FW or SR

Hey guys, here's an overlay picture...

SR over the FW:

 

Wow, nice, that is a lot larger than my SR, i'm glad that I got the SR now.

 

Hmm, is there a PCmark06 program? I have seen some PCmark05 tests, but I don't know about 06?

I don't know about Vantage though.

Wow, the SR is quite a lot smaller... Nice. xD

 

3dmark06 please . Also, have you tried any games on it ?

 

I got PCmark05 results, got a 3619... which is surprising (to me at least), comparing to results that notebookreview.com on pcmark05 with slower CPUs... maybe i'm just running it wrong, or got like a dud....

EDIT: Also, the futuremark.com results page says that I have a intel core 2 quad....

 

Hmm, that is very strange..... I wonder why the futuremark site is saying that you have an Intel Core 2 Quad. @_@
Kinda funny, but very strange. Perhaps the new chipset has something that registers as a Quad core one or has some involvement? I know that there are going to be Centrino 2 systems or something that are going to roll out Quad core processors.

 

Okay, got a 3dmark06 score of 1052, again, not too enlightening for me, I expected at least aroudn 1500 since that's what the HP dv5z got with it's integrated HD3200....

 

O_O Wow..... Hmm, that's kinda disappointing. It must be because of how low the memory is...

I would've thought it would get a better score too, I heard they used GDDR3 memory, didn't they? You can check through GPU-Z for that stuff though.

 

Is it really that low ? The other thread mentions that someone managed to get 2000 on it. You might wanna check if there is an update to the drivers. it's kinda weird to get a scoree below the hd3200.

 

Yeah, I saw that as well. I wonder if this is because it's the business version of the SR? Maybe the consumer one offers more Vram? My guess would be how "small" the Vram is, at 128 MB. I think it's supposed to be GDDR3 memory though, so you would think it would be better.

 

I don't think there is any difference between the normal and the business but I do know for sure. One more thing, the pcmark score is also below the other thread.

BTW...try the window vista score thingy. I know it's not really reliable but you should get the same result as the other thread if they are the same.

 

I don't know. They might underpower the Business one, as it's not supposed to be "for gaming" kind of a thing. Maybe more for having it to efficiently use programs that are CPU+GPU intensive, but not in a gaming kind of way.


Yeah, it makes me wonder, I would like to see a Vista Experience shot... I wonder if you have some parts different in your laptop.... That would be weird.

 

Also, the other guy who received his SR posted the windows vista index. Some of them are better than the one from that chinese website.

 

Well, that's because the guy on here put another 2 GB of ram in his laptop. That usually boosts some of the scores up just a tad. So that's why that other person had better scores, perhaps? Though... that 3dmark06 score shouldn't be THAT affected by only having 2 GB of ram....

 

Did not notice that. I thought it had something to do with the DDR2 667 vs DDR2 800.

Man...I was 80% sure about ordering this instead of dv5t until I read his benchmark. I hope they are just driver issues not hardware issues.

 

Hmm, I would expect Sony to install alll the neccesary drivers and stuff.

I'm running PCmark05 again on the laptop (on desktop right now) just to make sure my laptop ain't FUBAR.

EDIT: HUGE relief now (i take pride in having a fast laptop). Pcmark05 score of 4898 (that's more like it). I'ma gonna run 3dmark06 now to see if i also get better results (probably will).

But seriously, I didn't even restart my laptop since I got that 3619 score, i have no idea what cause that huge differential.

 

You would think? Maybe try updating them if you can. You might something more efficient. Though, I am really not sure why there would be that much of a difference. That's incredibly... incredible (in a bad way).

Well, I think DDR2 800 is faster than 667, but I'm not sure by how much... It's more efficient though, maybe. Though... that does not explain the 1000 point difference or so between 3dMark06 scores... Strange.

 

Don't forget to read the edit.

 

Did you actually update the drivers though? What did you do differently to cause the big jump in the PC Mark score? I am curious because I might buy this one in like, 3 weeks.

 

I have no idea... I really didn't do anything in all that time. Well, before I was running it on the battery and not plugged in, i dunno if that could make a difference.

 

..... OH. Of course that would. Your Sony might have switched to a setting in Vista that makes it more battery saving and efficient (IE, Battery Saving mode). So it won't give a lot of power to both things, it underclocks the GPU for sure though. Only plugged in can it give it the regular stats that it has.

No wonder! @_@

 

Yep, that would about explain it, i was running the vaio optimized mode, which wasn't quite the most battery saving one, but imbetween power saving and high performance. I guess that was a huge mistake on my part (not used to benching on notebooks, so my bad).

I got a 3dmark06 score of 2044. I'm very pleased with these results now.

Pics:
Old PCMark05:


Old 3dmark06:



New 3dmark06:




Sorry, but I forgot to prtscrn the Pcmark05, so you'll just have to tkae my word on that one.

 

Thanks for running the benchmarks! Good to see that the machine performs! I would have run more tests but I've been on the road since 4 AM and I'm exhausted. Sounds like you like the machine. Lot of bang for the buck and it looks pretty cool to boot.

 

Thanks ambitious ed. Im relieved to read these updates. Any word on battery life yet?

 

Ah, I see. Those were the old ones before.... Well, that's good to know it can get over 2000 in PCMark06 when it's plugged in. My guess that even when it's on Vaio Optimized, it's still not giving the GPU the max power that that could. How interesting. Alright, this is still in my consideration....

 

The vista performance rating:



It was already done by the other thread, but it can't hurt to have more.

 

Yeah. Interesting, the increased ram did slightly bump up some of the stats... but not by much. XD Good to know though. Well, and the other person did put a better hard drive in it.... Psh. xD

 

So, does the laptop stay cool even under load, as in during benchmarking like that? I guess it's a little late to ask for me, since mine's already paid for, but peace of mind is always good--my friend just bought a tablet with AMD's "Puma" and I was shocked by the amount of heat it put out.

 

It stays relatively cool under load, i mean, you can feel heat coming out of the heatsink on the left side, but it isn't very hot or anything, I could place the laptop on my lap without having it feel really hot. hell, I even pulled up my shorts a bit to see if it would be hot to the skin, and it wasn't, it'd be a nice lap warmer in the winter.

 

>"Nice lap warmer in the winter."

Now that's what I wanna hear. I am glad it doesn't feel hot on the lap. Sometimes at school I sit in the bigger cushy chairs they have that don't have any tables near them, and so I have to have it on my lap. I had a really old HP that kicked the bucket with the motherboard back in March, and the fan was really annoying. It was in the back, both pointing downward on the bottom and the side. Thing used to heat my lap really badly too, but it's an HP so yeah.

 

Guess what? Now I'm the one torn between the SR and the FW.

Love the large screen on the FW... love the small footprint on the SR. What's a guy to do?


SR and FW owners: can you please tell me the exact size of the screen?

Not the whole lid size -- just the actual screen itself.

Thanks!

 

This may not be what you want, but the actual size of the screens, according to my calculations, are (from here):

This is mathematically correct, assuming that the SR is exactly 13.3" diagonal @ 16:10 ratio, and the FW is exactly 16.4" diagonal @ 16:9 ratio.

 

Perfect, thanks AC!

Can any owners verify that this is correct?

 

I know that mine is a 16:10 ratio, and the measurements ac500 posted are just about right.

 

Thanks!

Any FW owners ??