News

May 9, 2009

Windows 7 vs Windows XP on netbooks

Hands on: running Windows 7 on a netbook

Steven J Vaughan-Nichols

Microsoft really needs Windows 7 to be the netbook OS of choice. But how does it work on a netbook? And how does that performance compare with Windows XP?

Netbooks are the one segment of the PC market that's actually growing, even in the current economy. For now, Microsoft is offering Windows XP on netbooks because Windows Vista simply won't run on a netbook's limited hardware, but it's going to need to move them to Windows 7 once that operating system hits the market.

Which brings up the question: is there anything wrong with running a full version of Windows 7 on a netbook? To test this out, I decided to install the Windows 7 Ultimate beta (because of frequent updates, I worked with builds 7000 to 7077) on a Dell Inspiron Mini 9 netbook. How well would it run?

While Microsoft claims any version of Windows 7 will run on current netbooks, Intel is not making such claims. In fact, Anand Chandrasekher, Intel's head of Ultra Mobility, recently said that Intel will be releasing new Atom processors in the second half of 2009 that will support Windows 7 Starter and Basic editions.

What Windows 7 needs

Microsoft states that Windows 7 requires a 1GHz processor, 1GB of main memory and support for DirectX 9 graphics with 128MB of memory (for the Aero interface). The company recommends that you have at least 16GB of available disk space for the installation; Windows 7 actually takes up about 5GB.

The Dell Mini 9 is powered by an Intel Atom N270 processor running at 1.6GHz. The test machine had 1GB of RAM and an 8GB SSD. The 8.9in display is powered by the processor's built-in 945GSE graphics. The default resolution, which is typical for a netbook, is 1024 by 600. The Mini 9 also has three USB ports, an Ethernet port, 802.11b/g Wi-Fi and an SD card reader.

What it doesn't have, as is the case with almost all netbooks, is an optical drive for the installation disk. To get around this, I used a Sony DRX-710UL external DVD drive.

NEXT PAGE: smooth installation, slow performance

Continued...
1 | 2 | 3 | NEXT >

<<newer story | back to index | older story>>

Comments received


Giovanni said on Saturday, 09 May 2009

Have you tried the release candidate? (7100)

Greg said on Saturday, 09 May 2009

RAM is ALWAYS the most important factor. I would of thought a site called PC Advisor would know this before this test, but I guess not. 4 GB of RAM with a Pentium 4 will get you better performance than 1 GB with a Core 2 Duo.

Skidz said on Saturday, 09 May 2009

Long Live XP !!

Charles Keledjian said on Saturday, 09 May 2009

I installed Windows 7 RC on my Acer Aspire One 8.9, with 1.5 RAM, 160 HD, and was running windows media center showing HD TV recorded show from my desktop computer across my wifi, while browsing the net and using Microsoft Expressions Web designer, and it was all fine and smooth. Windows Update offered me the latests drivers for the wifi. I don't agree with this article. Also, I just timed boot time to 30 secs. And it works perfectly with aero, Intel 945 is perfectly capable of it.

Player911 said on Saturday, 09 May 2009

I have a Asus EeePC 1000he with the 1.7 Atom Processor and 2gb DDR2 800mhz RAM running Win7 beta 7000 flawlessly. I run the same version on my Core2Duo desktop and use them about the same. I don't notice ANY difference in performance at all. My netbook can do whatever my PC can as far as internet related goes.

Boot time is super fast on my netbook too, faster then my desktop. To be honest I use my netbook more then my desktop now a days because of the portability factor.

One big thing is you are running on a Solid State drive. SSD's have a really slow write time. For Windows to function properly you have to install a patch for it to successfully run. I can only assume the XP was the OEM OS that had the patch built-in, while the new install of Win7 had not.

For better real world experience, I would not use a SSD. The technology under performs compared to a standard HDD.

Zk Lampkin said on Sunday, 10 May 2009

I love XP because it run perfectly on my DELL laptop. I tried win7 and I found it's a little slower on my laptop than XP, because when I switch my current window in a very fast speed, I found it sometimes freezing, I can't tolerance any freezing at any time! But this is not the major reason I do not choose win7. I found that Adobe Acrobat 8 Professional could not work as normal as in the winxp when I wants to make a PDF document via the Adobe pdf printer. I could not tolerate it any more! Besides, not only Adobe but Icesword, wSyschech, or other apps that I always use could not run! So, I still keep my keen on XP.

Tylar said on Sunday, 10 May 2009

Rewind to the year of XP's release... Ah the good ol days, when people were condemning it like... everyday.

Nathan Smith said on Sunday, 10 May 2009

Windows 7 runs very smoothly on my Asus N10j netbook. The computer came with Vista (which was horrendous). Boot-up times are waaaay faster with version 7 and the system is quite stable. Perhaps the 2GB of on-board RAM and dedicated graphics chip are helping....

ant said on Monday, 11 May 2009

I think most of your problems are coming from the 8GB SSD drive... after installing, you're looking at ~1GB remaining. On a slow SSD like that, how are you expecting any meaningful performance?

i'm running windows 7 build 7000 on my aspire one (1gb ram, 160gb hdd), and it runs fine with aero on...

Hoplex said on Monday, 11 May 2009

I have XP on my Samsung NC10 and it is running smoothly and no need to upgrade it.Windows 7 has more features and bigger program code so it will slower than XP in most netbooks. Their speed has gain a lot of media coverage and misleading all of us. XP , Vista and Windows 7 should be judged with their features,security and not their speed

Jonathan Bruce said on Monday, 11 May 2009

Have RC1 (build 7100) x64 on my machine. It runs very quickly and smoothly on my system. It should and does considering my system is a PhenonII-720 with 8gb ddr3 16000 and ati 4870 pcie

sirjohng said on Monday, 11 May 2009

An operating system should be able to chosen for its relevance to the purchaser and NOT for speed or gaming ability or any other single criteria. In business you need a stable platform that runs several apps all day without any fuss. XP has matured to do just that after the initial purchasers suffered its terrible beginning.
Most people remember that and wait now to see how new items perform before taking the irrevocable step of the massive change that a new operating system entails.

Andrei said on Friday, 15 May 2009

Just installed Windows 7 RC1 on Asus eee 1000he (everything standard, except 2gb RAM). Runs perfectly (no problem with Windows Aero).
In my opinion - even faster than XP

What is this?

Subscribe to PC Advisor now and claim your FREE gift

Keep up to date by adding PC Advisor News to your iGoogle home page or Google Reader


Google

PC Advisor Software Store

Search

Recent reviews

Reviews index


Latest reader comments

Latest reader comments


Top news

News index


Latest blog entries

Blogs index


 Our RSS feeds

Sponsored Content

  • Take the internet to new places with the Nokia N800
    Communicate how you want to, where you want to with instant messaging, email and internet calling. View movies, browse the internet wirelessly and watch TV on the high-resolution screen and listen through high-quality stereo speakers with headphone jack.
    Buy now