Anchel Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 One week ago I had a Vaio FZ-18M with an NVidia 8400M GT which happened to have only 64 Mb of dedicated video memory. I managed to sell that laptop and get a better one: the Vaio FZ-21S which, besides having a faster processor and a Blu-Ray Disc player, it also has an NVidia 8600M GS with 256 Mb of dedicated video memory and a total of 1023 when sharing. This switch should be more than good enough for some gaming. So why can't I see any noticiable differences in comparison to my old laptop? I've tried some different drivers already, but all I get is the same. Bioshock runs even worse than on the 8400M GT (the water effects look horrible because water sometimes completely stops moving, like in the first scene where you are in the middle of the sea, the water is moving and for a split second it stops moving and then it goes back to moving again, giving a weird jumpy effect - mind you that this happens completely independent of the rest of the game: I may be moving without any framerate issues, but the water does). Marvel: Ultimate Alliance worked brilliant on the 8400M GT 64 Mb at high resolutions AS LONG AS I didn't turn on the advanced light effects. I wanted to try the game in the 8600M GS 256 Mb with the same resolution but with advanced light effects on, with the result being an incredibly choppy framerate. I tried lowering the resolution down to 800 x 600 and still the light effects were slowing down the game even when those light effects were on the lowest setting. So this means that the 8400M GT 64 Mb and the 8600M GS 256 Mb HAVE THE SAME PERFORMANCE!! And then.... Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones. I've mentioned before how slow that game worked on my old laptop. I've repeated countless times how the game renders completely unplayable because just jumping takes 5 seconds instead of 1 second as it should really be like. If there was a game in which I expected a better performance it was this one. But instead it works even SLOWER!!! Ok, not that much slower, but considering that before it was a real pain... Right now I'm using the 156.66 WHQL certified drivers. Are there any drivers you would recommend testing to see if I can fix my problems? BTW, Windows Vista DOES detect a much better video card. My Vista Index Score shows now a 4.8 compared to the 3.5 I was getting before, and it is mostly reduced by my Hard Drive's speed (it is 5400 rpm though). So WHAT would you recommend I do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 Well as an owner of a 8400M, I know for a fact that NVIDIA released some 16x.xx drivers for improved compatibility for BioShock. Also, what type of processor did you change from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 I went from an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8 GHz to an Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz. But I don't think the processor is the main point here... And yeah, I tested those drivers that are supposed to work better with Bioshock, but the effect is the same. The water moves as if it was in a traffic jam from time to time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hanz Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 I went from an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8 GHz to an Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz.But I don't think the processor is the main point here... And yeah, I tested those drivers that are supposed to work better with Bioshock, but the effect is the same. The water moves as if it was in a traffic jam from time to time. i would like to know how you get on as i have just bought a FZ21S @ 999.99 uk pounds today and will be pissed off if thats the case with bioshock. what res, aa, af have u tried or is it the same on all default low settings? thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 I've tested the following resolutions: 800 x 600, 1024 x 640 (widescreen) and 1024 x 768. In all the cases the video settings were on High (Bioshock lets you choose between low, medium and high). The rest of the game runs smooth, but not the water. As for AA and AF, the game doesn't allow me to change. Instead I have tried different settings on the NVidia Control Panel without many changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 Run it in DX9 mode. Thats what I do. DX10 just does too much for the card to handle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 Ok, but Bioshock is right now the minor issue here (as I don't have a full version of Bioshock, only the demo). I wouldn't be worried about my graphics card if it was only that game giving me problems. But instead I'm having low performance in many games even though I have a quite decent graphics card! I just don't know what else to do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 The most I can say is make sure the drivers you have enable the best performance. I use the 8400M GS which is a step down from your card and I get good performance out of Bioshock. Also, realize that games that are designed for DX9 won't work properly in DX10 since there are files and settings that are altered, removed, and tailored for DX10 that the program looks for. There is some more advice I could give but, I think this is a driver issue. Also check your video settings in your BIOS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 Video settings in my BIOS? Um.... I'm sorry but I don't really know how to do that. Would you mind explaining a little bit? Is it dangerous to fiddle with? Thank you for your answers so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 21, 2007 Report Share Posted October 21, 2007 Well, in many systems, the BIOS has settings that control what the video card can do. This also can play a factor. Also, the BIOS on the video card itself can be flashed for upgrades, even though I definitely dont recommend you do that without some experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 22, 2007 Report Share Posted October 22, 2007 (edited) I tried the new 165.01 drivers and they worked best for Bioshock as far as I'm concerned. Greatly increased framerate. Also made GRAW 2 run better. Edited October 22, 2007 by Ex Bond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hanz Posted October 22, 2007 Report Share Posted October 22, 2007 I tried the new 165.01 drivers and they worked best for Bioshock as far as I'm concerned. Greatly increased framerate. Also made GRAW 2 run better. hi are u using dx9 or 10 for bio? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2007 New drivers you say? I think you are mistaken. 165.01 drivers are dated back to April. Having a higher number doesn't seem to be the reason of determining wether the drivers are newer or older, at least with NVidia drivers. You know, so far the most stable drivers I'm seing here are the ones that came with my laptop, dated from May. They are version 111.28, but they don't seem to be uploaded here. I guess they might be specific drivers for Sony Vaio laptops. And so I'll stick to those so far... too bad :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 23, 2007 Report Share Posted October 23, 2007 I mena I know they were released ages ago, but they work good for me. And yes I run it in DX9 mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2007 Just before I go on trying any more drivers... Do the 165.01 drivers give any problems when coming back from suspension? It is a crucial factor for me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 23, 2007 Report Share Posted October 23, 2007 I upgraded to the 167.xx drivers ad am proud to say they have yielded the best performance yet. Also, make it so NVIDIA makes everything application controlled because NVIDIA Control Panel WILL muck things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchel Posted October 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2007 Yes, I got the best performance out of those too, but I can't get back from suspension on Vista 32 Bits so I cannot use those (I have many reasons to keep suspension modes as a top priority). I will test the new 156.73 that just came out though. Those may work better for me being specifically tailored for laptops, right? I use my laptop a lot in places where I can't plug it to recharge, so both Powermizer functions and correct suspension/hibernation modes are the most important for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bond Posted October 24, 2007 Report Share Posted October 24, 2007 Go for it. Let me know how they work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Joe Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Strange, I have an 8600M gt, about 1.7gb vram when sharing I run bishock brilliantly on all high with dx10 on. Ah just realised my card has twice the stream processors which might explain it, and I have 4gb ram. TBH the GS really isn't a good card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.