New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

voodoo envy faster than sager?

post #1 of 16
2/21/04 at 3:48am
Thread Starter 
ok guys, according to a notebook magazine the Voodoo Envy m:855 scored a 191fps on ut2k3? According to pctorque's benchmarks on the same game it was like half that. Do you think the magazine means 191fps with all the settings turned low? I just ordered a 5680 like 2 days ago and now i'm a bit worried. Did I not buy the crem de la crem?

Magazine: mobilepc - Feb. 2004 pg. 34
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 16
2/21/04 at 4:11am
The 5680 is limited by the same thing in every other laptop - the video card. The Radeon 9600 pro turbo is only going to do so well no matter where its at. Now the 9700 might be a different deal, but its only found in the new Dell model - AND even then its only a higher clocked 9600 pro turbo card..

The 5680 is fine for all of today, and most of tomorrow's games. the 191fps in Ut2k3, I have no idea how the hell they came up with that number :P I average around 80 I think with the few botmatches and flybyes I did (same ones Toms hardware uses). Even the machines with 9700s couldn't get more than 100 at best running the same tests as me. AND I ran all these tests in 1024x768 high detail settings (like I'd play the thing :P ) Overall UT2k3 is more than playable AND Ut2004 demo is more than playable at 1280x1024. Enjoy!
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 16
2/21/04 at 5:13am
dont worry, be happy

your notebook will kick ass, mine does!
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 16
2/21/04 at 7:27am
I will now quote page 83 of the issue you spoke about on the right hand side where there is a red i in a circle.

"Unreal Tournament 2003 measures overall graphics performance by running a standardized flyby test with HardOCP's Unreal benchmark. Resolution is set to 800 x 600 pixels and color and detail settings are all equalized for the test run. We report the average result in frames per second (fps). Notebook graphics capabilities vary widely; serious gaming isnt really possible bellow 50fps."

The Specs of the Machine were:

It was a 2GHz Athlon 64 Mobile 3200+
64MB ATI Radeon 9600
1GB Ram
60GB 7200rpm
WinXP Pro

There you have it boys and girls... I believe the fact that it is a Athlon 64 makes the big differece.... and the fact that they were running it at 800 x 600 explains the high fps.

Who knows maybe this Voodoo does kick ass?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 16
2/21/04 at 7:40am
Now if we take a look at the specs of the Sager 5680 with which some benchmarks were made...:

3.2 GHz P4
128MB ATI Radeon 9600
I cant tell how much Ram was installed in the system.
60GB 7200 rpm

PCTorque reports:

UT2K3 800 X 600 Flyby
5680 204

So there you have it boys and girls... nothing to worry about. Even with the 64 bit processor, the Voodoo still gets its ass beaten by the 5680.... by 13fps. Rejoice... in the fact that you dont have to pay the exagerated prices of Voodoo.

Long live Sager!

Now for the daily sacrifice to the Gods:

Reply
Reply
post #6 of 16
2/21/04 at 11:37am
Maybe the extra 64mb vram in the video card makes the 13 fps difference? Hmm.. something to ponder eh?
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 16
2/21/04 at 12:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fiction1337
Maybe the extra 64mb vram in the video card makes the 13 fps difference? Hmm.. something to ponder eh?
No. In 800x600, with textures set to moderate detail or low detail, less than 64MB of video memory will be used. I would assume the small difference in framerates between the two (191->204 is small) is due to the CPU... a 3.2GHz Pentium4w/HT is probably faster than the Athlon64 3200 Mobile.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 16
2/21/04 at 3:47pm
Anyway, UT2003 is an old game. We'd really need a newer and more demanding game to test the Athlon with the P4.


Cheers.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 16
2/22/04 at 2:21am
the amd 64 is best for gaming, thats all you need to know
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 16
2/22/04 at 10:05pm
Test it with halo....lol

And BTW, UT2k3 runs fine pretty much all maxed out at 1600x1200 on my lappy, you have NOTHING to worry about.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 16
2/23/04 at 1:11am
Thread Starter 
thanx guys i really appreciate all the input. Go Sager!!!
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 16
2/23/04 at 2:05am
can u guys run aa and af and still get good fps ?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 16
2/24/04 at 5:24pm
doom 3 on top of the line systems now is getting really crappy fps... im so worried that when i order my laptop i wont have enough juice to run it
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 16
2/24/04 at 5:26pm
I dont believe any of us will .
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 16
2/24/04 at 6:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q-Ball
doom 3 on top of the line systems now is getting really crappy fps... im so worried that when i order my laptop i wont have enough juice to run it
Since DOOMIII is not yet released how would you

a) Know it gets crappy FPS
b) I this is a pirated beta version etc the why would you use it as a valid benchmark

Worry about today and let tomorrow worry about itself

PS: If its getting crappy FPS on top of the line systems why are you worried about your Sager not having enough juice. If its true then it doesnt sound like anyone has enough juice and a major rewrite is in order
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 16
2/24/04 at 6:26pm
Yeah, DOOM III has not been released. An early version of the engine was leaked but that was before it had been optimized.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebook Reviews