New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Post your Benchmarks!

post #1 of 34
7/10/04 at 7:10pm
Thread Starter 
Thought I'd share my results on some benchmarking I've been doing on my 5680.

Benchemall:
These were using the Sager drivers 7.97.
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 1022MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9600 PRO TURBO
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6414 (English)

-----------------------------------------------------------
Unreal Tournament 2004

Max details settings. 640x480 is not selected
800x600 is not selected
1024x768 87.45 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 110.36 fps, as-convoy: 59.17 fps, br-colossus: 92.81 fps )
1280x1024 62.16 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 73.32 fps, as-convoy: 47.34 fps, br-colossus: 65.82 fps )
1600x1024 42.59 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 48.75 fps, as-convoy: 36.14 fps, br-colossus: 42.88 fps )

-----------------------------------------------------------
Call Of Duty

Demo name: demobta00
800x600 not selected
1024x768 13.0 seconds: 58.6 fps
1280x1024 14.8 seconds: 51.4 fps
1600x1200 20.7 seconds: 36.8 fps


These next results were using the latest Omega drivers. Quite an improvement in UT2004.
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 1022MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9600/9700 Series (Omega 2.5.51)
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6451 (English)

-----------------------------------------------------------
Unreal Tournament 2004

Max details settings. 640x480 is not selected
800x600 is not selected
1024x768 88.76 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 112.34 fps, as-convoy: 59.30 fps, br-colossus: 94.65 fps )
1280x1024 63.11 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 74.44 fps, as-convoy: 48.30 fps, br-colossus: 66.60 fps )
1600x1024 50.18 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 58.01 fps, as-convoy: 39.59 fps, br-colossus: 52.93 fps )


-----------------------------------------------------------
Call Of Duty

Demo name: demobta00
800x600 not selected
1024x768 12.7 seconds: 59.9 fps
1280x1024 13.2 seconds: 57.7 fps
1600x1200 15.3 seconds: 49.8 fps


I tried overclocking from 351/250 up to 400/250 with the Omegas, resulting in an improvement on UT2004, but only a few higher FPS at 1600X1200 resolution. Not sure if it's worth overclocking for such a slight improvement.
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 1022MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9600/9700 Series (Omega 2.5.51)
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6451 (English)

-----------------------------------------------------------
Unreal Tournament 2004

Max details settings. 640x480 is not selected
800x600 is not selected
1024x768 93.60 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 121.56 fps, as-convoy: 59.58 fps, br-colossus: 99.67 fps )
1280x1024 68.12 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 80.65 fps, as-convoy: 52.05 fps, br-colossus: 71.65 fps )
1600x1024 53.87 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 62.44 fps, as-convoy: 42.51 fps, br-colossus: 56.66 fps )


-----------------------------------------------------------
Call Of Duty

Demo name: demobta00
800x600 not selected
1024x768 12.7 seconds: 59.9 fps
1280x1024 13.1 seconds: 58.3 fps
1600x1200 14.9 seconds: 51.2 fps


These results were using the latest DNA drivers. No improvement on the Sager drivers in UT2004, but a HUGE improvement on Call of Duty over both of the other drivers.
Benchmark session result
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 1 (2600.xpsp2.030422-1633)
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (2 CPUs)
Memory: 1022MB RAM
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0b (4.09.0000.0902)
Card name: RADEON MOBILITY 9600 SERIES (DNA 2.6.4.7)
Driver Version: 6.14.0010.6458 (English)

-----------------------------------------------------------
Unreal Tournament 2004

Max details settings. 640x480 is not selected
800x600 is not selected
1024x768 87.47 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 110.62 fps, as-convoy: 58.56 fps, br-colossus: 93.23 fps )
1280x1024 62.70 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 73.96 fps, as-convoy: 48.10 fps, br-colossus: 66.04 fps )
1600x1024 42.33 fps botmatch (dm-rankin: 48.58 fps, as-convoy: 36.01 fps, br-colossus: 42.39 fps )


-----------------------------------------------------------
Call Of Duty

Demo name: demobta00
800x600 not selected
1024x768 6.4 seconds: 118.3 fps
1280x1024 9.6 seconds: 79.6 fps
1600x1200 14.9 seconds: 51.3 fps

Unfortunately, I found that neither the Omega nor the DNA drivers supported DVD playback, at least with the WinDVD software that came with the notebook, so I had to revert back to the Sager drivers. Otherwise, I'd say for UT2004 fans to go with the Omegas, and for Call of Duty fans to go with the DNA drivers.


My 3DMark03 results using Sager drivers:
3DMark03

351/250 = 2981

Overclocked(400/250) = 3181

I'd be very interested to see other peoples' results, especially those with similar configurations and who have the 5690 with the 9700 as opposed to the 9600.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 34
7/10/04 at 11:10pm
5690S - 3.0 ghz, 512 ram, ati 9700
3dmark03 - 4222 / oc'ed to 527/317 stable
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2542582
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 34
7/11/04 at 8:14pm
CLEVO D500E/ SAGER 5690:
with O/C (524,57;325,29) :
3Dmark 2003: 4277 !!!!!!
For this benches and others see:
http://notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=25790
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 34
7/11/04 at 8:18pm
My brain, Oc'ed to 90 IQ. 3dmark- 4512 w00t!!! I'll post my 4750 soon
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 34
7/12/04 at 1:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amir
5690S - 3.0 ghz, 512 ram, ati 9700
3dmark03 - 4222 / oc'ed to 527/317 stable
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2542582
nice score
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 34
7/12/04 at 9:53am
8790, "untouched" (no overclocking, no omega drivers etc.)
3 Ghz
512 MB RAM
ATI 9700 256

Aquamark: 26,430

---------------------
Current PC: 10,234
---------------------
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 34
7/12/04 at 2:13pm
5680
3.0Ghz, 1024MB

3703 3DMark03

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2577653

Reply
Reply
post #8 of 34
7/12/04 at 9:28pm
5690
3.2
1024
550/335
aquamark: 34926
3dmark 03: 4314
stable enough to run 3dmark 03 for hours with very slight artifacting.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 34
7/12/04 at 10:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny X1900
5690
3.2
1024
550/335
aquamark: 34926
3dmark 03: 4314
stable enough to run 3dmark 03 for hours with very slight artifacting.
Wow, that's pretty impressive. But, without any artifacts is usually the goal.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 34
7/13/04 at 5:54pm
at 560/338 i benched 34927
no artifacts at 555/334 - 34700 or so
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 34
7/13/04 at 6:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny X1900
at 560/338 i benched 34927
no artifacts at 555/334 - 34700 or so
Now that's impressive.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 34
7/16/04 at 3:34pm
i downloaded powerstrip. and set my clock controls the same as you guys. Engine clock around 525 and memory clcok around 315... had plenty of cold air blasting, and had a shot glass (empty) under the left side, elevating the area where the fans are. My benchmarks went DOWN to 3288 from 3768 on 472.5/297 (stock). any suggestions?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 34
7/16/04 at 3:35pm
oh yea, im useing 3dmark03...
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 34
7/16/04 at 4:31pm
Remove shot glass, fill it with something good, drink that, rinse and dry and reapply.

Try changing the setting a bit at a time. Also see what the internal temps are and the CPU speed ratings (Use Mobile Meter). You may have set something up incorrectly and the result is the lower benchmarks.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 34
7/16/04 at 10:30pm
how about some blue lable JW? heh, or some Glenfeditch 25 year cask strength?? lol, i work in a liquer store... both bottles are 200$ +... would buy either bottle. not worth it. thanks g...
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 34
7/21/04 at 12:41am
Sorry, I dont really want to Brag, but I think I have a special vid card in my 5690.

Using Henrik's max fan utility, I was able to bump my cpu up from 3.2 to 3.43 and the gpu up to 565/337 and was able to run aquamark (no artifacts) in a loop for hours. got a score of 35014. Now if I could just get it to run 3dmark 01 and 03 at that speed.

It will run games like ut2k4, rallysport challenge and nfsu at 540/337. max cpu temp is 55c and the plastic by the power button and hotkeys (I guess that is where the GPU is) only gets rather warm, not really hot, if that makes sense.

God I love this thing
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 34
7/21/04 at 2:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by OGREtheBUFFOON
My brain, Oc'ed to 90 IQ. 3dmark- 4512 w00t!!! I'll post my 4750 soon
Lol. OC'ed to 90. That's classic.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 34
9/8/04 at 7:40pm

5690 Benchmarks

After using this 5690, and reading all these results, I thought I would see how mine is doing. Here are the results:

Aquamark3
27,509

PCMark 2002
CPU-8164
Mem-8363
HDD-812

3DMark03
3704
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 34
9/9/04 at 4:43pm
No overclocking and using Cat 4.5 drivers

3DMark 03 = 3773

Core:486 , Memory:304

3DMark 03 = 3863
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 34
9/10/04 at 2:45am
Just did some more Oc'ing check the stats.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebook Reviews