benchmarks

Empire: Total War in low-end laptops

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

I have seen some questions in other forums asking about a the ability of a certain laptop to play Empire: Total War, and I was curious to see that game and to test it on my laptop, so I promptly launched Steam and downloaded the demo.

The graphics card of my laptop is an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450 (256 MB DDR2) and the processor is an Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 (2.0 GHz). More details in my Dell Studio 1537 review.

I set the resolution to 1280×800 and Low graphics. Gameplay was OK, with framerates of 23-26 FPS most of the time, that occasionally dropped to around 15 when looking closely at a battle, but nothing that could difficult the control of you units. So I have to say that, at least in the battle conditions of the demo, the game is playable.

The problem is that Empire: Total War is plain ugly at Low settings. Please look at this screenshot, and notice the blurry mounted units at left and the soldiers at right.

Empire: Total War at Low settings

This does not happen at Medium settings, but my laptop gets 8-14 FPS even at 800×600 and with AA off (Medium settings include a x2 AA).

You can expect similar playability with other low-end graphics cards: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3410, 3430, 3470 and Nvidia GeForce 9200M GS and 9300M GS. Newer low-end graphics cards such as an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330 or the Nvidia GeForce G 105M should perform better, but not dramatically. If I were looking for a laptop to play Empire: Total War, I’d pick at least an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650 (but a 4530 or 4570 would probably be OK), Nvidia GeForce 9600M, GT 120M or similar. With an ATI 3200 it could be playable at 1024×768, but I have my doubts about an Intel GMA 4500MHD, even at 800×600.

Empire: Total War is known to be very processor-intensive and, while I think the slowdowns I have experienced are related to the graphics card, it’s quite possible than in battles larger than the ones seen in the demo a slow processor could be a bottleneck. So a 2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T6400 or Pentium Dual Core T4200 (or a 2.4 GHz AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-86) are OK, but a faster processor (such as an Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 2.26 GHz or better) is a safer bet. Probably any current dual core processor is OK in most situations.

To summarize, if you don’t mind graphical quality, you would be probably OK with any laptop with a low-end dedicated graphics card and a dual core processor, but in my opinion a faster graphics card is a must to really enjoy the game.

Nvidia GeForce GTX 280M SLI benchmarks (Notebookjournal.de)

Friday, June 19th, 2009

Notebookjournal.de published Nvidia GeForce GTX 280M SLI benchmarks, and they are the first ones as far as I know. The games tested are Call of Duty 4, World in Conflict, Lost Planet, Race Driver GRID, Far Cry 2, GTA IV and Call of Duty: World at War. The processor is an Intel Core 2 Duo T9900 at 3,06 GHz.
Very interesting if you are planning to spend a lot of money on an Alienware M17x with such cards.

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4570 and 4530 Crysis benchmarks

Sunday, May 24th, 2009

I was recently impressed by the good performance of the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330, and finally I got some benchmarks of the Mobility 4530 and 4570. The data belong to the benchmarking effort I coordine, so they are user-submitted benchmarks: there are different processors, operating systems, driver versions… Sure, it’s not the typical lab-controlled benchmark you are used to read in sites such as AnandTech, Tom’s Hardware and so, but they help assessing the relative gaming performance of these cards.

The most interesting results are from the Crysis GPU benchmark at 1024×768 and Medium details. Here you have a comparison with other better known cards. The GeForce 9600M GT in the chart is the GDDR3 version and is overclocked (600, 1500 and 840 MHz for core, shaders and memory, respectively; stock clocks are 500, 1250 and 800), so it is a quite powerful card in its class:

Mobility 4570 and 4530 Crysis benchmarks

You can look at the complete benchmark chart to see all available data.

A few remarks:

  • The Mobility Radeon HD 4330 found in the Dell Inspiron 1545 (US, UK) clearly belongs to a different class than the 3450 and other similar cards such as the GeForce 9300M GS. The difference in the result is likely due to the different memory (GDDR3 vs DDR2) more than to other specs of the cards, but at the moment all 4330 cards I have seen are GDDR3 and all 3450 are DDR2.
  • The Mobility Radeon HD 4570 found in the Dell Studio 1555 (US, UK) is comparable to a 9600M GT GDDR3 at stock clocks and is probably superior to the DDR2 version. The high-performing processor in the laptop (an Intel Core 2 Duo T9550 @ 2.66 GHz) could contribute to the high scores, but the influence of the processor usually is only significant at low demanding settings (800×600 or lower and low detail). This particular user plays Crysis at 1280×720, Medium Shadows and the remaining settings at Low. Update: there are some videos at Youtube showing gameplay in Crysis, Half Life 2 Episode 2, Unreal Tournament 3 and Sins of a Solar Empire.
  • The Mobility Radeon HD 4530 found in the HP Pavilion dv6 (US dv6t, US dv6z, UK) and dv7t is in the middle, probably at the level of a GeForce 9600M GT DDR2. Update: I have updated the benchmark chart with the Devil May Cry 4 DX9 benchmarks; the results are a bit worse than in Crysis compared to the Nvidia solutions.
  • Keep in mind that these are scores of a single game and a few different configurations. Anyway, it is a very popular game with a lot of benchmarks published in the Net, so it is quite informative. If I can get more data I will update this post.

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330 performs very well (for an entry-level card)

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009

Maybe you are aware of our benchmark collecting effort. I recently got benchmarks of a Dell Inspiron 1545 with an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4330 and was very impressed by the results: in the Crysis GPU benchmark at 1024×768 and Medium settings, this card more than doubles the score of a Mobility 3450 and is close (within 80%) to a 9650M GT. Not bad for the bottom end of the 4000 series! I’d love to have a 4530 and 4570 to compare!

Go to the benchmarks

Contribute to the new laptop benchmarks!

Monday, May 4th, 2009

OK, so the current benchmarks in my site are getting too old. In addition, actual gaming data are more interesting than 3D Mark scores. So I decided to get another kind of benchmarks to publish on this site: user-contributed laptop benchmarks (Crysis, Devil May Cry 4, World in Conflict and X3: Terran Conflict demos). It is hard to coordinate all the sources but the table is finally taking shape. Here you have the laptop benchmark table. As you can see there is a good representation of powerful cards, but entry-level ones are almost absent. It would be very interesting to have data from the Intel GMA 4500MHD, GeForce G 105M, Mobility Radeon HD 4330 and so. In fact, all current cards are interesting!

You can contribute with your benchmarks. What are you waiting for?

First GeForce GTX 280M benchmarks

Thursday, March 5th, 2009

The guys at Notebookcheck published the first Nvidia GeForce GTX 280M benchmarks. They conclude that it is an improvement over the 9800M GTX, but not a huge one, because it is a 55 nm version of the 9800M GTX and not a completely new chip such as the desktop GTX280.

But the guys at the Notebook Review forums do not like the results. I hope they publish their own benchmarks soon, just to compare.

And if you are in Europe, did you know that Cizmo is already offering laptops with the GTX 280M? At least in Spain it is!

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450 gaming benchmarks (Call of Duty 4, Crysis, World of Warcraft, F.E.A.R. 2, Sacred 2, Red Alert 3, Unreal Tournament 3, World in Conflict, GRID, Far Cry, Half Life 2)

Thursday, January 29th, 2009

GPU-Z ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450 is a quite common graphics card, often found in cheap laptops and its gaming performance higher than integrated graphics cards. While it is not a gaming graphics card, it delivers an acceptable performance in not very demanding games and, when resolution and detail level are kept low, even in the lastest titles. We are going to examine its performance in the demos of the games Call of Duty 4, Crysis, F.E.A.R. 2, Sacred 2, Red Alert 3, Unreal Tournament 3, World in Conflict, Race Driver: GRID, Far Cry y Half Life 2.  If not otherwise noted, all fps measurements were taken using FRAPS.

All tests have been performed in the demo versions, not in the full games. What impact can you expect on the measured performance? Usually the full game is better optimized, specially after one of more patches have been released, so performance can be better in the full game; but it is also usual that the full game has scenes of a higher visual complexity than the demo, resulting in a lower performance in such scenes.

All tests have been performed on a Dell Studio 15 sporting an Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 (2.0 GHz), 3 GB de RAM DDR2-800 and Windows Vista Home Premium SP1. Stock drivers were used. So both a faster processor and newer drivers can deliver better results. Results are expressed in fps (frames per second).

Call of Duty 4 (COD4)

  • Best performance: 800×600, everything Low or Off: 33-84 fps (average 50.4).
  • Native resolution: 1280×800, everything Low or Off: 8-48 fps (average 27.1)
  • Good compromise 1: 1024×768, Normal textures, all other settings Low or Off: 12-61 fps (average 31.1 fps)
  • Good compromise 2 (picture): 800×600, Low textures, all other settings Low or Off excepting Shadows On, Dynamic lights Low: 15-62 fps (average 30.0 fps)

At 800×600 and all settings at the minimum it is completely smooth, but visually the game is ugly and, removing shadows and most effects, it feels quite unrealistic. With shadows on and dynamic lights the game is more realistic and it is still quite playable. In conclusion, it is very playable if resolution and detail settings are kept low.

Call of Duty 4

Crysis

  • Best performance: 800×600, everything Low: 13-40 fps (average 25.3).

The demo is playable at 800×600 and even at 1024×768, but gameplay is not very smooth and can be annoying. In addition, some effects, such as fog and smoke, cause a noticeable reduction in fps, and this can be a problem in the full game: caution. The game is visually nice, but Crysis at minimum settings is not Crysis…

Crysis

World of Warcraft

  •  1280×800, Fair settings but High resolution textures: 22-30 fps (average 25.1).
  • Also playable at 800×600, Good settings (fps not measured).

I took the 10-days free trial. It’s very playable at 1280×800 and Fair settings, and you can even use High resolucion textures. Beware of expansions (mainly Wrath of the Lich King), because they need more graphics power.

World of Warcraft

F.E.A.R. 2 : Project Origin

  • 800×600, everything at minimum, shadows On: 10-61 fps (average 30.7).

I was surprised that one of the lastest games, F.E.A.R. 2, is playable in my modest laptop. Visual quality is quite good, but performance is lower when there are spectres and phantoms nearby, scoring 10-32 fps (average 29.7), so caution with the full game. Removing shadows will result in better performance, but in a game like this one I think it is very nice to keep them on.

F.E.A.R. 2

I uploaded a short video (30 s) to Youtube.

Sacred 2: Fallen Angel

  • Best performance: 1024×768, Low: 15-53 fps (average 33.5).
  • Native resolution: 1280×800, Low (picture): 13-38 fps (average 30.0).

It is good to find a game that works nicely at the native resolution of the monitor. fps scores are not very impressive, but this kind of game does not need as many fps as first person shooters. Perfectly playable.

Sacred 2

Red Alert 3

  • Native resolution: 1280×800, Low: around 30 fps.

Perfectly playable at 1280×800 and Low settings, but going to Medium quality results in slow moving units and laggy scroll, and that is a pity, because Medium graphics look really nice.

Red Alert 3

Race Driver: GRID

  • Best performance: 800×600, Low (picture): 30-40 fps (average 45.0).
  • Native resolution: 1280×800, Low: 13-31 fps (average 24.5).
  • Better quality: 800×600, Medium, MSAA Off: 14-22 fps (average 18.8).

Perfectly playable at 1280×800 and Low details, but it becomes too laggy for me at Medium details, even at 800×600.

Race Driver: GRID

World in Conflict

Tests performed using the built-in demo benchmark tool, not with FRAPS:

  • Good performance: 1024×768, Low: 12-114 fps (average 40 fps).
  • Native resolution: 1280×800, Very Low: 10-110 fps (average 42.0 fps).
  • Good compromise (picture): 1280×800, Low: 10-96 fps (average 34.0 fps).

The demo benchmark tool gives low fps when the big bomb is released, but playing the demo gameplay is smooth and visual quality is good. It is possible that, if big explosions are usual in the full game, playability can suffer, so caution.

World in Conflict

Unreal Tournament 3

  • Best performance: 800×600, everything quality 1 (picture): 31-57 fps (average 42).
  • Better resolution: 1024×768, everything quality 1 : 22-34 fps (average 27).
  • Better quality: 800×600, everything quality 2: 24-49 fps (average 35.7).

All tests performed in the map ShangriLa, that seems to be more demanding. In a multiplayer deathmatch you really want 30 fps at least, but you can get them. While graphic detail is low, gameplay is very smooth and visual quality is not bad (compare the textures below with the ones in the COD4 picture).

Unreal Tournament 3

Far Cry

  • Best performance: 800×600, everything Low: 110-200 fps (average 148).
  • High quality: 1280×800, everything High (texture filter quality Medium): 19-31 fps (average 26.7).
  • Good compromise: 1280×800, everything Medium (picture): 27-50 fps (average 40.0).

Far Cry is from 2004, but at that time it was one of the more demanding games in the market: at 1280×800 and medium details I still wish it was a bit more smooth. Anyway, it is very playable and visual quality is good.

Far Cry

Half Life 2

While contemporary of Far Cry, it is perfectly playable at 1280×800 and maximum quality: it is so smooth I did not bother recording the fps. Counter Strike: Source uses the same graphics engine (Source) and is from 2004 too, so it is likely that you can play this game at high details too.

Half Life 2

Other current games

Sadly many new popular games do not have an available demo, but you can guess if they are going to be playable:

  • Far Cry 2: playable on similar cards such as the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3200 at 1024×600 and Low details, so it has to be playable on the 3450.
  • Fallout 3: playable on an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470 with a mix of medium and low details, so it is probably playable at low details on the 3450.
  • Left 4 Dead: seems to run very well on a desktop 3450, that is marginally more powerfull than the Mobility version, so it is likely playable at an acceptable quality.
  • GTA IV: it is a poorly optimized game that needs a powerful computer. Probably NOT playable.

Conclusions

Is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450 a gaming graphics card? NO! But lets you play many current games at low detail and resolution. As that the tests have been performed in the demo version and not the full game, I would be cautious before buying a game when the demo was barely playable. If you enjoy playing current games at good quality, it is better for you to look for a “600 series” graphics card at least: Mobility Radeon HD 2600 or 3650, or Nvidia 8600 or 9600. You can be interested on the laptop graphics card comparison or on other articles in the benchmarks section.

If you play games on this card, leave a comment and tell us your experiences!

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 gaming benchmarks vs Nvidia GeForce 9600M GT

Monday, January 19th, 2009

The new Dell Studio XPS 16 (1640) sports an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 and maybe you are disappointed, because you expected a Nvidia GeForce 9600M GT. So what is the actual gaming performance of the Mobility Radeon HD 3670? The first reviews have popped out, so we can compare a few scores:

Game and configuration HD 3670 (fps) 9600M GT (fps) Source
Crysis: Medium details, 1024×768, AA off, AF off 16.2 17.8* PC Magazine
Crysis: High details, 1920×1080, AA off, AF 4x 1.6 1.8* PC Magazine
World in Conflict: Medium details, 1024×768, AA off, AF off 18 20* PC Magazine
World in Conflict: High details, 1920×1080, AA off, AF 4x 6 7* PC Magazine
Unreal Tournament 3: unspecified details, 1280×800, AA off, AF off 57.3 64.3** CNET
F.E.A.R.: Autodetect, 1024×768 77 77* Laptop Magazine
F.E.A.R.: Maximum detail, 1920×1080 24 N.D. Laptop Magazine

* 512 MB DDR2 version, with an Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 (2.8 GHz, 6 MB cache)
** 512 MB GDDR3 version, with an Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 (2.8 GHz, 6 MB cache)

All benchmarks for the Mobility Radeon HD 3670 (512 MB GDDR3) were performed using an Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 (2.4 GHz, 3 MB cache). So it is hard to tell if the 10% advantage in favor of the Nvidia GeForce 9600M GT DDR2 is because of the graphics card itself or because of the faster processor. Anyway, both the Mobility Radeon HD 3670 and the GeForce 9600M GT DDR2 are clearly very similar in performance.

Please tell me about any more gaming benchmarks you can find!

PC games system requirements

Monday, December 1st, 2008

I play games PC games very seldom, but I have to admit that I’m fascinated by gaming, and I’m very interested on everything related to gaming benchmarks, because most laptop graphics cards are not upgradeable and it is very important to compare the performance offered by a laptop with the performance demanded by games. I recently found a very useful tool: the Yougamers’ Game-o-meter.

This tool, that is donwloaded and executed from the browser, makes a fast assessment of your computer based on its Virtualmark score (based on 3DMark) and compares it to the one of the minimum and recommended components according to the game’s developer. It is not as informative as benchmarks for the same card, that show you the playable settings, but it is much better that a comparison with older graphics cards: is my Radeon HD 3450 faster or slower than a GeForce 6800 GT? Humm…

PC games system requirements

It looks like my PC is borderline to run Fallout 3…

The list of games is not huge, but it does include the most popular games. In my opinion, it is very useful.

PC Games at Buy.com

Fallout 3 laptop benchmark compilation

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

As Fallout 3 is one of the most popular PC games right now, I decided to compile the available benchmarks for low-end and mainstream laptop graphics cards. I could not find any formal benchmarks, so most of the information comes from comments in forums. In case you want to share your experience with Fallout 3, post a comment here or send a message to info@optimitza.cat.

Fallout 3 benchmarks