Surface Pro 2 Benchmark

Daylife

New member
Feb 21, 2013
223
0
0
Visit site
1Ww3is4.png

Surface Pro 2 Benchmark thanks (nuprotocol)
 
Last edited:

WG Rowland

New member
Nov 14, 2012
55
0
0
Visit site
It seems to show either there was an issue in the test or a driver issue. 4k and 512k random speeds are both up but linear down drastically? I'm pretty sure it's physically impossible for a drives random performance to exceed it's non-random (although this is an SSD, so who knows). That's got to be a glitch of some sort. Hopefully on the testing side, but if it's on the surface side I'd expect a patch or firmware fix.
 

Cleavitt76

New member
Jan 10, 2013
360
0
0
Visit site
Interesting. I'll be keeping an eye on this, but in reality those I/O numbers are still really good for a non-server system. It would be really hard to notice the difference even under a heavy workload. The small random I/O numbers are a lot better in Surface Pro 2 which makes me wonder if they made an intentional tradeoff on the sequential I/O to achieve a better balance. If not and if it is an issue with the system itself then it's likely something that can be fixed with a driver/firmware update.

Having said that, SSD drives can be finicky in benchmarks. Performance can drop of significantly for a period of time after repeated tests have been done. Also, SSD performance is reduced quite a bit once the drive reaches more than ~85% full. If this was a 64GB store model it's possible that either or both of these issues were a factor.
 

sinime

Retired Moderator
Sep 13, 2011
4,461
0
0
Visit site
I thought MS claimed a 50% boost in graphics performance from the Pro (1) to Pro 2? Those numbers don't support that...

Pro (1): 3428.12
vs.
Pro 2: 4083.34

I'm only seeing around 19%
 

azcruz

Active member
Jul 29, 2013
3,417
0
36
Visit site
nuprotocol took the benchmark of the Surface Pro 2 from the Microsoft Store, i think. The Surface Pro benchmark is from my friend's unit, 64GB model.
 

Mercule

New member
Aug 19, 2011
89
0
0
Visit site
I thought MS claimed a 50% boost in graphics performance from the Pro (1) to Pro 2? Those numbers don't support that...

Pro (1): 3428.12
vs.
Pro 2: 4083.34

I'm only seeing around 19%
This is probably the biggest stat I'm looking at. The Pro 1 was acceptable in pretty much all other areas for me to seriously consider the Pro 2 w/ docking station, etc. for a workstation replacement. I'm not a huge gamer, but I want a bit more GPU power than the Pro 1 had.
 

SwimSwim

New member
Feb 1, 2013
1,173
0
0
Visit site
Interesting find, thanks for posting.

A few of those numbers are a bit concerning, but hopefully it's just one of the aforementioned issues. And besides, still better performance than my current laptop, so I'll still take it.
 

Staff online

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,811
Messages
2,244,434
Members
428,131
Latest member
2pretty4tv