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

[Charles P. Jefferies]

HP Pavilion dv5t Benchmarks & Gaming Performance
By: Charles P. Jefferies

Welcome to the full benchmark review of the HP Pavilion dv5t. This article will focus entirely on the performance of the dv5t. Please see the full dv5t review for information about the notebook itself.

My dv5t has the following specifications:

• Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 processor (2.26GHz/ 1066MHz FSB/ 3MB L2)
• 15.4-inch WSXGA+ Infinity display
• Nvidia GeForce 9600M-GT w/ 512MB DDR2 dedicated video card
• 2GB DDR2-800 RAM (2x 1GB)
• 160GB 5400RPM hard drive
• Broadcom 802.11b/g wireless + Bluetooth
• Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit
• High-capacity 6-cell Li-ion battery

The video drivers used for all benchmarks are Nvidia 177.72 via http://laptopvideo2go.com/. I did a clean install of Vista using orev's excellent Clean Install Guide in the forums prior to benchmarking.

System Performance Benchmarks
This section of the benchmarks focuses on the overall performance of the HP Pavilion dv5t.

Windows Experience Index (WEI)

The WEI is not the most reliable benchmark, but is a somewhat useful tool for comparing to other Vista systems. My HP dv5t makes a nice showing here – the maximum score for each category is 5.9. The dv5t features DDR2-800 memory, which no doubt assisted in the 5.9 memory score. For some reason, the dv5t is held back by the video card, though I have to question this as I have the 9600M-GT, which is very powerful.

Overall System Performance using PCMark Vantage

Futuremark's PCMark Vantage is a new benchmark exclusively for Windows Vista. It stresses every component of a computer to its limits, especially the hard drive and CPU.

Processor Performance

wPrime 1.55

wPrime is a multi-threaded CPU test - it is similar to SuperPi but has a few more features. It is a much more accurate benchmark for dual-core CPUs. Please see our big comparison thread here.

SuperPi

Super Pi is an older benchmark and only uses one processor core. Not long ago, only the highest-end notebooks could calculate 2 million digits of Pi under one minute – now even the mid-range processors like the P8400 in my dv5t can.

SiSandra Arithmetic


SiSandra Multimedia


Processor and Video Card Rendering Performance using Cinebench 10

Cinebench Release 10 is the latest version of Maxon's rendering benchmark, based on the Maxon CINEMA 4D animation software. It is designed to measure the performance of the processor and graphics card under real world circumstances. More information can be found at http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebench_e.html

Hard Drive Performance using HDTune 2.55

The 160GB 5400RPM Fujitsu hard drive has good performance for a 5400RPM drive. Its access time (17.9 ms) and burst transfer rate especially lag behind 7200RPM and larger-capacity 5400RPM drives. I find this drive to be a big step up from my previous notebook's 80GB 5400RPM Samsung.
The Fujitsu drive makes little noise, and soft clicks can only be heard when listened for.

Gaming Benchmarks
These benchmarks will put the spotlight on the Nvidia GeForce 9600M-GT 512MB graphics card. The 9600M-GT is between 15 – 20% faster than the popular 8600M-GT; while both cards have the same number of processor cores (32), the 9600M-GT has higher clocks.

Synthetic Gaming Performance
3DMark06

This score is slightly higher than that of an 8600M-GT (~3400 average). A card scoring in this range (3500 – 4000) means it can play modern games at medium-high settings and medium resolution (1280x800 to 1440x900).
Note that this benchmark was done at the default 1280x1024 resolution, and not 1280x800; a benchmark done in the latter resolution will lead to noticeably higher scores (~4400 on this dv5t).

3DMark Vantage


Settings:


3DMark Vantage is a Vista-exclusive DirectX 10 benchmark.

Real-World Gaming Performance
Synthetic benchmarks are just that – synthetic, not real. This section of the benchmarks focuses on the actual in-game performance of the HP Pavilion dv5t using several of today's most popular and demanding games.
Results are measured in Frames Per Second (FPS). The minimum FPS for a game to be playable (not choppy) is 30.

All of the games were run in DirectX 9 mode (if applicable).

Crysis

Crysis is by far the most demanding 3D game available today. Gamers will be pleased to know that the HP Pavilion dv5t with the GeForce 9600M-GT video card is more than capable of handling this game.

I benchmarked Crysis using the Crysis Benchmark Tool 1.05 Final from Guru3D.com. The game version used is 1.21. I used all high and all medium settings during two runs. The benchmarked results are as follows:
High Settings:

Medium Settings:


Benchmark Results Chart:


Using high settings at a 1280x720 resolution is not playable, though medium settings is smooth and fluid. Note that this game is strangely playable at 22 – 25 FPS, so anything above that is smooth. The game still looks beautiful at medium settings. The graphics in this game can be tweaked down to the smallest details, so I imagine it would be possible to get this game looking even better with a minimal impact on performance.

Screenshots:





Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

Call of Duty 4 is a popular online first-person shooter. It has a large online gaming community and is quite demanding on a computer's hardware.
Prior to benchmarking, I patched the game to version 1.7. The following settings were used for benchmarking. They are a mix of medium and high; these settings push the dv5t to its limit while keeping the game visually appealing and playable.

I benchmarked the first two levels of the game using FRAPS.

The 9600M-GT is a practical card for playing this game, given it can produce good framerates at a relatively high-resolution and settings. Those looking for more playability can turn the resolution down to 1280x800. I ran the benchmark at a higher resolution to show that the 9600M-GT could do it.

Screenshots




Unreal Tournament III

Unreal Tournament III is the successor to the ever-popular Unreal Tournament 2004, and is like it in many ways. This game is resource-hungry, and likes a lot of CPU power.
Prior to benchmarking, I patched the game to version 1.5. I benchmarked the game at the following settings:



I benchmarked two levels of the game using FRAPS.

The 9600M-GT makes an impressive showing in this game. I was able to play the game at the highest 1680x1050 resolution at medium-high settings. Being able to produce mostly playable framerates at this resolution is impressive, given the 9600M-GT is a mid-range graphics card. Usually, only high-end graphics cards like the 9800M-GT can play games at 1680x1050.
I actually play this game at a 1440x900 resolution, which is noticeably more fluid. Again, I only ran the benchmark at 1680x1050 to show that the 9600M-GT could do it.

Screenshots:





Conclusion
The HP Pavilion dv5t with the Nvidia GeForce 9600M-GT 512MB graphics card is a more than suitable machine for modern gaming. It has no problem with medium-high details in some of the most demanding titles available today. All games I ran on this machine looked fantastic.
Overall system performance is excellent thanks to the latest Intel Montevina platform technology. Performance-seekers will not be disappointed with the HP dv5t.

[jetstar]

Thanks for the benchmarks. Good to know that the dv5t can handle Crysis just fine.

[SmoothTofu]

Awesome benchmarks. You might want to fix the second and third thumbnail images, they have WEI thumbnails but actually lead to PCMark and wPrime scores

[Jstn7477]

Your 3DMark Vantage score seems kind of low. I pulled P1966 on my laptop with SLi turned off and the card overclocked to 700/900. I don't exactly think that the 9600 GT should be that slow should it? Yes I do understand that my 8600 GT overclock is one of the highest but I believe that a 9600 GT should be a little closer seeing that it's stock core clock is 530 MHz. I don't think a 170MHz boost would really add 700 points to 3DMark Vantage, right?

-J.B.

[Charles P. Jefferies]

Originally Posted by SmoothTofu

Awesome benchmarks. You might want to fix the second and third thumbnail images, they have WEI thumbnails but actually lead to PCMark and wPrime scores

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

Originally Posted by Jstn7477

Your 3DMark Vantage score seems kind of low. I pulled P1966 on my laptop with SLi turned off and the card overclocked to 700/900. I don't exactly think that the 9600 GT should be that slow should it? Yes I do understand that my 8600 GT overclock is one of the highest but I believe that a 9600 GT should be a little closer seeing that it's stock core clock is 530 MHz. I don't think a 170MHz boost would really add 700 points to 3DMark Vantage, right?

-J.B.

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

[charonill]

wow nice.
Crysis looks amazing even at medium!
Since I have the dv7t, I'm guessing my performance on the 1440x900 res would be a bit lower than yours but oh well.

[Infamous22]

Originally Posted by charonill

wow nice.
Crysis looks amazing even at medium!
Since I have the dv7t, I'm guessing my performance on the 1440x900 res would be a bit lower than yours but oh well.

Why is that?

[Infamous22]

Nice Review CHAZ!

You stole the "LOTS OF PICS" thing from me, but I still love ya... heheheh lol

[touchdowntexas18]

That was another awesome review/benchmark chaz. However, I am wondering if maybe it would be a good idea to lower the settings in COD4 and UT3 to get better FPS for online multiplayer. For COD4 i know it really depends a lot on the map as to how much FPS you are getting, but should I be aiming for an average of 60 FPS in COD4 multiplayer?? 60 FPS is supposedly what the console version is locked at so i figured that is considered perfectly playable online. Also, for such a fast paced game like UT3 should i lower the settings to get 50-60 FPS? I guess my real question to you is what FPS do YOU plan on using for these two games and what settings are you going to use to achieve those. I know im probably being a little bothersome about all of this, but i only ask because I love playing online first person shooters, but i dont know how to find the balance between image quality and game speed to the point where the game still looks nice but doesnt slow me down to the point where I am murdered continually (though it could be because i suck )

I would rather be making all of the kills than observing these games in all of their graphical glory. for instance right now im running COD4 at 960xsome low number...i know not good. I have shadows, depth of field, smoke edges, ragdoll, and bullet impacts all turned off, as well as the water quality on lower and lower # of corpses. with these settings i get anywhere from 50-100 FPS where it usually sits around 75 or so.

So my question is, and anybody should feel free to chime in here with their opinions, what FPS should i be looking for in these two games and what settings should i apply to achieve them?? maybe we could get somethin goin where we post our settings and recorded FPS along with the overall online experience and playability as online play seems to me needs the most tweaking for performance vs. quality.

Here is my setup which i have posted previous times in the dv5t forum:
This is a dv7t by the way (the dv series is awesome!)
Upgrade to Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor T9600 (2.80GHz)
17.0" diagonal WSXGA+ High-Definition HP BrightView Infinity Display (1680 x 1050)
4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT
640GB 5400RPM SATA Dual Hard Drive (320GB x 2) with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
[For BrightView Infinity] Webcam + Fingerprint Reader
HP Color Matching Keyboard
Intel(R) WiFi Link 5100AGN and Bluetooth(TM)
High speed 56K modem port
$100 OFF Blu-Ray ROM with SuperMulti DVD+/-R/RW Double Layer
HP Integrated HDTV Hybrid Tuner
8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
3-year HP Accidental Damage Protection with HP Pick Up and Return

I know a lot of that info doesnt matter but it was just copied and pasted from another spec list so ya. lets get these settings going so we can actually enjoy these awesome games with our powerful new laptops!

[Charles P. Jefferies]

Originally Posted by touchdowntexas18

That was another awesome review/benchmark chaz. However, I am wondering if maybe it would be a good idea to lower the settings in COD4 and UT3 to get better FPS for online multiplayer.

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.