Raptor Performance Differences Other Vista Discussions Discuss Raptor Performance Differences in the Windows Vista forums; Hi Friends: The PassMark performance tests kept telling me that the 150 GB Raptor on which I installed Ultimate 64-bit is slower than the one on which I installed ...

[Znod]

Hi Friends:

The PassMark performance tests kept telling me that the 150 GB Raptor on which I installed Ultimate 64-bit is slower than the one on which I installed Ultimate 32-bit. So, today:

1. I formatted the slow Raptor and took it back to Best Buy. I got my money back--i.e., Best Buy did not have another 150 GB Raptor--so an exchange could not occur. Evidently, 150 GB Raptors are flying off the shelves in Phoenix--none available on my side of town. But, I will get another soon one way or another.

2. I formatted/clean-installed Ultimate 64-bit on my fast Raptor, restored my Ultimate 64-bit disk image to it to keep from having to reinstall all my software, and started testing.

Below are my prior PassMark composite test results with the slow Raptor/Ultimate 64-bit combo:

1. Without ReadyBoost (RB):
896.359
896.278
896.055
Avg 896.23

2. With RB--NTSF:
904.272
904.382
903.518
Avg 904.06

3. With RB-FAT32
901.225
901.18
901.859
Avg 901.42

Here are my new PassMark composite test results for my fast Raptor/Ultimate 64-bit combo:

4. Without RB:
910.3
910.1
910.4
Avg 910.27

Implied is about a 1.6% increase in performance, on average, as measured by the PassMark composite test (1.e., comparing the averages in 1 and 4). But, the increase in drive performance is much more dramatic. I haven't calculated precisely yet, but eyeballing suggests an increase of about 8% on average. I think the moral is test what you buy and return it if not fully satisfied.