3D Mark Benchmarks Gateway Drivers (6/4/08) vs. Recommended 175.63 Laptop Video2Go Drivers

3D Mark Benchmarks Gateway Drivers (6/4/08) vs. Recommended 175.63 Laptop Video2Go Drivers

I have just bought the Gateway P6860FX about three days ago and I took the liberty of doing 3D Mark Benchmarks after installing all my programs. Here are the conditions and programs installed:

Programs Installed (After Clean Install):

AIM
Big Fix*
Camera Assistant Software*
Driver Sweeper
Futuremark 3D Mark 06*
Steam* w/ Counter Strike Source and Team Fortress 2
Microsoft Works 9.0
Firefox 3
Norton Internet Security 2008 Full Version*
All Drivers Except Video Driver*
Video Drivers Installed and Uninstalled between Benchmarks

*Denotes Programs Running During Benchmark

I have done the benchmarks between the hours of 11pm and 2 am lastnight and unfortunately I do not have any screen shots of the scores (sorry). The notebook was raised by about 1 inch by a dvd case to have airflow on the vents that way there are no overheating issues. Also this was done on the High Performance Vista Power Setting.

There are 2 benchmarks for each driver, one on battery power and one on AC power (plugged in). The driver that was recommended by most people in these forums (after looking carefully) was the laptop video2go 175.63 driver.

So here are the scores:

Gateway Driver dated on website 6/4/2008:

On Battery: 5898 3D Marks
AC Power: 7152 3D Marks

Laptop Video2Go 175.63 Driver:

On Battery: 1834 3D Marks
AC Power: 6716 3D Marks

It seems weird but those are the scores. Gateway seems to be more consistent when it comes to running graphics on battery. The laptop video2go drivers surely need a little work but I understand that the drivers have been modded by the open source community. I love open source and I am glad that they are updating our drivers so we have a better notebook experience.

 

Dont look at 3d mark cause is synthetic

Go for CRYSIS bench WIC bench etc......

i honestly don't trust these things, by the way 3d marks are patented and are recognized the most as benchmark softwares.

 

well, when you install the basic drivers, they are set to factory. with out all the video enhancement settings while the laptopvideo2go inf is. try going to your nvidia control panel and set the slider to performance. and then run your benchmark. see what you get then. your performance has all to do with what is set here.

not sure what your talking about...

 

What he's saying is that 3DMark scores do not translate directly to real world performance. The 2900XT for example, owned 3DMark06 at the time of release, but in reality, we know how poor that card was.

Running a benchmark of some real games, such as Crysis would give you a better idea of the situation.

 

are you serious?
running a bench mark on crysis will give you an idea of "crysis performance only" and that has nothing to do with any other game.

 

You're absolutely right, it will give you an idea of Crysis performance. I used Crysis as an example of an actual game, but I did say games, meaning more than one. You need to run a couple others as well, but those can be used to give you a far better idea of overall performance than a 3DMark score.

That's why hardware sites do a battery of games instead of just different 3DMark
runs, you get a better picture of what to expect from a game that's not in the review. Nothing's perfect, and there's will be exceptions, but it's still a better read.

I personally have had 3DMark give me scores lower, or the same for the SM 2 and 3 tests after over clocking or changing drivers, but yet numerous games I have preformed better. The 3DMark score isn't always lower, but that fact that drivers are so heavily optimized for it can lead to weird behavior between driver versions and clock settings.

 

You tell em john.

 

yeah, i kind of already know what to expect from most benchmarking/overclocking/temps/gaming/real world apps... because what your explaining i have done a few times over and over. lol nice explanation by the way!

... and those are my 3dmark & vantage scores in my sig for over clocking and no over clocking of gpu. and i can play just about every game there is on all high, except crysis. so i do have a bit of experience here in real world performance and how to obtain it.

and the optimization you speak of are very true... i tried explaining that a few times, but some don't quite understand it. some one else's idea of optimizing your computer might not be the right thing for you. best to set all defaults for everything, then start gaging your own settings.

 

hey lakjin. *off topic* did you get the nc2000? to look really cool...i may get it to look cool myself. ...lol
and im being serious to... i did like how it looked and felt. ..lol

 

nah man...not yet. its way to expensive! almost 70 bucks with shipping =(((

if i can get the nc1000 or nc2000 40 shipped ill jump on it in a heart beat.

 

well, ill keep my eye out for the 40.00 dollar one and will let you know.

 

thx. a guy on here was selling a silver one (i want black) nc2000 for 50 bucks shipped...i offered but he wont go down to 40...YET =)

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Zalman-NC-2...ryZ96915QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
here is a silver one as well...

 

Remember the new drivers downclock your videocard while on battery, thats why you are getting low scores.

3dmark might not directly tell you how real 3d performance is but it will tell you if your computer is on par and working ok with other computers of similar specs.

 

thats the same guy that has it posted on the NBR for sales section.

 

yep.

and people kind of get this benchmarking stuff mixed up... you can bench for high quality/fps/performance/or all 3 together. each has it's own benefits and faults in and out of games. 3dmark is like a test ground just like a track is to a race car driver. to see what your system can achieve....

small world, but i still want black...lol

 

same here. my brother is pissed i offered 40 bucks... im like your a moron shutup.

 

too funny