96 replies to this topic

[Miki]

Hi,

Here are few results from my Amilo M3438G. I keep the GPU @ 380/680 and I haven't encountered any artifacts so far. Clock speeds > 400/700 are possible , but in shader intensive titles (AOE III) white noise starts to appear and core temp can easily hit 95C.

BTW here is something that I noticed: judging by the posts from 3438/4438 owners here and on notebookforums.com , 4438 has lesser overclocking tolerance and it can hit the wall starting at 360/630 while on 3438 you can push the core/memory 50 Mhz more. Maybe it has better cooling (unlikely) or Fujitsu slammed the worst 6800s in it's more expensive model (more likely) - slightly odd decision if you ask me!

I have flashed GeForce with 39.60 rom and it went without a problem (this is a must for any Amilo 3438 / 4438 owner).

Anyway , the best driver for 3438G in my experience is 83.20. Stock 72.50 driver was slightly slower, it had minor problems with some games (Doom 3 didn't render the fog correctly) and it was locked for overclocking. 83.40 , 83.60 and 83.90 are similar in terms of performance , but i just couldn't find a way to turn the GPU fan off. nvsvc32.exe process was enabled by default and with it either on or off, fan would not turn off . 81.xx drivers work ok, but these 83.20 drivers seem as they are 'written' for 3438G - everything works with them!


3DMark 2001 1024x768 default
----------------------------

72.50 19509
83.20 19558 (325/600) 19933 (350/650) 20247 (380/680)
84.12 20463 (380/680)
84.25 20536 (380/680)


3DMark 2003 1024x768 default
----------------------------

72.50 8699
83.20 9045 (325/600) 9550 (350/650) 10098 (380/680)
84.12 10076(380/680)
84.25 10087(380/680)


3DMark 2005 1024x768
--------------------

72.50 1024x768 default - 3517 @ 325/600
83.20 1024x768 default - 3736 @ 325/600

83.20 1024x768 default - 4055 @ 350/650

83.20 1024x768 default - 4318 @ 380/680
83.20 1024x768 4xAA... - 3785 @ 380/680
83.20 1440x900 default - 3581 @ 380/680
83.20 1440x900 4xAA... - 3028 @ 380/680

84.12 1024x768 default - 4330 @ 380/680
84.12 1440x900 default - 3576 @ 380/680

84.25 1024x768 default - 4335 @ 380/680
84.25 1024x768 4xAA... - 3844 @ 380/680
84.25 1440x900 default - 3581 @ 380/680
84.25 1440x900 4xAA... - 3029 @ 380/680


3DMark 2006 1440x900
--------------------

84.12 default - 1808 (SM2.0 - 751 , SM3.0 - 660 , CPU - 845) @ 325/600
84.12 default - 2073 (SM2.0 - 880 , SM3.0 - 772 , CPU - 847) @ 380/680
84.25 default - 2072 (SM2.0 - 879 , SM3.0 - 772 , CPU - 847) @ 380/680

3438G can't display 1280 x 1024 res which is default for 3DMark06 but results should be comparable because 1440 x 900 has the same amount of pixels (1% less actually)


Doom 3 High - timedemo demo1
---------------------

...................1024x768 8xAF.....1440x900 8xAF.....1024x768 4xAA 8xAF.....1440x900 4xAA 8xAF

FW 72.50 - ..........77.0................57.5................--..................--. @325/600
FW 83.20 - ..........89.1................71.7................56.2...............38.3 @380/680
FW 84.12 - ..........90.8................72.5................57.7...............39.0 @380/680
FW 84.25 - ..........90.4................72.6................57.3...............39.0 @380/680

As you can see, Doom 3 is playable even in 1440x900 with AA and AF! Only when there are >3 monsters on screen frame rate drops to 20-25fps but most of the time it is in the 40-60 fps range.


FEAR 1024 x 640 Max Settings 8xAF - performance test
----------------------------------------------------

FW 72.50 - MIN 22 AVG 46 MAX 098 @325/600
FW 83.20 - MIN 20 AVG 52 MAX 113 @380/680
FW 84.12 - MIN 20 AVG 54 MAX 116 @380/680
FW 84.20 - MIN 21 AVG 58 MAX 144 @380/680
FW 84.25 - MIN 20 AVG 57 MAX 141 @380/680

FEAR is playable up 2 1024x640 at max settings. When I increase res to eather 1280x800 or 1440x900 , minimal fps drops too often under 20. Beautiful game... play it with lower res, but max the settings - some shader/particle effects are truly incredible. 84.20 drivers rock in FEAR but image quality is worse in some games (Counter-Strike, Halo). On the other hand 84.25 set shows improved performance and it manages to keep iq from 84.12 set. Definitely use these if you play FEAR.


Halo 1440 x 900 High 8xAF - timedemo
------------------------------------

FW 72.50 - 50.4 FPS @325/600
FW 83.20 - 51.5 FPS @325/600
FW 83.20 - 60.2 FPS @380/680
FW 84.12 - 59.7 FPS @380/680
FW 84.25 - 58.6 FPS @380/680

Halo seems to have best performance with 83.20s but the difference is only 3% between them and 84.25.


I don't have the numbers for HL2 but it is very playable @ 1440x900 4xAA 8xAF. Framerate never drops below 30. It is interesting that enabling AA does not kill the framerate at all. Minimal fps drops by 3-4 so it remains playable all the way.


Prey 1.0 max settings , 8xAF
Forceware 84.25 , GF 6800 @ 350/650 - custom demo
-------------------------------------------------

1024 x 768 - 39.3 fps
1440 x 900 - 26.8 fps


Prey rocks at 1024 x 768 and it is playable at 1440 x 900. Only at more demanding scenes in spiritual form frame rate drops to 17-25 but othervise it is mostly between 30-50. I heard that latest ( > 91.3x ) drivers improve the frame rate a bit so it might be worth a shot to try them.


My recommended set: 84.12 - Solid performance, great image quality featuring H.264 acceleration

My current set: 84.25 - Great performance, good image quality, allows higher overclock

Edited by Miki, 04 September 2006 - 08:17 AM.

[®®®]

I'm about to pin this. Will this be updated with results from new released drivers?
Anyways, thanks for taking time to post a clear overview of drivers, oc and results

[zipper]

, but i just couldn't find a way to turn the GPU fan off. nvsvc32.exe process was enabled by default and with it either on or off, fan would not turn off

It's some setting on these latest drivers, but eXtreme-G 83.20 did work correctly.

I got rid of always running fan by setting Nvidia display driver service to start automatically - but
the fan treshold is quite low, even on web browsing it starts and stops periodically ;CPU about 53 C
and GPU 57 C.

[Miki]

Thanx !

I usually stick to those drivers which work but I will certainly try 85.xx series when it is released and post the results. I hope H.264 acceleration will be in them as NVidia promised. Pentium M @ 2 GHz is too slow for 1280x720 @ 30fps (like Nasa trailer from Apple's website). Playing performance is about on par with my ex DP 1.25GHz Powermac - 1280 x 6xx @ 24 fps is as high as it can handle.


@ Zipper: Nvidia display driver service was set on automatic when I installed 83.40 but turning it on/off didn't seem to help . Anyway I'm back to 83.20s which work perfect and offer about the same performance. Which driver are you using?

[zipper]

. Which driver are you using?

83.90, a speedy one!

[ConteJazz]

83.90, a speedy one!

zipper do u think that 83.90 are better than 83.20? what games u tried with? i usually play with World of Warcraft, do u know if 83.90 will give better performance in this game?
tnx all

[zipper]

I've done mostly benchmarking, but if we believe tweaksrus.com, 83.90 is one of the fastest drivers combined with excellent image quality. Thumbs up from guru3d.com, too.

[ConteJazz]

I've done mostly benchmarking, but if we believe tweaksrus.com, 83.90 is one of the fastest drivers combined with excellent image quality. Thumbs up from guru3d.com, too.

understood tnx...and what about fan? it will be always active with 83.90?

[Maier]

understood tnx...and what about fan? it will be always active with 83.90?

You have to enable the service of NVIDIA (run--->services.msc---->nvidia service) and set it to automatic. If you dont the fan will be enable all the time

[Miki]

Added results from XG Mobile 84.12 drivers. Results went up but image quality went down. Unfortunately, corners were cut on mipmap quality so games with simple and repeating textures (Counter-Strike , Halo) have visible transitions between mipmaps even on highest quality settings from Control Panel

I've also tried mobilenvidia's 84.12 set - same performance but better texture quality Great work mobilenvidia!

[Miki]

so if the fan problem in 83.90 is solved i should install them instead 83.20?...do u agree miki?

I agree. Try 83.90 first and if the fan problem still persists install 83.20 .

ps. in my services list i have only "NVIDIA Display Driver Service"...u mean this service?

That is the one. Double click on it and set Startup type to 'automatic' and reboot. That should fix it.

[zipper]

After setting 'Automatic' double clicking 'Use' is enough, no need to reboot.

[sonics6]

Im getting similar results with 83.90 as well: no overclocking, 3d mark 05 is 3740 roughly. its was a marginal increase from the 81.98 but as ive mentioned i dont overclock. will i see a considerable difference between the two drivers if i overclock?

[Miki]

Updated test results with 84.25 set. Very good set. They show good performance in games, rock in FEAR (& hopefully ES4: Oblivion) and improve image quality from 84.20 drivers, but still not as good as 84.12 set.


PROS:
- performance in FEAR and Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
- slight increase in 3DMark 2001 and 2005 scores (but who cares anyway)
- NV Control Panel allows higher frequencies (420/660) !!! , compared to 84.12 and lower which allowed ~350/650 on my setup
- texture filtering is almost on pair with 84.12s

CONS:
- still has a bug in NV control panel where you can't see a name of the game executable after you've created a new profile (present in 84.20 and 84.21 but not at 84.12 and lower)
- performance in Halo is a bit slower than with 83.20s
- texture filtering is almost on pair with 84.12s

Edited by Miki, 24 March 2006 - 01:21 PM.

[®®®]

We older GPUers are a bit short of power to test latest games. So i'll put your test results to our v84.25 general driver description as comment. We defenetily could need more of these tests in the future with more recent GPUs. Go for it

[Suns]

I only get 5221 with 3Dmark. I use an amilo M 3438G with 1,73 GHz and 1GB ram.

84.12: 5221 (325/600) 1024/768

What might the problem be?