7 Ultimate Beta Results: http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/3/7betahdfitestbk0.jpg
---------------------------
Conclusion:
Again, XP comes out on top, its clean install footprint only being 3.68 GB. Second place is 7 Beta, with 6.09 GB, and Vista comes in last with 7.34 GB. Seems like Vista has the most bloat on the hard disk as well. As for direct comparison, if XP = 100%, 7 Beta comes in at just over 65% more bloat, and Vista brings up the rear with over 99% over-sized.
--------------------------
More tests coming soon, suggestions?
They can't be graphic based, due to the limitations of a virtual machine, but any other test I can administer easily.
.