baconcow's D901C Benchmarks

Just broke 15,000 points, for those interested. No overclocking, by the way.

Over the next while, I will be updating this topic with some benchmarks for my new D901C. So far, all I have is the 3DMark06 benchmark and Company of Heroes. Specifications are located in my signature. I thought that those interested in a D901C/NP9262 would like to see these.

Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit Setup:
SLI-enabled (unless otherwise specified)
DirectX 10
nVidia panel setting: performance
SP1 installed

Windows XP Professional 64-bit Setup:
SLI-enabled (unless otherwise specified)
DirectX 9.0c
nVidia panel setting: performance
SP2 installed

Windows XP Professional 32-bit Setup:
SLI-enabled (unless otherwise specified)
DirectX 9.0c
nVidia panel setting: performance
SP2 installed


3DMark06 Basic:
SM 2.0 / SM 3.0 / CPU Score / 3DMark Score
14013 =
5535 (46.33fps, 45.93fps) / 6439 (69.28fps, 59.49fps) / 4117 (1.38fps, 1.97fps) ( Vista x64 - 177.92, post-SP1)
13998 =
5560 (46.56fps, 46.11fps) / 6311 (65.99fps, 60.22fps) / 4239 (1.38fps, 2.08fps) ( Vista x64 - 176.02, pre-SP1)
14661 =
5853[/COLOR] (48.97fps, 48.59fps) / 6472 (64.63fps, 62.80fps) / 4768 (1.57fps, 2.32fps) ( XP Pro x64 - 177.98)
15126 =
6132 (49.68fps, 52.51fps) / 6587 (68.10fps, 63.64fps) / 4744 (1.57fps, 2.29fps) ( XP Pro x86 - 177.98)



Company of Heroes (built-in performance benchmark):
Default settings: Version 2.101 / Max settings / SLI-enabled / LaptopVideo2Go drivers - 177.79
Test 5 (1920x1200, AA enabled): "Great"/Avg. 92.2 fps/ Max. 249.7 fps/Min. 18.9 fps
Test 6 (1920x1200, AA disabled): "Great"/ Avg. 118.1 fps/Max. 244.0 fps/Min. 25.8 fps


World of Warcraft (in-game FPS):
Video Settings: 1920x1200, 24-bit color & depth, 1x multisample, hardware cursor, world appearance maxed, special effects maxed, character shadows on
Audio Settings: hardware sound enabled, high quality sound, low sound channels, ambient sounds enabled, reverb off
Results: Avg. 100.5 fps / Min. 60.4 fps / Max. 303.0 fps / Length: 3 hrs 51 mins (with Vista x64 SP12 and 177.92 drivers, after reformat)
Results: Avg. 77.4 fps / Min. 26.1 fps / Max. 104.2 fps / Length: 10 mins (with Vista x64 SP1 and 176.02 stock drivers)
Results: Avg. ~125-135 in smaller populated town, ~140-240 in fields and forests / Length: ~15 mins (with Windows XP x64, 177.98 drivers)

NOTE: I was able to play World of Warcraft in Windows XP x64 from the Vista x64 installation. I noticed a substantial framerate increase of approximately 20-100+ fps depending on the area. I found that one good way of increasing the framerate, if you use QuestHelper, is to type /qh perf 10% (changing the performance update rate to 10% instead of the default 100%). This increased framerate in XP from 82 -> 131 in the exact location in town. Windows Vista increases to about 85-90 fps in the same location from approximately 75 fps. I will post more accurate results as I continue.


Crysis:
Using the Crysis Benchmark Tool 1.05 Final from wwwGuru3D.com


Coming Soon:
Crysis version 2.1

_

 

Nice 3DMark06 score...Quad core with SLI...nice.

 

wow... killer scores...

 

Now that’s power!

 

Thanks. Any game requests? I borrowed a bunch from a couple friends. I only own a few. I do not have Crysis yet (hopefully soon for benchmarking purposes). Many are older.

 

You can get the Crysis demo and UT3 demo and benchmark those.

 

Thanks. I never thought of demos. Sure beats buying the game if I have no immediate intentions of playing it.

 

Those are some great scores!! thanks. Yeah if you can, install the crysis demo. Its the ultimate benchmark for your laptop.

 

Masta, your machine is even more of a beast than mine! Have you done any benchmarks of your own?

 

Nice buy!
Just one question did you use the Nvidia control panel for performance or quality?
I ran my benchmark test at 1280x1024 res. and got a OK score Just ran it and got 14606..lol
I love this machine!
Now if I can get Gears of War to start working I will be so much happier.
I have never played a game with so many bugs!
My game starts, then stops.
I get this thing saying
Gears of War has stopped working, tried installing some patches that don't help.
FU%@#!N Games For Windows.

 

holy shiza, a q9650!

that thing must have a brilliant cooling system

 

I have it set at Performance. I figured that most people benchmarking their system, who want to see a nice performing result, would think to set it there. I'll make note of that. I am lucky to have GoW for my Xbox 360. Mind you, I have never even finished it, yet.

 

The only problem with my laptop,(and it's a very,very minor one)is that the touchpad and left side gets a little warm when using it for a while.I think a nice laptop cooler should fix that.
Any suggestions on a nice 17" laptop cooler?

 

Zalman ZM-NC2000
Cooler Master Infinite
NZXT Cryo LX


How many times have I posted these coolers.....

 

The UPS guy is coming tomorrow so I ll post my benchmarks asap.

 

Sorry Gophn!
I didn't know there was a thread on laptop coolers.
Do they sell those at any retail store like BestBuy or CircuitCity or any where like that?

 

wow killer scores ikas v and bacon cow. makes me wanna change my cpu now heheh..

yep Zalman NC 2000 she is a killer cooler. got it sitting my 9262

 

Is it me or the scores seam to be higher the the 8800MGTX SLi? Granted not enough to justify an upgrade from the 8800M GTX but still ~800 points higher with no overclock seams to be a difference to note.

Yeah, it would be nice to see how it performs against Crysis in comparison too.

These are all good news for the 9800M GTX ... I hope.

Trance
PS: It must be the increased FSB in the CPUs that is pushing the mark up.

 

Well I did get one with a Q9650,so that probably explains the higher score.

 

I think it is the CPU score that really pushes it up high.

 

Well just ran it again, and I will break it down:
1280x1080 res
Nvidia control panel set 3D on balanced:

Results

3DMark06 score-- 14766
SM2.0 Score-- 5918
HDR/SM3.0 Score-6568
CPU Score -- 4524

Not Bad..lol

 

Mine:

3DMark Score - 13998 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score - 5560
SM 3.0 Score - 6311
CPU Score - 4239

It is interesting to see how the Q9550 -> Q9660 CPU boosted all of the scores, not only the CPU-specific one. Also, my test was done on performance. I wonder how much of an impact putting yours on balanced will lower your score. Can you try it on performance to see your max potential. You are not overclocked are you?

Are you using stock drivers? I don't even know which versions came preinstalled on my notebook.

 

Going to do it in performance now.No overclocking.Stock drivers version 176.02 thats what it came with.Also using Vista 64.

 

Nvidia control panel set up in performance

3DMark06------14889
SM2.0----------5897
HDR/SM 3.0---6648
CPU Score-----4630

Not bad! Small improvment...I'll take it.

 

Wow, your processor really does make a difference. All it says on Device Manager and dxdiag is driver version 7.15.11.7602. Where do you located the nVidia driver version number? Date on the drivers is June 19th, 2008.

 

Last five digits of the number you found, with the decimal moved over two places to the right. Your driver is 176.02. Don't ask me why it's done this way. I've either forgotten or never did know.

 

Wow, that is kinda dumb, but thanks. I am going to install the newest drivers and see the results.

This is an interesting article.

"Changing the Global SLI Performance mode setting does NOT change how 3DMark will perform (3DMark has its own profile with its own SLI mode specified, AFR2 or AFR3 if memory serves me correctly)"

http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/forum/...howtopic=16908

Apparently it doesn't matter what we set the system up as, performance-wise. Your increase could have been coincidence.

 

This is a confusing area and that article doesn't seem to help much. I'm far from being an expert in this area, but I've spent a lot of time fooling around with it, so here's my take (feel free, anyone, to correct my errors).

When you change the performance/quality slider you are actually changing the global settings. Try it. When set on performance, the first entry in the global settings (AF) is turned off. When you select quality, AF is set to 8x in the global settings. Since the AF line in the program settings for 3DMark06 is "Use Global Setting", you can see that the system will try to run this application with no AF in performance mode, and with 8x AF in quality mode. Many other settings besides AF are modified by the slider of course. Hopefully this explains why IKAF V's increase was no coincidence. Naturally, if you modify this line in the 3DMark06 program settings, the slider will have no effect on AF.

I've had very good luck with games using the "Use Advanced 3D Image Settings" button, and games for which no program settings exist generally run quite well with this setting. If you try this, however, you MUST restore the default global settings with the restore button. Otherwise, I believe the global settings will be locked at whatever they were before you switched modes.

 

Updated the layout of the benchmarks to improve readability. Added more Company of Heroes benchmarks with the game patched to version 2.101. It shows the importance that patches can have on a game's performance.

 

I use GPU-Z it's a free download at filehippo.com.
They got lots of cool free downloads.

 

wow nice scores for the guys running the Q9650 and SLi GPUs.. really makes me drool.. i got half the number of cores and half the number of GPUs in the same system ):

 

yikes, 14000!

 

I know I never thought I could get such a high score and these are all with stock drivers it came with(176.02)
I am going to try to get up to 15000, hopefully with NO overclocking.

 

drivers can go only so far... you will probably have to OC the videocards a bit to get to 15k.

 

I never thought the Q9650 would be such a large jump. Your score was almost 1,000 higher than mine with stock drivers. I am going to try today's newest drivers out then the stock again.

 

I also thought that getting the Q9650 (originally ordered a Q9550) was not that big of a deal, but I said what the hell,If I am going to spend this much $$ on a laptop might as well upgrade the processor, boy am I glad I did it.Well worth the extra $$.

 

I had already spent the extra to go from the E8400 to the Q9450. The Q9550 was an automatic bump from the Q9450. I am still so pleased that I have a notebook that destroys most decent desktops. Obviously dual cpu desktops and quad-sli setups will not be matched for many years, but still... this is portable.

 

Magnus72 prooved me wrong when I said the 8800M GTX cannot OC like crazy.

625/1550/950 fully stable, max temp 82-83C.
Crysis is like butter.


Try these values, see what you get...since the 9800M GT=8800M GTX...

 

What did you use to get those values? Riva Tuner? Wait... I just looked at your guide. Tomorrow, I'll go through it in-depth and try some of those things out. I am still trying to choose which drivers to stick with. I may end up staying with the stock drivers (176.02) in the end.

Also, I find Crysis difficult to benchmark since the in-game benchmarks are hard to compare. Only the Crytek-made ones seem consistent, but are not really true to an in-game experience since it is just a camera flying around the level or a person running around shooting buildings.

Also, what are the default clocks for the 8800M GTX / 9800M GT?

 

I tried Riva Tuner and found that my 3DMARK06 Scores dropped when I was messing around with it, maybe I was not doing something right but the only thing I did was set it up to 3D performance and got much better scores up to 14890 (WOW!)
I am also still using the stock drivers version 176.02.
I also don't know much about over clocking.
Under driver settings I did the customizing of the ForceWare enabled the overclocking set it up in 3D performance and bam improved scores my original first run in 3DMARK06 scores was 14411 so a improvement of 479 points.

 

Nice, I am going to try it out after work tonight. First, I am going to switch back to the stock drivers and redo the test. Those, and the 177.79's seemed to give me the best results, so far. I also want to try these 177.92's out without using DOX's INF. Supposedly that INF improves IQ (image quality) on higher-end cards and reduces performance. DOX said that they wouldn't improve 3DMark scores.

 

The Crysis benchmark is widely used to evaluate these high-end cards because it uses a standard graphics path and because it gives a pretty good estimate of in-game FPS.

I don't know what you mean by "Crytek-made ones". Didn't you just go into the Crysis bin folder and run the benchmark from there?

The 8800, 9800 GT, and the 9800 GTX all use clocks of 500/1250/800 (799).

 

Yeah. The Crytek-made ones are the ones in the Bin folders. However, there is a commonly-used in-game one from Guru3D that I was looking at, but it requires you to play the game. I figured it would be difficult to make the results consistent considering it is based on what path you take in the game. I will end up using the one that is in the Bin folder and have it do some runs.

 

Great. Let us know what you get.

For reference, here's a run I did on my system a while back:

1900x1200 HIGH SETTINGS

!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 61.73s, Average FPS: 32.40
Min FPS: 9.98 at frame 147, Max FPS: 38.61 at frame 987
Average Tri/Sec: -23052930, Tri/Frame: -711576
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -1.29

 

Thanks for posting your reference. Did you ever try running it at Very High? Probably will kill our systems.

 

I use XP so I can't routinely set it for Very High. I tried the hack that is supposed to allow XP to use Very High, but I didn't get it to work. I don't recall seeing any Very High benchmarks posted here, but, if you search, you might find one or two. Anyway, why don't you try it?

 

I didn't realize that XP couldn't run Very High. Very High must be DirectX 10 related than?

 

Yep..........

 

Just did some CRYSIS benchmarks look for the thread on the Clevo Sager section.

 

I just realized that I didn't have Windows Vista x64 Service Pack 1 installed... Windows Update is just downloading it now... 1 week later. Weird. I wonder how this will impact my scores? Also, installing the 177.92 drivers with the modified (non-Dox) INF. That will leave me with the newest iteration of Vista x64 and newest drivers.