À©µµ¿ì ºñ½ºÅ¸ ºñµð¿ÀÄ«µå °­Á¦ÀÎÁõ.

ÀÌÁø¼ö   
   Á¶È¸ 4494   Ãßõ 25    


¿À´Ã Ž½ºÇϵå¿þ¾î¾î¼­ ±ÛÀ̿öó¿Ô´õ±º¿ä (http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/page11.html)

Windows XP vs. Vista: The Benchmark Rundown ¶ó´Â Á¦¸ñÀ¸·Î¿ä. ¿ä¾àÇÏÀÚ¸é,

Overall, applications performed as expected, or executed slightly slower than under Windows XP.

There are some programs that showed deeply disappointing performance.

We are disappointed that CPU-intensive applications such as video transcoding with XviD (DVD to XviD MPEG4) or the MainConcept H.264 Encoder performed 18% to nearly 24% slower in our standard benchmark scenarios. Both benchmarks finished much quicker under Windows XP

 À½. Á¦ Áú¹®Àº ºñ½ºÅ¸ ÀÎÁõµÇÁö¾ÊÀº ATI PCI graphic card with 256 MB ramÀ» °­Á¦·Î ÀÎÁõ½ÃÄѼ­ »ç¿ëÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ»±î¿ä?  ¾Æ´Ô ¸Ó¸® ÁÁÀ¸½Å Çϵå¿þ¾î ¸¶´Ï¾Æ´Ôµé²²¼­ ¹º°¡ ¹æ¹ýÀ» ¸¸µé¾î³õÀ»±î¿ä?
ªÀº±Û Àϼö·Ï ½ÅÁßÇÏ°Ô.


QnA
Á¦¸ñPage 4509/5658
2015-12   1408573   ¹é¸Þ°¡
2014-05   4863287   Á¤ÀºÁØ1
2006-03   5320   ÀÓöÇõ
2006-04   5801   ±è¿µ±â
2007-03   3935   ±èÁ¤Çö
2007-11   5190   ±èÅÂÇö
2003-06   11798   ¿ÀÇü±Ù
2006-10   5335   ¹Ú¹®Çü
2007-03   4738   ÀÌÈñ¿ø
2005-08   5752   ³ëÁ¤·¡
2004-07   7748   ÀÌ¿ø±â
2007-11   5132   ±è°ü½Ä
2002-07   14026   ¹Ú¹®Çü
2008-12   5497   Çѵ¿ÈÆ
2003-02   10448   ±èÅ°æ
2005-11   5618   À¯È£ÁØ
2006-03   5437   ¼Õ¼ºÈ£
2004-01   8100   ÃÖÁ¤¿ì
2007-05   4483   ±èÈ«±â
2004-11   6932   ÃÖâÇö
2005-05   5704   ¾ç±¹Çü
2008-02   5050   À±³²¼ö