Sager 9261 Benchmarks

I've had my new 9261 for a little over a week. I'm very pleased with it so far. The only thing I can't do is OC the Q6600. That's a huge bummer but maybe it will be allowed in the future. Here's a breakdown of my configuration and various benchmarks.

Specifications:
Q6600
4GB 800MHz DDR2 RAM
8700GT 512MB x2 SLI
160GB Seagate HDD x2 RAID-0
Vista Business 64

Driver and OC Info:
Video Driver: 169.04 (laptopvideo2go)
GPU Clocks: 756MHz CPU / 1700 MHz Shader / 1000 MHz Memory


wPrime:



HD Tune:



3DMark06 Default Test Suite:




EDIT: Fixed picture links and added some more info

 

Wow, definitely nice scores there... especially for 8700M GT's.... that most people thought to be weak.

Can you join Team NBR in hwbot, and submit those scores, that would be give you and NBR some rep.

 

Thanks Gophn!

I'm curious on my HDD scores. The HDDs are the slowest part of my system and it shows on games when they load data from disk. I knew they would be which is why I have them configured as RAID-0. I use an external drive for regular backups so I opted for RAID-0 speed.

I'm hoping others will post their HDTune scores so we can see how the typical SATA-II RAID-0 setups are performing.

 

as soon as i get mine i will post tests of the q6700
yes those are great scores
ur 160's are the seagate 7200rpms

 

I joined the team and submitted my 3DMark06 and my wPrime scores. It still shows me with "no points" on the team summary. I submitted verification links/images.

Also, 8700M GT's are not a selection in the video card list -- I'm stuck with 8800's in SLI .

 

My points just showed up... I'm now 3rd on the Team .

Our team scores really well on wPrime -- must be all the quads. If I could bump up my FSB base clock to 333 I'd be doing really well.

 

Ok here is my info on this. I have not yet OC anything just updated to the new driver 169.04 and moded the INF to allow it to install. These are just quick tests. I am still waiting for a 2g 800MHZ stick to catch up with me. I will post the new results when I get it. Hopefully in about a week. I may try to do some OCing in a few days also. I think hitting the 10k mark should be easy with these results. But for now I am more than happy with this setup. XOTIC PC ROCKS they were very responsive to all my needs and delivered what they said they would.

 

What system do u have i cant see ur porcessor ur hdd's

 

nm sry about that i see it now i didnt look at all the attachments
i just woke up

 

Mine is the duplicate of yours.

 

ok then keep testing baby so when i get mine, urs will be right and i can copy off u

 

I did tweak mine some last night and did get it over 10K. I think this link should work for it.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3638716

But I need to go back and play some more with it, I would not call it a stable OC. But I think I can tweak around with it some more and get it in that range.

 

Ok after some testing these settings seem to be stable for me now. I can probably tweak a little more out of it but it works fine on stock right now. This was more to see if I could do it. I hope it helps out some!

 

ok thx
i cant wait till i get mine

 

Hopefully you get it soon. I am very happy with mine. I think it is probably the best that I have bought.

 

Check out my HDTune score...

I have 3 x 160gb... SATA 300 drives in a Raid 0

Joe

 

Impressive! Those seagates are very fast.

 

Maybe you guys can help me.

I've downloaded Riva Tuner and done some OC. Basically used the same values as Kozi.

I get 9100 at 1280x1024. Without overclocking I get 9015 (more or less the same I used to get with the 7950GTX). I have the same System as Kozi with respect to Video Cards, CPU and Memory. I go to System Tweeks/Overclocking and set:

Core Clock: 751Mhz
Shader Clock: 1700 Mhz
Memory Clock: 1000 Mhz

I'm doing the test in XP. I wonder if I'm actually overclocking anything

Trance
PS: I guess that is becouse I'm on XP using DX9.

 

I can confirm that there is a huge difference between the scores we get on XP and Vista Ultimate x64.

I just got ... 10294. Without overclocking I get around 8800.

Maybe someone can explain to me this technically. Is the 3dMark06 using DX9 or DX10?

Why is there such a difference. Judging by this values someone with a 8* Video Cards should actually play in Vista rather then XP as they should get better values. Unless these 3DMark Scores became useless for comparing video card performaces as I was starting to suspect a couple of weeks ago

Trance

 

Vista has a better driver model then XP. I've been stating that Vista will exceed XP at some point -- it's one of my many opinions that I tend to get slapped around on.

Your 10294 score is very nice!

And with Vista you get DX10 -- pretty sweet all the way around.

 

Yes, I'm still testing the thing but I noticed that COD4 runs faster on Vista then XP. I can run 1920x1200 with all settings maxed. I FPS varies between 40-50. On XP at 1920x1200 it simply crashed and at 1600x1050 it ran more slughish. Same driver version ... 169.04 for both Vista and XP.

Soon I'll post some organized results. I've been fixing some issues with my machine.

Trance

 

Using 169.09
Stock I got 8136 and at 710/949 I got 9220 not to shabby with the specs I chose.

Clevo D901C
17" WSXGA+ (1680x1050)
SLI 2x8700 GT 512MB GDDR3
Core2Duo E6750 2.66GHz - 1333FSB
2,048MB DDR2 800 (1 SODIMM)
2x 80GB 7200RPM (RAID)
Vista Premium x64

 

Thats pretty sweet.

Bang for the buck rig there... with future upgrade ability.

...wish I could get one.