HP Pavilion dv5t Full Benchmarks (Warning: LOTS OF PICS)

[Jstn7477]

Thanks - my copy + pasting links had to go wrong somewhere.

Hm. What are the full specs of your machine? Processor, mainly.

My Toshiba X205-SLi4 consists of this:
Intle C2D T8100 2.1GHz/3MB cache on a PM965 chipset
3GB (2+1GB) DDR2 667
Dual 8600M GT GDDR3 graphics cards in SLI (I disabled SLi and overclocked the single card to 700 core/900 memory)
2*160GB 7200RPM hard disks
Vista Ultimate SP1 32bit with NVIDIA Forceware 177.79 graphics drivers

-J.B.

[touchdowntexas18]

Thanks. For game benchmarks, I run the laptop at the highest possible settings (highest playable, for this review) only to show what the machine is capable of. For everyday gaming, I don't have the settings that high since it's a little sluggish for my liking.

60FPS is not a realistic goal for the dv5t in CoD4 unless you lower the settings dirt low. I would say make the settings so you stay in the 35 - 50 FPS range. In the end, you just have to tweak it to your liking.

Normally I game on my desktop - it gets way over 60 FPS in most games at the highest settings. On the laptop, I shoot for 40FPS. I go for resolution over settings - for example, I'll take 1440x900 and medium over 1280x800 at high.

That's a ridiculous machine, by the way, nice specs. I'd be interested to see your 3DMark06 or 3DMark Vantage results to see how much of a difference that 2.8GHz processor makes over my 2.26GHz.

with the 3dmark06 scores its not much of a difference. the cpu gives an extra 200 points and puts it at 4170 or so. as you know the GPU is what really makes 3dmark benchmarks so since we have the same one there shouldnt be that much of a difference.
Ya i just got done playing COD4 on my laptop and i was getting anywhere from 45-80 FPS. however i was only playing at 1024x768 and once again had the shadows, depth of field, softened smoke edges, bullet impacts and ragdoll all turned off, as well as the water detail on low and the number of corpses lower. there really isnt much of a difference with those settings off and for online play i dont think you need them and they should boost you a good 20 FPS. I think these are the settings i will stick with because right now it seems very playable online and i did really well. this is with all of the other settings on high too so im really liking it. I am finding out how powerful this machine really is. Im gonna find out how well i can play crysis next and UT3. I also play the orange box games and BF2. thanks again chaz for your help with this forum

[Charles P. Jefferies]

My Toshiba X205-SLi4 consists of this:
Intle C2D T8100 2.1GHz/3MB cache on a PM965 chipset
3GB (2+1GB) DDR2 667
Dual 8600M GT GDDR3 graphics cards in SLI (I disabled SLi and overclocked the single card to 700 core/900 memory)
2*160GB 7200RPM hard disks
Vista Ultimate SP1 32bit with NVIDIA Forceware 177.79 graphics drivers

-J.B.

I'm thinking the difference is due to the clocks. The 9600M-GT stock is faster than an 8600M-GT stock. Since they both have the same amount of shader units (32), whatever one has higher clocks is probably going to be faster. I don't know if the 9600 has any added features like more transistors, etc, over the 8600 . . . something to look into.

The real advantage with the 9600M-GT over the GeForce 8 series is that it is built on a smaller process, and therefore can run at higher frequencies and consume less power.

[drunken_monk]

Hi everyone, this is what I obtained on my dv5t machine with the following specs
* Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 processor (2.40GHz/ 1066MHz FSB/ 3MB L2)
* 15.4-inch WSXGA+ Infinity display
* Nvidia GeForce 9200M-GS w/ 256MB DDR2 dedicated video card
* 3GB DDR2-800 RAM (1GB+2GB)
* 250GB 5400RPM hard drive
* Intel 5001 wireless + Bluetooth
* Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
* High-capacity 6-cell Li-ion battery

[steve0689]

Chaz, how did you take screen shots in crysis? and were you able to open up console in crysis?

Btw, very nice and well written Gaming Benchmark review

[Jstn7477]

@ Chaz: I just ran 3DMark Vantage again at stock 475/700 without SLi and this is what I got:




-J.B.

[timesquaredesi]

excellent performance review!

FLACK MASTERRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! l0l0l

[Charles P. Jefferies]

Lol, thanks.

If there's any additional benchmarks you'd like me to run, please let me know.

[timesquaredesi]

actually, i am thinking - when my dv7t comes in this upcoming week, im going to run most of the apps that you ran on my dv7t - just so we have something to compare against.

correct me if im wrong but i think the only difference between our machines is the screen size and processor. if so, it would be a nice comparison.

i am not really into games but i want to see what my $ bought me in terms of performance. ;]

[lewdvig]

The 174.74 drivers are best in games by about 10 - 15%.

The 177.92 is the slowest driver in the last year.