NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Forums › Acer Notebook Reviews › Acer Aspire 5672 Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Acer Aspire 5672 Review - Page 8

post #141 of 214
9/18/06 at 10:31pm
Another 3DMark06 from an Acer 5672WLMi x1600 128MB: 1223
that is with everything standard, no reinstall
Reply
Reply
post #142 of 214
9/20/06 at 9:48am
nice review! how hot does it get?
Reply
Reply
post #143 of 214
9/20/06 at 2:20pm
@h1tman

I have an Antec Notebook cooler under my laptop, but I think that it doesn't even get that hot without it. The only downside (heat-wise) is that there's a heat exit on the right of the laptop, so if you're right handed and you have a mouse right next to your laptop your hand tends to get hot hot hot ^^
Reply
Reply
post #144 of 214
9/24/06 at 4:51pm
hi, can anyone please, post scores in 3dMark2001 too?
Reply
Reply
post #145 of 214
10/1/06 at 6:06pm
Got 3082 in 3DMark05 (stock speeds 475/370).Used nhc to undervolt my cpu(10x->1.085 v),Able to overclock my mob x1600 on 5672 to (482core N 405Rram) using ati tray tools,nhc shows the overclocked timings but unable to run 3d mark,The screen gets distorted. Don't know why?
will keep updated.
Reply
Reply
post #146 of 214
10/4/06 at 3:18pm
bhavitavya, can you please post score acording to 3dmark2001 as well? Please try, and post when you get it.
Reply
Reply
post #147 of 214
10/6/06 at 12:58am
I've had mine for about a month, works great. All the features for this price range... just awesome. It was from Newegg, it looks like this one was produced in June.

I do notice the lower clock speed on the X1600 though. Reinstalled using XP Pro and the standard drivers from Acer's website
Here's my scores
3DMark06 1156
3DMark05 2510
3DMark03 4587

Reading the thread, I see that this is isn't good for the X1600. I will try the Omega drivers next
Perhaps bhavitavya could share how to overclock it. When I use ATI Tray Tools, I can't change any of the speeds.
Reply
Reply
post #148 of 214
10/8/06 at 2:52am
I did not read the whole thread, but you guys know this is a 64 bit memory bus on the X1600 right? That is why the scores in synth benchmarks are half what they should be.

No point having 128 video memory if the system RAM is 64 bit dual channel.
Reply
Reply
post #149 of 214
10/9/06 at 8:02pm
Quote:
I did not read the whole thread, but you guys know this is a 64 bit memory bus on the X1600 right?
No its a 128 bit memory bus (32 x 4). The low scores could be the result of an underclocked version of the X1600 in the particular laptop model, mostly to avoid heat issues.
Reply
Reply
post #150 of 214
10/9/06 at 11:45pm
It's weird that ATI Tray Tools say 64 bit then. Which is right?
Reply
Reply
post #151 of 214
10/10/06 at 5:19am
Im thinking the low scores are from the memory.

I took a screencap of cpu-z. http://pictures.greatestjournal.com/.../6570753/98143

Look at the timings of the RAM as well as the speed. If it were 2 gigs for 667, the score would be significantly higher. This is for two reasons: first, the video card borrows RAM when it gets into higher memory required situations. This causes a conflict, because the system needs the same RAM. Hence, the system writes to the Hard Drive, which is wayyyyyyy slower than the RAM.

Not to mention that writing to RAM instead of internal video memory is slower. Hence, the x700 out performs the x1600 because the memory has to be routed to the system RAM and back.

Just my opinion. Im not godly with these machines, but I do own one. =D
Reply
Reply
post #152 of 214
10/14/06 at 3:03pm
I have the 5672 (Core Duo 1.66ghz) with a Radeon x1600 512mb. According to Powerstrip the Engine is at 472Mhz and the memory at 364Mhz. My problem is my performance is really bad, even in games. In the beginning of this topic somebody reported getting excellent framerates in games like Doom3 and Counter-Strike Source with most or all settings on high. I get abysmal framerate in Doom 3 with settings on medium, and in CS: Source with settings mixed between medium and high I average 40 and drop as low as 20. I used a modding program to install the latest ATI desktop drivers (6.9) and got a 75% increase in framerate (still nowhere near reported speeds from this topic) but it made CS:S unstable and crash frequently. Normally I use Acer drivers (they're later than the ones available at Acer's website, not sure where I got them to be honest), which are at version 8.24. I've tried the latest Omega drivers but they were unstable and didn't increase my performance at all.

I'm sorry if this has been discussed before, the thread is long and I haven't read all of it. Does anyone have any suggestions? My performance should be much higher than it is, shouldn't it?
Reply
Reply
post #153 of 214
10/14/06 at 3:52pm
Quote:
I have the 5672 (Core Duo 1.66ghz) with a Radeon x1600 512mb. According to Powerstrip the Engine is at 472Mhz and the memory at 364Mhz. My problem is my performance is really bad, even in games. In the beginning of this topic somebody reported getting excellent framerates in games like Doom3 and Counter-Strike Source with most or all settings on high. I get abysmal framerate in Doom 3 with settings on medium, and in CS: Source with settings mixed between medium and high I average 40 and drop as low as 20. I used a modding program to install the latest ATI desktop drivers (6.9) and got a 75% increase in framerate (still nowhere near reported speeds from this topic) but it made CS:S unstable and crash frequently. Normally I use Acer drivers (they're later than the ones available at Acer's website, not sure where I got them to be honest), which are at version 8.24. I've tried the latest Omega drivers but they were unstable and didn't increase my performance at all.

I'm sorry if this has been discussed before, the thread is long and I haven't read all of it. Does anyone have any suggestions? My performance should be much higher than it is, shouldn't it?

If i'm not mistaken early versions of your model 5672 use the X1400 chip, when the manufactures replaced it with the X1600 they underclocked the chip to minimize the heat levels do somehow similar to the X1400.

X1400 (factory settings) : Core Clock : 433Mhz Memory Clock : 345Mhz
X1600 (factory settigns) : Core Clock : 470Mhz Memory Clock : 470Mhz

your X1600 comes closer to the X1400 frequencies, but outperforms it cause of the increased overall pipelines (Fragment pipelines, Vertex pipelines).

Also your model spots the lowest Core Duo 1.66 Ghz and apparently your X1600 borrows some of the system available ram, so your performance is gimped.
Reply
Reply
post #154 of 214
10/14/06 at 4:06pm
How do I check whether the video memory is actually shared? I see no evidence of this but don't know where to check?

And still, nobody else with this lappy and card has reported speeds anywhere near this bad (from what I've seen). From what I've read the X700 performs better than my card is doing.

I tried OCing the card with Powerstrip but the display stopped responding, I thought I'd fried the card.
Reply
Reply
post #155 of 214
10/14/06 at 4:31pm
Think the X1600 models come with up to 256 MB of dedicated RAM, the rest are always shared.
You could check the bios, some bios report the usage of shared memory. Or even better check your system properties and see if you miss any memory. Though HyperMemory dynamically allocates memory when needed so if you are not doing anything graphically intensive you may not see any memory missing. You could always search in the manual, they may hide it in some lower case letters
Reply
Reply
post #156 of 214
10/14/06 at 5:07pm
The BIOS says I have 128 megs of video memory, so I guess the rest is shared. Lame.

Would using shared memory actually decrease the performance? There's got to be a reason why it's going so slow.
Reply
Reply
post #157 of 214
10/14/06 at 6:33pm
We believe it is the underclocking and supposedly a 64-bit memory bus.
What scores do you get from 3DMark?
Reply
Reply
post #158 of 214
10/14/06 at 7:46pm
I don't have 3DMark, I'm not really concerned with benchmarks, just game performance. I guess I'll get it anyway to compare to other people's scores.

edit: I just ran 3DMarks03 and got 5048, which just shows even more that the benchmarks don't mean jack. BTW, 3DMarks says the video card has 256 internal, not sure what's going on with the BIOS.
Reply
Reply
post #159 of 214
10/14/06 at 11:12pm
It does score slower than an usual x1600, so being 64 bit memory migth be true. I dont exactly know how much it would affect being 64bit versus a 128 bit tho using the exact same card. It is underclocked but not much, and it scores 1k less (average) than other x1600.

still its a pretty good performer.
Reply
Reply
post #160 of 214
10/14/06 at 11:46pm
But what about game performance? Filiab said he got 70-100 fps in CS:S with all settings high.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Acer Notebook Reviews
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Forums › Acer Notebook Reviews › Acer Aspire 5672 Review