512MB 7900 vs 256MB 7900 Scores on 5760

Just finished running 3DMark on the 5760 with the new 512MB GO 7900GTX

256MB 3DMark 05 = 8207

512MB 3DMark 05 = 8512

 

What processor and drivers? I got almost an identical score with the XPS M1710:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2887&review=Dell+XPS+M1710

 

Used drivers from laptopvideo2go. Used 2.16, 2GB Ram, 100GB 7200 RPM.

 

Nice, not that huge a difference at all.

I have a T2500 2.0GHz CPU, 2GB RAM and 100gb 7200rpm HDD.

I got a 8111 3dMark05 on my 5760.

Comparisons with 3DMark05:

T2600 2.16GHz vs T2500 2.0GHz = 96pt or 1.17% performance increase compared to my 5760.

T2600 2.16GHz w/ 7900GTX 512mb vs T2500 2.0GHz w/ 7900GTX 256mb = 401pts or 4.71% performance increase compared to my 5760

7900GTX 512mb vs 7900GTX 256mb = 305pt or 3.58% performance increase with the compared model with the same CPU.


Looks like us early Pre-orders have nothing to worry about against the 512mb 7900GTX as it is really a minor difference.
Also shows that there really is not a huge benefit on getting the T2600 2.16GHz vs the T2500 2.0GHz as the benefits is very minor as well.

Would still like to see other benchmarks also if possible like SuperPi, 3DMark06 and PCMark05

PS:
I wonder if I can increase my score a bit if I use the LaptopVideo2go drivers ... maybe I should read up that site and see what I can do.

 

Sounds like the specs on the system I ordered,

 

anyway to see the 3DMark06 scores for that 512mb 7900 Go GTX?

 

Working on some of the other benchs over the next few days, will update you all with the results.

3DMark 06 = 4748

Although minimal, you will most likely increase scores with the 91.33's from laptopvideo2go.

 

Great.
So far my top score on my 5760 on 3DMark06 is 4631.

Yours is only better by 117pts or 2.46% increased performance via 3DMark06.
And your the 5760 you tested has the T2600 2.16GHz CPU while mine has the T2500 2.0GHz CPU.

And as can be seen in the 3dMark05 benchmarks you have compared in your original post, the increased processor power does give it a very marginal edge in numbers.

With or without the increased processor power, it is a very small increase in numbers for 256mb vs 512mb.

My hopes of not getting disappointed for getting the 256mb version of the 5760 early is getting higher

 

here here Kilim.

512mb version of 7900 Go GTX seems to have a nominal increase in performance. But i feel that some future games might thake advantage of the headroom...

Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter is currently requiring a 512mb card to unlock all video options... gay.

There is a workaround, go to TweakGuides.com

 

Those are some really nice scores guys! Anyone try a little overclocking yet? 9k in '05?

 

Since I ordered a Sager 5760 with the 512MB Nvidia 7900 GTX card and I'll need to know, I might as well ask. Where do you download video drivers for the 7900 GTX? Nvidia's site, or laptopvideo2go?

On Nvidia's site there is this driver. Although it doesn't list the Sager 5760 as being supported, it does list the Clevo M570U and Eurocom M570U DIVINE as being supported, and both those laptops are essentially the same as the Sager 5760. Would I download my video drivers from there?

 

Working on this a little bit over the next couple days.....Will be posting back results...

I have always went through Laptopvideo2go and used the latest 91.33's.

 

laptopvideo2go drivers install fine on my machine (5760 w/256mb 7900GTX, 1900x1200)... However, upon reboot I got a black screen and the machine is locked up...

Anyone with this similar setup get the lv2go drivers to work? Also, NVidia posted new 8x series mobile driver and the Sager5760 is -NOT- on the list of supported laptops -- anyone know why?

 

Try the 91.31 drivers; they work very well. Which ones did you use that didn't work?

 

Wait, you need to download drivers for your video card too?

Is it safe to assume these drivers you're talking about already will be installed in my system which is being shipped today?

 

If you have a system preconfigured with an OS, then yours will have Sagers latests drivers which are like 84.21, I think.

I was just trying a newer driver from laptopvideo2go.com.

I also noted that Nvidia released a new mobile version of there 84.xx series and it does not list the Sager 5760 as supported. Was wondering why that was.

Also, Chaz, I only tried 91.33. I am gonna try .31...

 

Ok.. Same business with the 91.31. Just lock up and black screen when rebooting after install.

And, I need to correct myself -- the latest drivers I see from Sager are 84.26. Those work fine, I have yet to load and play oblivion tho, which is really why I was looking into the newer beta laptopvideo2go drivers. No biggie.

Chaz, do you have the sager 5760? If you do, do you have the WUXGA screen, and if so... what did you do to get the laptopvideo2go drivers working?

 

I don't have the 5760 no. People don't have any problems using the 91.31's on a Dell XPS M1710 with a 512 7900.
You could always try the drivers from www.tweaksrus.com.

 

Is it suggested that I download these newer drivers?

 

dimmu...

If you have the 5760... The drivers that come with the computer are fine. Performance gains are minimul, and unless there is a compatibility issue with a game or something, I would leave it alone. I have rolled back to the 84.26 that come with the Sager laptop and all is well... However, installing a higher tweaked driver has not been a successful endeavor for my configuration. Many praise the beta 9x.xx drivers, so there should be a working driver for the 5760 in that realm soon.

 

Well, I have the 9750, but i'm sure the same thing goes. thanks.

 

SO far, none of the games I play requires 512mb of Video Memory.
But like you said, there will hopefully be tweaks for some games that will require 512mb to run on a 256mb GPU.

At this time I am not too worried as the performance increase is VERY minimal.
I am also hoping that by the time the games I want to play requires a 512mb GPU minimum, it is time to either upgrade my 5760 or desktop or buy a new one and that my 5760 has already served its full purpose.

 

The biggest advantage of more onboard video ram is you can load more (and more detailed) texture maps. And this advantage really only comes into play on the highest resolution settings.
ATI claims that current games can see noticeable increases in performance using 512M cards, but only at the highest possible settings; eg. 1600x1200 with 6x full-scene antialiasing and 16x anisotropic filtering. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20050228021302.html

Here's a good article comparing a 7800GTX, 256M and 512M versions and an ATI x1800 512M.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/video/g70-7.html

 

So like I said before.

I have the WSXGA+ LCD Screen and having the 7900GTX 256mb should be more than enough to handle most if not all games for now.
Even if I decide to upgrade my GPU to the 7900GTX 512mb, it will only be a marginal difference and really not worth the cost.

BUT.
If you have the WUXGA+ LCD Screen this may be able to help you by having the 512mb GPU as those consumers have a higher resolution and the performance difference will be a bit higher and more recognizable.

It will still be a marginal difference but having a 512mb GPU is more helpful for the consumers that have a WUXGA+ LCD Screen and not as helpful for those with a WSXGA+ LCD Screen.

Did I interpret that close enough?

 

OK I just saw a more detailed Benchmark testing by Luke@NBF at the NoteBookForums site and Luke pretty much stated what I wanted to hear.

You can find his review of the 5760 with Benchmark scores with the 7900GTX 256mb and the 7900GTX 512mb here:
http://www.notebookforums.com/post2273564.html#post2273564

 

I'd like to see someone run some productivity benchmarks. That is, graphics programs like image processing or photoshop edits, etc. Those would probably see a good improvement.