Sony SZ-140: disappointing 3DMark06 performance - help?

All,

Just got my SZ-140 yesterday, 2.1 GHz, 2 GB ram. Overall, I'm pleased with the performance, as the standard engineering application I work with shows better performance than my dual P4-3GHz workstation. With the NVidia Geforce 7400 Go settings (Speed mode) I can easily rotate a 2-million polygon model comfortably. Multi-threaded performance is also good on the CoreDuo processor. Batterly life is less than I expected, but I'm working on that...

I ran the basic verison of 3DMark06 ( www.futuremark.com), and the scores were terrible.

3DMark: 794
SM2.0: 287
HDR/SM3.0: 269
CPU: 1720

When running the benchmark, this is equivalent to a result of 1-2 frames per second. As this same benchmark program is used to stress test the very latest desktop SLI accelerator boards, I wasn't expecting a smooth-running experience, but I did expect better than this.

When switching to Stamina mode (Intel onboad graphics) the results were worse:

3DMark: 140
SM2.0: 64
HDR/SM3.0: n/a
CPU: 1697

I suspect that the Basic version of 3DMark06, which doesn't allow adjustment of settings, is using Optimal filtering by default and is too much for the Geforce 7400 Go to handle. I've tried to adjust hardware settings, search for tweak utilities, search online for helpful hints, but to no avail. These scores are simply lower than I had hoped for.

I stepped back and tried the previous basic version of 3DMark05 to see if that would make a difference, but it yielded a score of 1323; again, I expected a little more, but oh well. I haven't been able to find other benchmark information for the Geforce 7400 Go, which uses "TurboCache" for graphics memory. Some benchmarks of the Geforce Go 6200 at ExtremeTech show that the non-TurboCache version of the 6200 performs far better than with TurboCache enabled. If comparing the 6200 scores to my scores, keep in mind that I was also testing at the native screen resolution (1280x800) which is 2.1x greater than 800x600 and 1.3x greater than 1024x768. Maybe the scores aren't terrible after all?

The graphics card reports 128 MB of memory available, but I suspect that this number is not actually on-board ram, but perhaps 32MB onboard and 96MB from system memory [anyone have any details on this, or a way of checking?].

So, in the end I feel that the Geforce 7400 Go card with TurboCache on the 140 is not especially well suited to heavy use of DirectX 9 shaders, but performs fairly well for engineering OpenGL applications. Other games that aren't as taxing as 3DMark may also fair well. I believe I read one post where a user said that Doom3 ran fine on their SZ, but that might have been an SZ-160, which may have a better graphics configuration (?). At this point I can't imagine how well this laptop will fair with the graphics-intensive UI of Windows Vista...

I'd appreciate any tips or suggestions you may have, as well as any other benchmark information people have gathered on their SZ-140s. If I sound negative on the unit it is only on the 3DMark performance. I could get better results from a Dell M70, but I'm still happy to sacrifice that (and style!) for the lighter weight, better battery life, CoreDuo processor, and nice screen of the SZ-140.

- ncdave

 

You have something going there. In 3DMark05, you should be able to get a little closer to 1900, at least well into 1800's. I haven't run the 06 version. I wouldn't worry about not being able to tweak the settings of the benchmark program, it kind of defeats the purpose.

Make sure you don't have a lot of extra crap running when you run the app. See if that makes a difference. You might also look at the nvidia control panel ans see if there are some 3d settings there that you can play with. Try running at the default 800x600 resolution to see if your numbers in 3dmark05 are closer to 1900. That may be the only difference.

PS
mine is a 120.
3dmark05, one time I got 1903, but more regularly get around 1880.

 

You were probably just expecting too much out of the 7400, It's only the first step above integrated and is performing to its general capabilities. 3dmark 06 is designed to bring today's very best hardware to it's knees so it would make sense that the 7400 would have trouble running it.

When benchmarking using Futuremark's programs you always want to use the default resolution, even if it isn't the exact resolution of your LCD it will give you a more accurate comparison to everyone else's benchmarks out there.

 

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to matter what I am running as my resolution - the benchmark always runs at the native screen resolution and I can't change it in 3DMark05 or 3DMark06, so I can't test at 800x600. How were you able to do it? External monitor?

- ncdave

 

There is a fairly good thread on notebookforums.com about someone's 3dmark05 scores. I think his default was ~1950, and he included screenshots. He ended up taking his back after a bad HDD and locking up problems (with the second laptop). I purchased one even after knowing that, hoping that I would have a better experience and really wanting to go thin and light.

I think scores sub-1700 indicate another issue. I haven't ran it yet on mine but plan to today. I'll report my findings (with screenshot) here.

I was having no problem with Doom III either on the default "High" setting, at 1024x768 (I haven't figure out if/how you can make Doom III play on widescreen resolutions yet)

Here is a link to the thread I was discusssing.

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=133739

His 3dmark scores are scattered throughout the document, but I think his first run on vanilla drivers was pretty good.

 

Ummm, I just hit the go button. So, it ran at whatever it uses by default. But with the jaggies I saw, I highly doubt it was running at native.

 

I looked at the app again, and it is set to 1024x768 by default (at least mine is). So, that is what I ran it at.

 

You're right - 3DMark05 ran at 1024x768, and 3DMark06 ran at 1280x800.

- ncdave

 

Alright, ran mine on vanilla drivers with a fresh reboot into speed mode. Processor was set to performance and the only installed programs running in the background were AIM, MS Office Customer Service Improvement program, AIM and whatever my bluetooth mouse uses.

Machine did not get all that hot. I was unable to discern fan noise because I have a 17" DTR running in the background and it's noisy (it's also going away...soon)



I don't think that's all that bad for a baseline. I can probably get it up close to 2k and I'll take that for a 4lb machine any day.

 

Well, I don't know what I did but now my 3dmark scores are in the 1300 range as well. I updated drivers and thought it would make things better. I ran detonator destroyer to get rid of all the old drivers and reinstalled again and still get in the 1300 range. Not all that good. I'm going to do it again, load the Sony default drivers and see what happens...I"ll report back....if anyone has any suggestions I'm listening.

 

I have not done anything with drivers, and now I'm a little afraid to

Anybody done any overclocking on these SZ's yet? I'm thinking about it...

OK, I downloaded a little registry tweak from Guru3d that opens up an option for overclocking in your Nvidia 3d properties. After enabling the automatic overclocking, and running 3dmark05 again, the score was 1986. Thats around 80 points higher than without. Its not huge, but it IS an improvement.

Just a note, I have always gotten higher results in 3dmark05 when running it right after a fresh re-boot.

 

Mine were ran after a fresh reboot as well.

I fixed it. Getting 1949 now, with NEW drivers.

Here's how to fix it.

Run MSconfig, deselect anything that begins with NV, reboot

Run Detonator Destroyer (google for link)

Right click my computer, properties, hardware, uninstall the7400, reboot into stamina mode.

Run detonator destroyer again, removing the last 3 or so files you couldn't get earlier

If you run detonator destroyer and see ANY files left, you've missed something. Figure out what it is and get rid of the files, or whatever is loading them.

Reboot into speed mode

Load the new drivers, rerun 3dmark and see a score in the 1900's

 

Where'd you get drivers?

 

I got mine from www.laptopvideo2go.com . There are other places out there, though.

 

What version of drivers are you running? I have 8.3.02

I did load up an older version of drivers, but performance suffered a little.

Thanks,
Jason

 

I loaded the latest.... 84.20. I found out what was causing the problem, even further than last night.

Windows Defender protects certain files and restores them after they've been tampered with.

I uninstalled it because it was part of the problem. The nice thing about it is it doesn't defend files that don't relate to the current video, so when I switched to Stamina mode, I avoided it.

Well, it's gone now.

 

With much, much thanks to Vcdechagn, this has worked for me and I'm now able to get a score of 1838, which is ~40% faster than before.

Some subtleties of the installation:

1) it took me two tries to remove the 7400 harware drivers
2) Detonator Destroyer never showed anything to remove
3) you must download and use the modified .inf file as well as the 84.20 driver

No negative side effects yet!

Thanks again,

- ncdave

 

Update

After installing the 842 drivers, I got a 1962 in 3dmark05
Overclocking pumped it up 2045!

I just let the driver utility detect the optimal OC speeds.
Running at 475 memory, 754 core

 

OK - found first problem.

I can't play DVDs anymore in Speed mode.

Intervideo says it can perform overlay, and recommends lowering the color depth and/or resolution. I've tried most settings, but with no success.

Windows Media Player plays the audio with no video.

Stamina mode works fine.

Any thoughts?

- ncdave

 

Might be best to stick with the standard Sony drivers for now and either wait for them to update them or wait for an update to the generic drivers to properly support the SZ...

 

ncdave// tried to rollback ur video driver.

Some video drive cause problems like that which I had experienced before.

Just find another version of drive.

that'll fix it.

 

The score of 1962 in 3dmark05 You got using 1024x768 resolution?
Or 800x600 ?