some m570tu benchmarks for you guys to chew on

I just ran 3dmark 2006 (sorry, I'm still on xp) and here are some results

3DMark Score
8936 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score
4032
SM 3.0 Score
4145
CPU Score
2087

They do seem kind of low.... I'm using the latest laptopvideo2go drivers too... I suppose I'll just return it along with my pixel problem tomorrow or the day after.
edits:
Just did it a second time and the score was even lower at 8600.... feeling sad right now.
Hoping that 3rd time was the charm, I tried it one more time and.... got 8600 again.... dang.
just for reference this is my desktop scores

3DMark Score
12900 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score
5317
SM 3.0 Score
5314
CPU Score
4427

Some how I feel its a bit low too compared to the highest score which is three times higher.

 

my stock 8800m GTX and GPU scored 9200 back to the day.

 

Considering the T8300 was @ 2.4 stock and the 8800gtx is same as 9800gt and I have ddr3 ram, I would think my score would be higher. Hopefully (weird I would say this) this is a hardware defect and would get fixed along with my pixel during my exchange.

 

Hi,

Yes they seems little bit low to me. Especially CPU score. Here you have mine for reference.

3D Mark 06
9255 3D Marks (default GPU clocks 500 1250 799)
Driver 177.66 from LV2G
SM2.0
4299
SM3.0
4025
CPU
2276

I'm running Vist 64bit w SP1.

 

That's within 300 points. It's negligible. You probably have something running in the background. 3Dmarks isn't exactly analogous to practical performance anyways. Try an actual gaming benchmark.

As for the gap between your laptop and the best current config: You have a gaming laptop with a single graphics - not a watercooled, overclocked, octocore, >$7000, quad SLI beast.

Of course your desktop replacement laptop is going to be owned by a rig that can max out two copies of Crysis at once. If it makes you feel better, your Clevo eats most laptops for breakfast.

Edit: I don't think RAM speed has a huge, if any, effect on 3D marks. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

hmm... so now the question is if its just my laptop being weird or the ru is better then tu...

@mikel, I was comparing my desktop when I mentioned the top score. I seems kind of disappointing the computer I pored so much time and money into got beat like that. Its only a 100 points above "average score", that makes me sad too...

 

That sounds about right. High end laptops are comparable, in power, to midrange desktops.

Forget 3DMarks. How does it run your games?

 

heh, well since I'm pretty set on an exchange, I really didn't install anything...

 

3Dmark scores can have a difference of 500 points even for similar configs. People with the t9500 and 8800mgtx were ranging anywhere form 8700-9600

 

3DMarks doesn't mean much. Really. Play a game and compare framerates and settings with similar configurations.

Aside from the dead pixel, your system doesn't seem faulty to me in any way.

 

sigh, again with the 3dmark score comparison....why not test a real game so you know for sure that your card isn't performing less tan it should.

 

because no matter what is said, benchmarks are benchmarks: something to compare two systems. I understand that they may be inaccurate and have high variance sometimes, but their purpose is to compare, so why not take advantage of that?

 

Because you're making a critical decision based solely on a very minor discrepancy in a synthetic benchmark.

If you want to be sure, try out a game with a built in benchmark utility, as it would give you much more accurate results for comparison.

 

ok... but now it seems like I've got bigger fishes to deal with. Every time I boot I get bootmgr is missing after trying to install vista again... so I definitely need to get a replacement.... I don't know how I could have done anything to the bios just by attempting to install an os.... weird. I better not get fined on this.

 

http://lifehacker.com/software/troubleshooting/vista-tip--repair-bootmgr-is-missing-error-251733.php

You didn't do anything to the BIOS, just Window's boot manager. Try using the repair utility on the install CD.

It's pretty amazing what you can find with never-say-die attitude and a quick Google search, huh?

 

heh, heh, I think its because deep down inside I want some crazy problem to take over my computer so I can get a shipping free trade... I swear I'm typically not so lazy.

 

Hey, it's no problem. We all like to feel entitled to things we aren't actually entitled to.










I demand a hoverbike!

 

lol, I want a flying car...

I guess I'll just have to stomach the shipping fees and wait time and hope that the new comp will fix all my problems of vista install, low benchmarks scores, and stuck pixels.... hey, I can wish right?

 

I got a 9700 with stock drivers and no OC with my 9800 GT !!! Wtf. This seems odd. To bad my 5796 has had some fan issues

 

9700 is very good. I have a 5793, and I get around 9200-9300.

 

Because your 3dmark benchmark is giving the 9800m gt a bad name. People see this and go oh noooo 9800gt doesn't equal a 8800m gtx the lies!!! When in game benchmarks show that it does equal a 8800m gtx because its a rebadged 8800m gtx. At least post what drivers you are using so I can tell you they need to be updated .

 

Yup,your laptop is a brick because it scored 2-300 points less than others.

BENCHMARK IN GAMES , forget about 3dmarks.
I get 10500 regularly and I can play Crysis at WUXGA, 25+fps, all high.

 

damn im only getting 9200 on my 9800m gt with a p8600 wat processor u got and what driver u using

 

damn, I'm only getting 11021 on my 5793...I think I'll go and throw it out the window

 

Man that's awesome - love those killernotebook mods!

 

lol, and the extreme processor.

 

Mods, OC and he still can`t game Crysis all high at WUXGA
I score around 10500

 

Eleron yours 25+fps, all high WUXGA are not very impressive for SLI 8800M GTX . I don't think it's playable, +35fps would be Remeber Chaz's review of NP9262 with 34.7fps all high WUXGA . Stay cool.

 

People... you should really post the resolution you are running 3DMark06 with. If you didn't realize yet: higher resolution = less points. So if you received maybe 8600 Points using a 1920x1200 resolution you may not compare it to a 10.000 Points someone achieved with a 1024x768 or something like that on the Alienware m15x ...

 

the trial version is stuck at one resolution. I don't think its possible to change even in the pro one, idk, no point in getting it.

 

Dude, what you don`t understand is that it means 25+ , and the average can be 30-35 depending on the level and sceneries.
I guess you are not very familiar with Crysis` highly demanding architecture.
And if 25+fps at 1920x1200 , all high is not impressive, maybe your RU can teach us a thing or 2

 

Dude, there is one thing which you don't understand. If fps during game play drop below 30fps the game is no longer fluent and to demanding for your XPS 1730 in that resolution, even avg. is 30-35fps. Wrong guess I've played Crysis on my RU so I know how 25+ looks like and I can say it's not fluent, playable yes if you are desperate. My RU can't teach yours XPS a lesson because of slight diffrence in number of GPU's (if you don't know), but D90xC will.

 

Oh brother, you are so full of it
Whatever, I`m letting this one go just so the mods won`t have to step in to erase some smug attitudes around
Cheers mate.

 

O yeah! I was also worry about mods erasing something .
Cheers Eleron. Bless you and your XPS!

 

Thank you

Can any 570TU user post absolute max temps? (CPU, GPU, HDD)

 

How do you guys test temps underload? I've been trying to figure that stuff out for my desktop recently...

 

HWMonitor has a min /max / current temp reading.
Play Crysis at max settings and resolution supported , and see what you get.

 

ok, I'll try that. Thanks.

 

Sorry, I didn't know that. Hmmm weird thing then, I'd expected it to be some 9500+

Damn thats impressive on that resolution Would be enough to enjoy the game I guess. Also it means that in lower Resolution (1680x1050) it would have even more FPS

 

3dmark can have its resolution changed in the pro version, but almost all scores are done at 1280x1024 as that is the standard (mine certainly are). The main problem arises when people with WXGA+/WSXGA (1440×900) run it as they only run it at 1280x900 (due to display restrictions) and obviously, they get abnormally high scores...

It can be interesting to run 3dmark at higher resolutions as when run at 1280x1024, it is very cpu bound, but if run at 1920x1200, it becomes far more of a gpu benchmark.