So I keep hearing that Aero over Basic uses more of your gpu, and that it may effect your fps in games. I have yet to see actual numbers, so i decided to this out myself. Added Classic test by request of TwoCables
I am using:
Sig Rig
Furmark 1.8.0 benchmarking with Post FX at Fullscreen 1680x1060 for 1 min.
Ran each test 3 times, got the same results for each.
These are my results
Aero and Transparency On:
Aero with Transparency Off:
Basic:
Classic:
As you can see by turning off Aero your minimum fps greatly increases, yet the average only increased by one. I am surprised however that there is no difference between Basic and Classic, I thought at least the minimum would have increased. It is enough however to convince me to run with Basic
What happens when using the Windows Classic theme?
By the way, csscmaster3: this is perfect timing as I was finally beginning to wonder the very same thing last night. I even went so far as to try gaming with the Windows Classic theme, but it made no difference that I could feel or see. However, I certainly understand that a benchmark would reveal any differences.
Originally Posted by TwoCables
hehe 2 more points with Classic, but the temperature was higher.
Well on the aero and basic tests i let my gpu cool down all the way to 37 in between tests, so the conditions aren't 100% the same for classic, I just did it quickly to show you
Originally Posted by csscmaster3
Well on the aero and basic tests i let my gpu cool down all the way to 37 in between tests, so the conditions aren't 100% the same for classic, I just did it quickly to show you
Oh, well now I appreciate it even more! Thank you!
I think if its not too much of your time it would be interesting to test this with say the STALKER or the Crysis benchmark utilities. I'm not saying get on it now but for future reference it would add more support to this hypothesis.
Originally Posted by cs_maan
I think if its not too much of your time it would be interesting to test this with say the STALKER or the Crysis benchmark utilities. I'm not saying get on it now but for future reference it would add more support to this hypothesis.
Ok thanks, I do that either tonight or tomorrow. I did Furmark because i knew it was a fast test.
For what it's worth I ran my own crysis bench since the OP didn't have it. I did basic and aero. If someone wants classic I'll do it. Tests were done with sig rig except the 5850 was at stock settings.
Results
Aero:
Basic:
No difference really.
Anyhow, +rep to the op for a good idea and great info. I've wondered the same thing but never really got the motivation to put it to the test.
Very inconclusive observation here, but OP and myself are running Nvidia GPUs while the one above me is running ATi. Seems to effect Nvidia? Or maybe its the 5850 is a beast, or hes running DX9... dunno the idea of this thread is an interesting one.
Yeah, that doesn't really mean anything. Try benching with a game that runs full-screen and see if you see any difference. I am guessing there will be none.
So far we have ATI and Nvidia benchmarks, but all with different programs
It does appear like Nvidia cards however do get a slightly better average framerate, and that the minimum increases. Tonight I will run some Stalker benchmarks, could someone with an ati card comparable to a gtx260 PM me so we can run the benchmark at the same settings ?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!