Windows Vista and Windows 7 take better advantage of multiple cores than Windows XP, but not enough to overcome XP's greater efficiency Credit: Wachiwit / Shutterstock Windows XP SP2 outpaced Windows Vista SP1 and Windows 7 beta by leaps and bounds during multiprocess workload testing (concurrent database, messaging workflow, and multimedia tasks) on our dual-core and quad-core test beds (see main article, “The generation gap: Windows on multicore“). However, as you can see from the Scalability figures below (next page), the improvement in performance of XP when moving from dual-core to quad-core paled to the gains of Vista and Windows 7, showing that the later operating systems take better advantage of multiple cores. See “How I tested” for test details. Windows on multicore: OfficeBench results (dual core) DatabaseMessaging workflowWindows XP1.57 seconds5.94 secondsWindows Vista3.02 seconds11.77 secondsWindows 73.42 seconds8.18 secondsDelta: XP to Vista92%98%Delta: XP to Windows 7118%38% Windows on multicore: OfficeBench results (quad core) DatabaseMessaging workflowWindows XP0.43 seconds4.49 secondsWindows Vista0.51 seconds7.45 secondsWindows 70.51 seconds7.14 secondsDelta: XP to Vista19%66%Delta: XP to Windows 719%59% Windows on multicore: Scalability comparison DatabaseMessaging workflowWindows XP265%32%Windows Vista492%58%Windows 7571%15%Delta: XP to Vista86%80%Delta: XP to Windows 7115%-55% Windows XP is more efficient If you take the raw transaction times for the database and workflow tasks, and then factor them against the average processor utilization for these same workloads, we see that Windows XP consumes significantly fewer CPU cycles than Vista or Windows 7 to complete a single pass of the database and workflow transaction loops. XP provides a cleaner, less complex code path for the workloads to navigate as they execute, resulting in better overall performance with lower consumption of CPU cycles. Windows on multicore: CPU cycles consumed (dual core) DatabaseMessaging workflowWindows XP8.90 billion cycles18.08 billion cyclesWindows Vista12.43 billion cycles23.54 billion cyclesWindows 714.93 billion cycles25.15 billion cyclesDelta: XP to Vista40%30%Delta: XP to Windows 768%39% Windows on multicore: CPU cycles consumed (quad-core) DatabaseMessaging workflowWindows XP7.19 billion cycles40.71 billion cyclesWindows Vista10.36 billion cycles51.57 billion cyclesWindows 710.88 billion cycles48.41 billion cyclesDelta: XP to Vista44%27%Delta: XP to Windows 751%19% Technology Industry