Performance of the different Vista themes

[Jeronimo]

I just did some tests with Windows Vista Standard (Aero interface no Glass?) and the Windows Vista Basic interface.

The first requires "Desktop Window Manager Session Manager" service to be enabled, which takes up an additional 20MB of memory. For Basic interface one of the csrss.exe processes is used and memory for this is reduced when Standard is selected. I noted, that the CPU power required for standard interface is 25% max and for Basic (less glimmer) it is max 35%. So it seems that you can gain some performance improvement by selecting more glimmer. This all depends on your setup. I have an ATI X800, P4 3.33GHz and 1GB internal memory. I have enough memopry and prefer less CPU intensive UI, so I selected Standard, while if your balance is different (better CPU, less memory) or have a poor graphics card, then you might want to select Basic.

How I tested: drag a window over your screen (contents must be visible while dragging)and watch the Task Manager CPU usage or resize a window quickly.

Edited January 23, 2007 by Jeronimo

[nuhi]

Could very well be, not unexpected since the VGA is used. But have you compared memory consumption?

Also this may spend laptop batteries faster but I'm just guessing.

I like Glass and won't remove it, did it on request.

[Jeronimo]

Windows Vista Standard
csrss.exe	404K	2952K
csrss.exe	708K	5468K
dwm.exe		17396K	36584K
Total		18MB	44MB	
Memory used		327MB

Windows Vista Basic
csrss.exe	444K	2992K
csrss.exe	5536K	10304K
dwm.exe		1508K	2660K
Total		7.3MB	15.6MB
Memory Used		307MB

(first value is memory usage private memory, 2nd is the working set; memory usage taken from performance page)

Since dwm.exe can be disabled as a service when Basic is used, Standard uses around 30MB more memory. Because the interface seems more responsive with Standard (not Glass: Home Basic) I also use it, even though it costs more memory. Memory usage is abstract while system responisveness is a real benefit you notice.

Edited January 19, 2007 by Jeronimo

[nuhi]

Because Vista takes a lot of memory for people with 1GB or less 30MB isn't nothing.

I know you have 1GB but games or virtual machines easily fill that up.

Just a quick question, are you saying that standard/non-glass is faster than classic?

That doesn't seem logical, 3d acceleration is activated only on Glass.

[Jeronimo]

Because Vista takes a lot of memory for people with 1GB or less 30MB isn't nothing.

I know you have 1GB but games or virtual machines easily fill that up.

Just a quick question, are you saying that standard/non-glass is faster than classic?

That doesn't seem logical, 3d acceleration is activated only on Glass.

Yes, I find that hard to believe, but an article of Vista Beta 2 at Anandtech brought this to my attention. Sceptic as I am, I first checked this myself. I expected more memory usage and this was not an issue, I wanted to see how responisve my system was and this indeed was better with the Aero interface. This was indeed a lot better with Aero interface.

Windows Vista Aero Glass

Windows Vista Standard (Aero without Glass)

Windows Vista Basic (XP-style)

Windows Vista Classic (9x/ME?)

Anandtech article

Blog on Windows Vista interface(see 02 december 2006)

[aydc]

I though Glass was faster than anything because it runs on the video card, not cpu. It takes RAM, but not CPU. It's worth a bit of RAM I think.

Edited January 20, 2007 by aydc

[Jeronimo]

I though Glass was faster than anything because it runs on the video card, not cpu. It takes RAM, but not CPU. It's worth a bit of RAM I think.

I think you are right, except you should replace Glass by Aero. Both make use of the Desktop Window Manager and both use 3D capabilities, handled by you graphics card (when possible).

[nuhi]

Jeronimo, with all do respect I don't think that Aero without Glass is ever using a 3D card.

If anyone has a link to support otherwise I'm all ears.

[SnapShot]

I'm also confused with contradictory info on the web about Aero (Glass) and Standard (without Glass). But I think that nuhi is right, Standard doesn't have HW acceleration.

Here is description of Standard UI from winsupersite.com

Windows Vista Standard UI

On Windows Vista Home Basic only, which is artificially limited for marketing purposes and does not include the beautiful Windows Aero UI, users will see a rare Vista UI option called Windows Vista Standard. This UI visually resembles Windows Aero, but offers none of the associated graphical effects, including translucency, Windows Flip 3D, and Live Taskbar Thumbnails. From a technological perspective, Windows Vista Standard provides only software-based rendering, so it offers none of the performance or stability benefits of Windows Aero.

Users of other Vista product editions who are interested in Windows Vista Standard can roughly approximate this UI type by going into the Window Color and Appearance control panel and unchecking the "Enable transparency" checkbox. However, note that these systems are still running Windows Aero with all of its associated graphical effects and other benefits.

It's a shame that Windows Vista Standard wasn't the default UI on low-end systems instead of Windows Vista Basic. It is far more attractive. My guess is that Microsoft wanted to provide users with low-end systems with an obvious reason to upgrade.

[Jeronimo]

Home Basic:

Windows Vista Standard (Aero without Glass and additional effects)

Windows Vista Basic (XP-like)

Windows Standard (9X like)

Windows Classic (even more 9X like)

Other Vista flavours:

Windows Aero

Windows Vista Basic

Windows Standard

Windows Classic

Windows Aero allows disabling of Glass, which gives a different form of the Windows Vista Standard interface. Also HW-accelerated? From my previous postings I would say yes, but I am not sure anymore.

[Jeronimo]

Thanks SnapShot, nothing exactly new but a refreshing tip.

I went on reading through the article of Paul Thurott (again) and also saw an article at Softpedia (one could have been based on the other, due to the similarities). I do think that Aero with or without Glass supports HW-acceleration and Windows Vista Standard in Home Basic does not. I would like solid proof of this, maybe by use of a benchmarking tool. I knew one which renders on the desktop and this might give an indication to some extend. However forgot the name of it.

Edited January 22, 2007 by Jeronimo

[Jeronimo]

I did some testing with PCMark05 2D transparent windows benchmark. I would like somebody else to confirm, so if you have the chance, please try and report here.

For the above mentioned benchmark I got a score in Home Premium with the following themes selected (score is windows/sec.?):

Aero Glass - 850

Aero without Glass - 1150

Basic - 250

Now under Home Basic, I was unable to get scores with PC Mark05, but I did notice the speed of Windows Vista Standard was about the same as Aero without Glass and I also tried the following on both:

I set resolution to 1600x1200, opened up personalization and Appearance settings. Now I started dragging around this last window and watched CPU utilization in the Task Manager. For Windows Vista Basic it was around 90-100% all the time (!?). For Aero with and without Glass (Home Premium) and Windows Vista Standard (Home Basic) it never went over 35%. Windows Vista Standard might not have everything Aero without Glass has (minimize is not animated, no thumbs of taskbar items and in alt-tab) it is better performancewise in my point of view.

My conclusion is, if you have enough memory and primarily work on the desktop, then my choice would be as following:

1.a Aero without Glass (good performance, nice features)

1.b Windows Vista Standard (best performance)

(unless you know how to disable these features, you are bound to 1a for Home Premium and 1b for HomeBasic)

2. Aero Glass (if you prefer the transparency and all eyecandy)

3. Windows Vista Basic

Graphics card does not support transparency: 1a/b

Slow CPU: 1a/b or 2

Slow graphicscard: 3

Memory of 512MB or not sufficient for your usage: 3

(indication: you should try to find out what suites you best)

p.s. I am no where talking about Windows Standard or Windows Classic these are 9X/ME type of schemes. Furthermore for the Aero/Vista Standard interface to work under Visual Styles the option "enable desktop composition" must be selected (this is also known as transparency).

If you are intersted, download this document to read up on rules to enable Aero (also performance requirements etc.).

Edited January 22, 2007 by Jeronimo

[nuhi]

Nice!

You got my attention. Could it also be that when themes are applied it's faster than clean-forms classic view due to their image support?

I guess you should test some third party theme for that.

In essence I would like it to use the card even if no Glass...maybe it is using 2D accelerations better, 3D could be reserved for Glass only...any way it goes your test proves that it's much faster...I'll add some note in the description.

[Jeronimo]

Nice!

You got my attention. Could it also be that when themes are applied it's faster than clean-forms classic view due to their image support?

I guess you should test some third party theme for that.

In essence I would like it to use the card even if no Glass...maybe it is using 2D accelerations better, 3D could be reserved for Glass only...any way it goes your test proves that it's much faster...I'll add some note in the description.

I do not know how themes are exactly handled, I just saw that Aero based themes are handled by dwm and others are handled by csrss.

Without Glass Aero can still be 3D, just without transparency (check the outer border of a window for instance). If this is indeed the case, I can not say.

[Spooky]

Remember also that Vista Aero was supposed to be designed to speed things up for cards that will support the Aero glass theme by default, even in the Aero basic (without the glass). I'm don't remember right now if the hardware acceleration is disabled with Aero Basic or not ( I want to think its not but I can't check right now cause i'm not on a Vista machine, i could be wrong here), however, the Aero theme in general is supposed to have optimizations for video and memory usage that the classic theme does not have.