G1S 8600M GT vs F3SV-B1 8600M GS Benchmark

I'm not saying that Turbocaching is a miracle working dream mechanic (though I may have when I first saw the benchmarks). I am saying that I believe in the 3GB is the magic number theory. For some reason the chipset shares RAM when running in dual channel mode with identical DIMMs. This is in contrast to apparently what is happening when one DIMM is smaller than the other, one is used with the CPU and the other is used as (I think) PSRAM with the GPU, which is a very efficient set up. I don't think it is "increasing performance" as much as streamlining the system to work more quickly. Kind of like a body kit on a car doesn't increase its horsepower, but it still makes the car faster because power isn't wasted by poor aerodynamics.

 

Ken - Did you ever get to compare the speakers of the G1 with the F3SV-B1?

 

I`m looking for the fotos of 8600 gt ddr2 (from asus g1s)Does anybody can uploud this fotos?

 

The G1S has an 8600M GT 256 GDDR3.

The C90 is the one with the 8600M GT 512 DDR2.

 

Can anybody tell me why the 8600M GT on the acer 5920G gets ONLY an average framerate of 25-28fps in Fear and COH?? http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/index.cfm?reviewid=859&pn=2 and http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/laptops/0,39030092,49290611-3,00.htm ? Yet, it gets a respectable 3DMark06 of 3288 although lower than the Asus G1s. Could it be a GDDR2 instead of a GDDR3 or maybe severely underclocked? My Dell 9400 (go7900 GS) gets an average of 57fps with EVERYTHING maximum INCLUDING 4X AA and 16X AF at 1024x768 res(supposing they didn't alter the.ini to change the res for widescreen). Even IF it is GDDR2, why is it SO low(25fps vs 57fps)? Its a 8600M GT not 8600M GS/G...!(?) I was given the impression that 8600M GT is better or on par with Go 7900GS. Maybe we need to see some real world benchmarks.Hmmm....

 

First, not to be an ass, but it is DDR2, not GDDR2. There is a big difference.

The version of the 8600M GT with DDR2 has 512MB of on die memory, and to my knowledge hasn't been benchmarked yet.

That particular computer is not benefiting as much from TurboCache since it is not using the 3GB "magic number" that for some reason boosts performance to above 2GB and 4GB. It also has a slower processor than the G1S. Those combined are keeping it from reaching the 42 FPS averaged by the G1S. Also, both of these machines are running Vista, which hurts game performance. Lastly they are both using 5400 RPM HDDs which, while not as much as the other factors, also hurts its performance.

Also, those numbers are at full res, 1680x1050, not the wimpy 1024x768 that your other computer is using.
I would be willing to bet your Dell 9400 is running XP.

 

While I agree with most of this, the speed of the hard drive has absolutely zero effect on fps.

 

Yea, you are right, but I loooove 7200RPM drives =P. I don't know why.

 

Perhaps because of the vrooooming.. sound they make..

 

I always thought that the newer high-end graphic cards all used the better GDDR than normal DDR by now due to its better efficiency. So your're saying the benchmarks are low (almost by half) due to the hard disk and slower processor? Its only from 2.0 to 2.2GHz...(?) I don't think so. The Acer 5920G can only go up to 1280x800, so the test on the Acer 5920G was 'probably' tested with that res but i doubt it unless they tweaked the settings .ini. I still get 47fps in Fear at maximum with 1280x800. Why Im asking is because, I was planning to get a 8600M GT based laptop but I doubt the real world benchmarks. Could anybody try the Fear benchmark on the Asus G1S or Acer 5920G with everything maxed out + 4XAA + 16XAF at 1280x800 to prove that the 8600M GT is indeed better?

Btw, what is this 3GB "magic number"? All i know is that both the Acer 5920G and Asus G1S is using 2GB of ram and 256MB of dedicated VRAM and, oh, the Acer 5920G has 1GB Robson on board. Could you mean the RAM+Robson? Thanks.

 

I wasn't saying it was solely due to those things. I was saying that they are factors. The FEAR benchmark all maxed WAS done on the G1S about page 38ish. And it was done at a resolution that has almost twice the number of pixels of your 7900GS based machine.

 

Why does it seem that you're biased towards my 9400? I was asking about why the ACER 5920G has low benchmarks compared to my 9400... I know for a fact that the G1S beats my Dell in 3DMark. But I'm not getting the Asus, I'm looking for answers for the 8600M GT based Acer and the benchmarks that I found for it.

Ok, Ive compared the screenshots on page 38 and found that mine had slightly higher framerates at a resolution of 1440x900 (my max screen resolution), so the G1S is just slightly better. I only have a GB of ram and T7200. Is it possible for anyone to use the built in benchmarking tool for Fear (Min/Avg/Max Fps)? I was expecting better results with the G1S to match its 3DMark scores. Now I know that the Acer 5920G isn't going to be worth it. Thanks AlexOnFyre, no hard feelings. Just trying to be a smart shopper.

 

Has anyone done test with the Gs1 or the F3Sv using 2GB of DDR2 800? the systems have a 800MHz FSB well the T7400-T7600... Just wanted to see the performance increase...

I have recieved a F3sv-B1 and so far it can run all my Nvidia based games on High settings. Haven't ran 3dmark tests but overall the 8600M GS is running better than exspected...

 

Why doesn't G1S have a Geforce Go 7950 GTX ? It's the best ...

 

The 7950 is too big for a 15".

 

Yes but it isn't on the G2S too :/

 

Yes, Asus has been weird with that. On the G2P there was actually a weaker gfx card then on the G1P. I have no idea why asus does that stuff to their so called "Gamer's Series". Although they wouldn't put a 7-series in a Santa Rosa build anyways. Right now the 8600gt is the top mobile card.

 

The 8700GT will replace the 7950... as it is 1000 points faster and the layout is smaller

http://www.nvrev.com

 

Okay three things:
1) This is very important to remember: 3DMarks do not translate to real world performance. They are a good general gauge, but if a system doesn't perform as well as a system with fewer 3dMarks, that's okay, it happens all the time. Computers are like snowflakes =P.

2) FEAR is a DX9 game, the 8600M GT is approximately equivalent to the 7900 GS in DX9 games. I would say that your card running at a lower resolution (much lower), in addition to running on XP (which is much faster for gaming), would trump the 8600 working with better supporting components, but in Vista with a much higher resolution. I am simply explaining that these benchmarks are not contrary to what should be expected. (Aside from the 3GB magic number thing).

3)If you want to know about the Acer Gemstone you showed us, you should be asking in the Acer forums. There could be many things about that computer that we don't know that those guys would. They may underclock it, there may be a common typo in the specs of the thing, they may have even done their own benchmarking and found something different.

In short, the G1S behaves how it should and the guys that hang out in the Acer forums should be able to explain the Acer's lackluster performance.

 

Yeah, just found the thread by bigspin recently, thanks. Answered all my questions about the Acer 5920G. Yeah, I do agree that the G1S is a must for new notebook buyers, but i was just wondering whether it would justify replacing the 256bit Go 7900gs. Alot of Go 7900gs owners are asking themselves the same question I guess, but there are no actual side-by-side comparison in real world benchmarks. I'll definitely get a 8700M GT based laptop since I hear that performance is 20-70(!)% better than go 7900GS!

 

Here is some random, HILARIOUS action from FEAR Extraction Point demo on my new Asus F3sv-A1.

<embed src='http://admin.brightcove.com/destination/player/player.swf' bgcolor='#FFFFFF' flashVars='allowFullScreen=true&initVideoId=1033870784&servicesURL=http://www.brightcove.com&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://www.brightcove.com&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&autoStart=false' base='http://admin.brightcove.com' name='bcPlayer' width='486' height='412' allowFullScreen='true' allowScriptAccess='always' seamlesstabbing='false' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' swLiveConnect='true' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash'></embed>

I am using medium-high settings here, but the FRAPS video doesn't show it too well (due to my own video compression)

 

I don't get it...

It looks very nice though!

 

would 8600m gt be powerful enough to play enemy territories quake war maxed out?

 

It should be, but don't make any bets on it. id has always made efficient quick running games, so it should, however it is impossible to tell these things before games are released. It is like asking if Crysis will run quickly...well Crytek has a history of overpowering games that play at a snail's pace except on the top systems, so probably medium settings. But again, no one knows, so you really can't ask a question like that and expect a good answer when there isn't even a demo of the game you are talking about yet. The beta is out, but chances of finding someone with your specific system in that specific closed beta....very slim.

EDIT: On the other hand I can get someone in, I will talk to Ken so that he can play it and let you know.

 

Thank you Alex for the download link, I am downloading the Quake war beta right now , will let you guys know how it perform on G1S.

 

thank for the work guys

 

Slightly off-topic, I've seen two different specs: Does the C90S 8600m GT have GDDR3 or 2? I've seen it said both ways, and I can't really find a site that specifies one way or the other. I've seen Alex say 2 and GenTechPC say 3...So I'm a little confused

Also, I've heard that by Q1 2008 Asus will have 5 different GFX Cards for their C90 DTR series. Would y'all think it's a safe bet to assume the 8600M GT is going to be the strongest of these 5? Reason being it's only an MXM-II slot, I would think the 8600M GT is about as good as you could get with that. What do you think?

 

Well the C90 is supposed to be their high performance notebook, so I would see no reason for them to release gfx cards that are weaker than the 8600GT

 

I think that nVidia will be releasing newer cards with MXM-II spec (seeing as the 9 series will be made fully on the 45 nm process) so in the current generation, we MAY see the 8800 GS, but I think the real cash in for getting it will be in the next generation of cards. (The 5 this year are probably 8600M GT 512MB DDR2[that is the default for whoever asked], the 8500M 256MB GDDR3, HD 2600 XT 256MB GDDR3, and possibly another HD card and, if we are lucky, the 8800M GS.)

 

They were planning on releasing the HD2400XT as well, weren't they?

 

They could be, I haven't heard of it, though.

 

Quake Wars Public Beta, special thanks to AlexOnFyre for providing his download account and beta key, Thanks Alex.

Setup:
G1S
Stock driver no overclock
3GB RAM
160GB 5400rpm on eSATA:
























Anti-Aliasing 4X is the playable setting at acceptable FPS.

The graphics looks amazing, another must have game.

 

That looks awesome, I can't wait to play it myself =P

 

*drools* I think I'm going to faint ...

Are the yellow numbers the FPS, isn't that a bit low?
How is it with 2x AA?

 

OT: Is that game based on the new id engine?

 

Yes sir. It is.

As for the FPS, this is one of the most graphically intensive games to be released this year, I would say 18-22 FPS is pretty good, however 2x AA would probably be even better.

 

I'm pretty sure fps would soar if the resolution is limited to 1024*768

 

I would leave the resolution alone. Native resolution looks the best. 2xAA or turning down the details a little would be enough to keep the game play fluent.

 

That is amazing how well it performs. I do a lot of graphics testing and for this game to average around 20 fps with shadows enables at 4x AA and 8x AF is excellent. Especially on a notebook processor. Theres a lot to be said about good game engines. Games that perform well even at high settings says a lot about the developers efficentcy mentality. One engine that comes to mind is the Half-Life engine. I give it an A+.

 

Forgot to say thanks Ken! Your doing an excellent job and I really appreciate you taking time out to do this for consumers!

 

Besides, it's non-optmized since it's a beta....

 

I didn't even think of that, true!

 

can we get screenshots for the other laptop? The F3SV

 

I just got a key for the beta yesterday and I'm installing it now and will post some screenshots soon. What's a good image hosting site, photobucket limits resolution to 800x600.

 

By the way, whoever was asking about it, they are planning 5 gfx cards for the c90s, 3 of them are already out and the 8600M GT is the strongest so far. This leaves 2 slots for the initial 5, hopefully we will see a stronger card, even though it's MXM-II.

@Alex: Where are you getting the DDR2 information for the C90S 8600? Reason I'm asking is that I've seen other people, including resellers say it's GDDR3. Just curious

 

I talked to Ken (GenTechPC) who asked the product manager over at Asus, and he said so. Then I called to confirm a couple days ago.

In addition I know that nVidia only designed GDDR3 versions with 256MB, and the DDR-II versions with 512MB. This is on-die memory. They can each TC up to 768 MB or something like that.

 

If it is GDDR2 running at 400mhz then the C90s will be slower then the G1s. The faster CPU wont help that much for most games. The 3dMark score might be similar because it is 1/3 CPU score but in games it will hurt alot IMO.

 

It isn't GDDR2 at 400
it is DDR2 at around 700.

I bit slower on the clock, but also a bit faster per latency. The added legroom will help it be as fast as its cousin. Plus the DDR2 version is the only one that fits MXM (I believe, correct me if I am wrong there)

 

So it effectivly is vram running at 2x700 mhz = 1400mhz same as the G1s? if it is then it doesnt matter if its GDDR2 or GDDR3 or DDR2.

 

The FPS is actually pretty good at 1680X1050 with most settings at max, that gives people an idea of any lower settings will get better FPS.

I got similar FPS with S96S at 1280X800 with slightly lower video setting.