January 22, 2009

The generation gap: Windows on multicore

Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 show their multiprocessing mettle in our dual-core and quad-core performance tests

They say you can never be too young, or too rich. Or too handsome or too beautiful. And in the case of Intel-architecture PCs, it also seems that you can never have too many cores. With both the industry leader and its archrival, AMD, ratcheting up the core count, the future of personal computing will be experienced in parallel -- parallel processing, that is. The days of cranking up the clock speed to keep the pipeline flowing are gone. These days, it's all about width: How many instructions can you execute per clock cycle simultaneously?

Going hand in hand with the multicore push has been the evolution of desktop Windows to support these new chips. Today's dominant flavors -- Windows XP, Windows Vista, and soon Windows 7 -- all support Symmetrical Multiprocessing (SMP) out of the box, a trait they inherited thanks to their Windows NT (New Technology) lineage. However, experience has shown that multiprocessing across discrete CPUs is not the same thing as multiprocessing across integrated cores within the same CPU.

[ Is it Windows 7, or Windows Vista R2? See "Windows 7 unmasked." Read the great Windows 7 debate. Is Windows 7 necessary? See "Death match: Windows Vista versus XP." Monitor the performance of your Windows systems with Windows Sentinel. ]

As a result, current-generation software products incorporate additional optimizations to allow them to perform at their best in the low-latency, shared-cache world of multicore. This includes Windows Vista, which shipped at the beginning of the multicore transition, and Windows 7, of course, but not Windows XP. All of which begs the question: How much of an impact does this additional multicore tuning have on real-world OS performance and scalability? And what, if anything, do you gain or lose by sticking with Windows XP versus migrating to one of Microsoft's more modern versions?

In order to test the limits of Windows multicore support, I constructed a comprehensive, multiprocess workload test package using the ADO (database), MAPI (workflow), and WMP (media playback) Stress objects from the DMS Clarity Studio; see "How I tested" for the details. I then executed the package across representative dual- and quad-core systems in an effort to document the scalability, the execution efficiency, and the raw performance of the workloads when running against each of the available Windows incarnations.

What I found may surprise you. Not only does Microsoft have a firm grasp of multicore tuning, but its scalability story promises to keep getting better with time. In other words, Windows Vista and Windows 7 are poised to reap ever greater performance benefits as Intel and AMD extend the number of cores in future editions of their processors.

Close

On Twitter now

Platforms

Powered by Twitter

On Twitter now

additional resources
White Paper - How to Improve Delivery of Advanced Web Applications

White Paper

Virtual Workforce: The Key to Expanding The Business While Cutting Costs

Get the independent advice and expertise you need to support a virtual workforce.

Go inside:
The three-step approach to making a virtual workforce a reality.
The four flavors of client virtualization technologies.
The three key initiatives that solve IT challenges.
Download now »
White Paper: Successfully Secure Your Wireless LAN With Wi-Fi firewalls.

White Paper

Addressing Linux Threats Leveraging Fewer Resources

The increase in Linux popularity has increased the frequency and sophistication of malware attacks. Read this 2 page white paper now to learn how you can protect your Linux environment with real-time protection that is certified by all major Linux vendors.

Download now »
White Paper - The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

White Paper

The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

Ensuring acceptable application delivery will become even more difficult over the next few years. As a result, IT organizations need to ensure that the approach that they take to resolving the current application delivery challenges can scale to support the emerging challenges. This handbook elaborates on the key tasks associated with planning, optimization, management and control and provides decision criteria to help IT organizations choose appropriate solutions.

Download now »
White Paper - Is Your Backup System Outdated?

White Paper

Mid-range Storage Considerations

A common misconception is that mid-range storage requirements are dramatically different than that of a larger enterprise. Mid-range storage users may require less capacity, but they have similar functionality and management requirements. This ESG paper examines mid-range storage needs and reviews a new solution that adjusts size while retaining value, performance and functionality.

Download now »
NickFie 16-Jun-09 9:38am
Great article. Would love to find out where Windows Server 2008 stands in your ranking. My subjective conclusion is that its code path length is much closer to XP's than Vista's.
shadfurman 11-Sep-09 11:59am
At first I thought that this was an unbiased article, until you basically stated that anyone who had a different experience than you wasn't a mature windows user. You left out the obvious benchmarks where windows 7 shines. I've never actually done database benchmarks, but most of the benchmarks I've ran come out in favor of win7 over XP. And all this junk about win7 being the same kernel as vista? Like thats such a big deal? How often has windows rewrote the windows kernel? USUALLY a new windows release is just an update/optimization/GUI overhaul. The only one I seriously balked at was WinMe, every other one was a SERIOUS improvement. Granted... if you want to continue using old hardware, by all means, use the OS it came with. They're designed for each other. No one is expecting Vista to be installed on a Pentium 4 and perform like a champ (though I've done it and it performs fine) The problem is when people think of the benefits of an OS only in terms of speed. Optimization IS important. But I have a feeling you picked benchmarks that showed a performance difference, cause in the benchmarks I have done, on new hardware windows 7 beats XP near across the board. Add with that the INCREDIBLE increase in technology in windows 7, XP is really a junker by comparison. Of course you'll always have people who idealize how things were better in their day. I love to reminisce (I have a version of windows from every release setup in my virtualbox, JUST so I can go back when I want to. From 1.0 to Win7, except Vista thats what I currently run.)

Sign up to receive Platforms Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Today's Headlines: First Look Newsletter

Find out what will be news for the day, with our first-thing-in-the-morning briefing.

©1994-2010 Infoworld, Inc.