The score is not going to keep a game from working.
Not having a video card installed that meets, or exceeds, the recommended
minimum specs on the game box WILL. Again, the score is mostly irrelevant to
most anything.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
"SonicJoe" <SonicJoe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C554AC7E-A6E4-4A9F-BDA0-AB51246D9CF0@microsoft.com...
> It is doing what I want for the moment, but I'm sure in the near future
> I'll
> buy a game or something, and then I'll have to wonder if its going to work
> because of this score. If my hardware covers what's needed to run the
> program, but its not working up to its potential because of a driver, it
> could make a huge difference in how the program runs. Now I have to
> wonder
> if it will ever be capable of these things in Vista (such as HD quality
> video, which isn't a concern now, but might become one if I decide to buy
> a
> new monitor in the not too distant future).
>
> Also, I'm a pretty cautious buyer. I didn't buy the card without checking
> it out. Yes, I realize I bought a budget card. No, I don't play enough
> games, or run enough graphic intensive programs to justify dropping
> $200-$400
> on a high-end graphics card. But it would be nice to be sure that the
> card I
> bought can handle what it says it can. And to make you feel better, I
> visited both of your links, and they didn't give me anymore information
> than
> I already had. Good card for the money, but wouldn't be recommended for a
> hard-core gaming machine. Thanks. I appreciate the input. But it would be
> nice if you just answered my question.
>
> "Richard Urban" wrote:
>
>> It is not like a sporting event where the score if final. It is down and
>> dirty benchmark - one that can not be relied upon too heavily.
>>
>> End result - is your computer doing what you want. If not, read hardware
>> reviews on http://www.extremetech.com/ and http://www.tomshardware.com/.
>> There are many other sites that do a good review also. Search for them.
>> You
>> will notice that some do not even touch on the WEI in their reviews.
>> Then,
>> pick a card based upon the reviews.
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)
>>
>> Quote from George Ankner:
>> If you knew as much as you think you know,
>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>
>>
>>
>> "SonicJoe" <SonicJoe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:09D9B9B9-8325-4073-B24B-F1C0AF2789C1@microsoft.com...
>> > Hey all,
>> >
>> > From reading in here, I can tell I'm not the only one having this
>> > issue.
>> > The Windows Experience Index seems to be very touchy, and inconsistent.
>> > Does
>> > anyone know where I can find an article that explains the WEI in-depth.
>> >
>> > My real issue is my graphics score. I'm trying to figure out
>> > everything
>> > that goes into these ratings. My graphics card (Nvidia GeForce 6200)
>> > is
>> > not
>> > the best, or worst, but I can't get a subscore over 2.2 for graphics
>> > and
>> > 3.1
>> > for gaming graphics. My old card (Geforce FX 5500) had a slightly
>> > higher
>> > rating (2.4/3.2), but I had to buy a new one because: 1) Nvidia doesn't
>> > appear committed to improving the FX5500 beyond basic Vista
>> > functionality;
>> > and 2) I bought a new TV Tuner card and the FX5500 was causing a
>> > conflict.
>> > From comparing the features, the 6200 should be a much higher rated
>> > card.
>> >
>> > The main two things I'm trying to figure out are:
>> > 1) How much to drivers affect the WEI? Nvidia hasn't finished making
>> > drivers
>> > for the cards, and I'm wondering if I should expect my score to go up
>> > when
>> > they get all the kinks worked out.
>> > 2) How much can a monitor affect the graphics score? I thought I had
>> > it
>> > figured out, because I lowered my resolution and increased the refresh
>> > rate
>> > (my cheap monitor won't allow a refresh rate higher than 60 Hz at full
>> > 1280x1024 resolution) and gained a tenth of a point. But then I
>> > changed
>> > it
>> > back and the score stayed, so that doesn't appear to be the problem.
>>
>>