Crysis FPS and benchmark on sager 9262 8800 gtx SLI enabled

Well from these results clevo isnt the only geting owned,comparing these scores with the alienware's m15x from chaz's review having 9241 3d mark score with the same specifications(dif.not raid 0) is pathetic and explains crysis low fps scores...

 

Yep that is true.

Trance
PS: Basically the gaming laptop business is stopping to be just an ODM niche business and maturing to be mainstream. The M1730 XPS is the first true non ODM system and is scoring in less then six months.

 

Interesting, my friend with M1730 and a T9300 processor gets 11,000 with SLI enabled and 8,700 with SLI disabled. Don't understand why yours is so much faster ?

 

Due to the extreme CPU. Also, I think he OCed a bit

 

but according the the results provided and my research the CPU overclocking doesn't change the score much.

just look at the sm2.0 and 3.0 scores no matter how much I oc my card, and my CPU score is higher. I cant reach those scores. in GPU only.

 

Graphics card clocks are at 600 core 950 memory.

There are a lot of factors that could make the difference. Drivers, Bloatware, etc. And the processor is getting quite a few points more than a T9300 would even without overclocking. Also does he have 8800 sli? Even out of the box I was able to beat 12k with only changing the driver and 14k with only overclocking the CPU. That is with no GPU overclocking and on dell's initial install wtih bloat.

 

Are these the stock speeds or overclocked?

N

 

Overclocked.

 

This is the score I get with Crysis 1920x1200 SLI DX9 almost Very High settings. My new personal record I must say. Overclocked GPU´s in sig.

!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 51.91s, Average FPS: 38.53
Min FPS: 22.00 at frame 158, Max FPS: 53.94 at frame 1001
Average Tri/Sec: -34320432, Tri/Frame: -890704
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -1.03

 

you should state which settings were not set to high as the shader and shadow settings are the real culprits that put the beatdown on the gpu.

 

All is settings is custom. Shaders are Very High, these are basically Very High settings though under DX9 instead of DX10.

 

so your playing with a autoexec custom cfg??

ahhh that explains the high fps.

 

it is better to run the stock game with no modifications and do the time-demo in all high settings so we can get an accurate measurement.

 

correct, that's what I do.

Custom Cfg's are not good. because you can Cheat.

 

Yes I tested out this config now. Before I ran with stock no modifications.

 

Messing around with crysis today to get a change from staring at 3dmark =p.

Here is what I got at 1900x1200 all settings high overclocked. No custome .cfg or anything like that.



Only got 24 all settings very high, I'll start messing with custom .cfg files and see what I get. I've kind of gotten sucked in to the witcher at the moment though so haven't messd with crysis much.

 

I get 29-30fps @1680x1050 all high avg with that benchmark tool overclocked.

 

Yep but in DX9 dexgo? I think you said before you run in XP, which is faster than running the game in DX10. Now I am not sure if duane ran that in DX10 if he did it is plain amazing and definitely proves that Crysis benefits from a faster CPU

Oh by the way I upped my overclock on the GPU´s to 645/1600/950 now and listen to this upped the back a little by two lego pieces my kids have, well the temps got lowered quite a bit. In the idle area a whole 6 degrees, load around 4-5 degrees

 

I think that's a little too high. to keep 24-7

 

yes, and Why would anyone run anything but XP???

its FASTER, Better, Better FPS and Scores..

that should tell you ppl something.

Vista is a HOG of Death!

I am done with this 3dmark garbage btw.

3dmark is crap, vs realworld is not real at all.

lastpost in the target.

 

True true dexgo I agree I have just been lazy and not installed XP yet on this notebook. Though I have to have Vista too, who wants to play Lost Planet in DX9 when DX10 looks so much better?