DreamScene gets mixed reception
CPU use, a tale of two video cards..
Saturday, February 17, 2007 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News
Windows DreamScene is Microsoft's animated wallpaper program that's currently in "preview" (beta) for users of Windows Vista Ultimate. So far, reactions have been mixed.
While users seem to love the concept, the amount of CPU used to do it seems to vary wildly. From 12% or so on my ThinkPad T60 to nearly 50% on systems that are much faster.
The difference? So far, it basically can be thrown to the feet of nVidia. Their drivers, which not only seem to crash PC games do double-duty in being very inefficient with DreamScene.
Below are the results on my laptop. Note the very low (as in not great) performance rating and yet its relatively low CPU use while running a DreamScene. It has an ATI card.
Lest someone thinks I have it out for nVidia, my primray machine has two nVidia 7950s in it. I just wish nVidia would take its drivers more seriously. They were crummy on Windows XP. Some may recall how you'd see reports about how WindowBlinds or WindowFX "slowed my machine to a crawl" and called our software bloated not realizing that no, our stuff runs great if the drivers are decent (like the ATI ones or the occasional nVidia one).
Now, Microsoft is getting a taste of what we've gone through. Maybe this time, nVidia will be motivated to worry about desktop drivers rather than trying to show they can get an extra frame per sec in a first person shooter.
Still, if you have a good machine, nVidia or ATI, the CPU use isn't a big deal in actual use, especially if the .DREAM file's content is in MPEG and not WMV (WMV is more CPU intensive). And hopefully soon nVidia's drivers will get better. Because I want to get an Geforce 8800 but am not going to get one until they fix this stuff.
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
anotherpaul
Reply #2 Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:31 PM
Reply #2 Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:31 PM
Wouldn't the problem be more down to it using bloated old WMP as the engine?
It seems pretty clear to me that unless you find a more streamlined player to do the work, you're always going to have this problem. Having a pop at nVidia's drivers is all well and good, but some people turn their computers on to use, not to look at.
It seems pretty clear to me that unless you find a more streamlined player to do the work, you're always going to have this problem. Having a pop at nVidia's drivers is all well and good, but some people turn their computers on to use, not to look at.
I.R. Brainiac
Reply #3 Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:51 PM
Reply #3 Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:51 PM
Its a funny wierd PC world Brad.I cant run Vista yet so I cant say how my pc would handle Dream content.
As a part time pc repairman,my experience with video cards and drivers has been terrible with all ATI all in wonders ...yet I've had no problems with nVidia.(I dont game much,so I dont really push them that hard)
I'm dealing with older cards tho so I cant say much about the newer stuff.My nVidia 6100(onboard) runs WB,OD,5 widgets,WinFX quite zippily.
As a part time pc repairman,my experience with video cards and drivers has been terrible with all ATI all in wonders ...yet I've had no problems with nVidia.(I dont game much,so I dont really push them that hard)
I'm dealing with older cards tho so I cant say much about the newer stuff.My nVidia 6100(onboard) runs WB,OD,5 widgets,WinFX quite zippily.
kenwas
Reply #4 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:06 PM
Reply #4 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:06 PM
"Now, Microsoft is getting a taste of what we've gone through. Maybe this time, nVidia will be motivated to worry about desktop drivers rather than trying to show they can get an extra frame per sec in a first person shooter."
With the popularity and widespread use of nVidia drivers, I am confused as to why this is a realization of an issue now. Certainly, MS and Stardock tested these programs prior to the release even of the beta version and I can not image tests that would not include nVidia drivers.
With the popularity and widespread use of nVidia drivers, I am confused as to why this is a realization of an issue now. Certainly, MS and Stardock tested these programs prior to the release even of the beta version and I can not image tests that would not include nVidia drivers.
SeaweedOPM
Reply #5 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:14 PM
Reply #5 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:14 PM
my nVidia 7800GT is running two 22" ers at 1680x1050 each. They are both flawless. Anyways, both releases people have aren't release versions so who cares, report your issue with MS and then shut the f**k up. It makes a cleaner world out there
kenwas
Reply #6 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:27 PM
Is this really necessary?
Reply #6 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:27 PM
report your issue with MS and then shut the f**k up.
Is this really necessary?
bistro
Reply #7 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:47 PM
Reply #7 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:47 PM
It'll be nice when the MS Ultimate Team gets the full function version of Dreamscenes out....the version that supposedly kills that CPU cycle usage and puts it all back on the graphic card's GPU (promises, promises...). I think people are getting confused between the current preview version (a CPU hog) and the future full version.
I know this will embarass Nvidia owners, but I am still using an X800XL ATI card and the Dreamscenes play flawlessly. Not knocking Nvidia...my plan is that on my next setup I'll have two 8800's in SLI (if Nvidia will get the Vista/SLI issues worked out). I think Nvidia is in some kind of time displacement....
I know this will embarass Nvidia owners, but I am still using an X800XL ATI card and the Dreamscenes play flawlessly. Not knocking Nvidia...my plan is that on my next setup I'll have two 8800's in SLI (if Nvidia will get the Vista/SLI issues worked out). I think Nvidia is in some kind of time displacement....
Teecha
Reply #8 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:48 PM
Reply #8 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:48 PM
how id this program any different from dremples, which was out years ago?
SeaweedOPM
Reply #9 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:58 PM
Reply #9 Saturday, February 17, 2007 4:58 PM
Yea JourneyMan, I thought it was kind of fun! And bistro, at the least, agrees with me on basic level (maybe more) 
Astyanax
Reply #10 Saturday, February 17, 2007 5:47 PM
Reply #10 Saturday, February 17, 2007 5:47 PM
Actually what you said was completely backwards. They ARENT focusing on FPS in games, and benchmarks prove it. There is still a heavy hit ingame.
Anyway, back on topic here. I don't see how people are having problems. I run a 7900GTO with 100.64 and my average CPU usage is around 18% with the exact same wallpaper seen above.
Heres a pic: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/2410/deskoc0.jpg
I suggest you all try 100.64, they are by far the best so far. Desktoping on these drivers is perfected. Its gaming that needs the work, and yes I have ran numerious benchmarks. Even though HL2 gets 156FPS with no anit-aliasing and 8x ansio in XP i get atleast 20FPS more. And yes, that is quite the hit.
Anyway, back on topic here. I don't see how people are having problems. I run a 7900GTO with 100.64 and my average CPU usage is around 18% with the exact same wallpaper seen above.
Heres a pic: http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/2410/deskoc0.jpg
I suggest you all try 100.64, they are by far the best so far. Desktoping on these drivers is perfected. Its gaming that needs the work, and yes I have ran numerious benchmarks. Even though HL2 gets 156FPS with no anit-aliasing and 8x ansio in XP i get atleast 20FPS more. And yes, that is quite the hit.
viking396
Reply #11 Saturday, February 17, 2007 6:43 PM
Reply #11 Saturday, February 17, 2007 6:43 PM
My main system has a 2.93ghz Core 2 Duo Extreme, 4gigs DDR2 800, 2 Raptor's and a GeForce 8800GTS, it averages about 20 to 30% on most Dream Scenes. The one that shipped with the Dreamscene download runs the lowest CPU. For this system I don't care, you simply can't tell unless running something that monitors CPU usage.
I have 3 laptops, one HP nc8430 Core Duo 2ghz with 2gigs of memory and an ATI x1600 with 256megs and 1 HP dv9000t with a Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz, 2gigs of memory and a GeForce 7600 with 512 megs of memory, the last one is a Dell XPS monster maxed out on everything. Strangly enough it runs better on the dv9000t with the GeForce 7600 card, the system with the x1600 runs much higher CPU using Dreamscene than either my dv9000t or my XPS.
So, on these it would be nice if CPU usage could be brought down so the battery doesn't run down quicker. Right now I pause Dreamscene when I unplug so it's not too much of a big deal, hopefully Nvidia and ATI listens and works on the drivers.
I have 3 laptops, one HP nc8430 Core Duo 2ghz with 2gigs of memory and an ATI x1600 with 256megs and 1 HP dv9000t with a Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz, 2gigs of memory and a GeForce 7600 with 512 megs of memory, the last one is a Dell XPS monster maxed out on everything. Strangly enough it runs better on the dv9000t with the GeForce 7600 card, the system with the x1600 runs much higher CPU using Dreamscene than either my dv9000t or my XPS.
So, on these it would be nice if CPU usage could be brought down so the battery doesn't run down quicker. Right now I pause Dreamscene when I unplug so it's not too much of a big deal, hopefully Nvidia and ATI listens and works on the drivers.
Neil Banfield
Reply #12 Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:09 PM
Reply #12 Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:09 PM
bistro: Who told you dreamscene will use almost no CPU?
Video decoding costs cpu cycles and high def video costs even more.
psychotic_penguin
Reply #13 Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:39 PM
Reply #13 Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:39 PM
The reply isn't the program itself, the program is solid. What Vista users are looking for is probably something more that's been released at this time.
All the work is solid, but nothing has been released that's overwhelming just yet.
All the work is brilliant, but nothing that's blown anyone way has been released yet. Everyone that spent the hard earned money is ready to get jacked up just yet.
No disrespect is intended to the authors, great work by all.
All the work is solid, but nothing has been released that's overwhelming just yet.
All the work is brilliant, but nothing that's blown anyone way has been released yet. Everyone that spent the hard earned money is ready to get jacked up just yet.
No disrespect is intended to the authors, great work by all.
Kirkburn
Reply #14 Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:50 AM
Reply #14 Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:50 AM
To all the people say "look, it's only ~20% on my uber PC card", that is baaaaad. It should be much lower (as you can see from Brad's screenshot, that rig only has a score of 3.0).
i.e. it is nVidia / the drivers.
i.e. it is nVidia / the drivers.
Astyanax
Reply #15 Sunday, February 18, 2007 1:02 AM
Reply #15 Sunday, February 18, 2007 1:02 AM
Right, it has nothing to do with dreamscene or the fact that the majority of them are probably wmv?
kwyjibo
Reply #16 Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:48 AM
Reply #16 Sunday, February 18, 2007 11:48 AM
I'm also disappointed with my nVidia drivers. But you have a bigger voice, so maybe they'll do something about it.
stevecn70
Reply #17 Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:51 PM
Reply #17 Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:51 PM
I have an old 2.53 pentium with 266 bus speed, and an Nvidia 6800 GT. had computer since 2003.
Using the deskscapes I have the Nvidia Purevideo codecs installed which allow hardware acceleration. Unfortunately, my graphics card doesn't support WMV with purevideo but it does with MPEG2.
Without Purevideo. I'm getting up to 80% cpu usage on WMV files, When I switch to an MPEG2 Dreamscene the Purevideo Hardware acceleration kicks in and my CPU drops to about 15% average. So for now, I only use MPEG2 vids for dreamscene.
You have to pay for purevideo codecs, about $20 or so but it is worth it if you play alot of video or watch dvd's on your computer.
Using the deskscapes I have the Nvidia Purevideo codecs installed which allow hardware acceleration. Unfortunately, my graphics card doesn't support WMV with purevideo but it does with MPEG2.
Without Purevideo. I'm getting up to 80% cpu usage on WMV files, When I switch to an MPEG2 Dreamscene the Purevideo Hardware acceleration kicks in and my CPU drops to about 15% average. So for now, I only use MPEG2 vids for dreamscene.
You have to pay for purevideo codecs, about $20 or so but it is worth it if you play alot of video or watch dvd's on your computer.
jasonvoorhees4383
Reply #18 Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:55 PM
Reply #18 Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:55 PM
what about the people that dont have Vista Ultimate?
Astyanax
Reply #19 Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:10 PM
Reply #19 Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:10 PM
Then you don't get Dreamscene, its an Ultimate Extra.
Grog
Reply #20 Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:02 PM
Reply #20 Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:02 PM
My just over a month old HP laptop with a nVidia Go 6150 is running around 14% with Dreamscene, which is better than I expected given the current state of the nVidia drivers. You can get the latest drivers to work on laptops with the files from laptopvideo2go.com which do help a bit. I would have been happy with an initial performance with Vista of 75% or so, right now I'm just hoping that I will be able to play Supreme Commander when it comes out this week. One of the VP's from nVidia said that they had devoted 350 Man Years to the Vista Drivers, and if you look at their Forums, you'd never know it by reading the posts from the 8800 owners with their "Made for Vista" cards. My 6150 gets a whopping 2.4 on the Vista scale no matter which driver I'm running, which I can only hope will get marginally better with time... I'm not counting on it.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 1 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:24 PM