POST YOUR DOOM 3 FPS

Message

Conmee · #31 Post by **Conmee** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 12:39 pm

Logi7,

I'm running a retail version of WinXP (I deleted all IBM partitions and formatted the HDD) with all MS patches (pre-SP2). And I'm using the all the latest IBM drivers and ThinkVantage apps, and I'm getting the 3DMark01 and 3DMark03 scores you see on the first page of this thread, roughly 9500 and 2600, respectively for the two benchmarks.

The Intel Chipset drivers are required because WinXP doesn't recognize the Intel Mobile 855PM chipset. It will just install the closest match... which means that often, you will have slower drive access, slower AGP/video, and little/no power management support. Here's the order in which I installed a fresh retail WinXP Pro on my T42p:

Downloaded all IBM drivers and ThinkVantage apps and burned them to CD
Format/Partition Drive (removed IBM Service Partition)
Install WinXP Pro from CD
Installed Intel Chipset Drivers from CD(from IBM)
Installed IBM Power Management Drivers from CD (from IBM)
Installed SP1 from CD (downloaded from MS and burned to CD)
Installed DirectX9.0b from CD (downloaded from MS and burned to CD)
Installed IBM Software Installer App from CD(from IBM)
Installed IBM Update Connector from CD (from IBM)
Installed the remaining IBM apps/drivers using the Software Installer -- Access Connections, Configuration, Modem, Audio, Video, Bluetooth, NIC, WiFi, Security Client, Rapid Restore, etc.
Installed remaining patches from Windows Update site
Installed any missing IBMpatches/updates by running IBM Update Connector

If you follow this order, you'll have everything running optimally and back to factory spec (except you won't have the Record Now or DVD software or the service partition). If you backup the C:\Drivers and C:\IBMTools directories from the factory install, you'll have all the programs/drivers that are installed by IBM from the factory.

Daniel.

mtbiac · #32 Post by **mtbiac** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:14 pm

I only get 8991 in 3dmark01 with a retail version of WinXP.

I have the latest Omegas and all the rest of the IBM drivers installed. I also installed the intel chipset driver (did this before installing the omegas). I dont have many apps installed because I just installed the retail XP Today.

any tips?

thanks

Conmee · #33 Post by **Conmee** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 3:35 pm

Just make sure that if you have the Battery Maximizer applet running that you set the Power Management to High System Performance and uncheck the Graphic Device Power Management. Also, make sure DirectX9.0b or 9.0c is installed.

I just looked up the benchmarks I ran when I first received my machine. Using the factory Preload from IBM, I simply installed 3DMark01 and 3DMark03 with no other apps. I got 3DMark01=9290 and 3DMark03=2580 right out of the box using ATI/IBM defualt drivers when I first received my system (I killed a number of background processes using Task Manager before running the test). The scores I get with my current configuration using a retail WinXP and fresh install is 3DMark01=9624 and 3DMark03=2628. That was two days ago.

Since I don't use the Omegas or Patje's Modder, can't be sure what could be the problem. Personally, I'm not seeing enough increase in using modded drivers/alternate drivers to replace the IBM-supplied drivers. Of course, I would consider the Omegas if I needed greater than 1280x1024 from my Dock II's DVI port, but that's not a limitation for me at this point.

Daniel.

mtbiac · #34 Post by **mtbiac** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:00 pm

well before I did this new isntall of retail XP, I was getting about 500pts higher with the omegas compared to stock IBM drivers...

I have everything set to max performance, although I havent installed Directx at all, maybe thats the problem? I think it may have installed when I did the windows update though...

any other ideas? how are you guys who did retail clean XP installs getting high scores?

thanks

mtbiac · #35 Post by **mtbiac** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:24 pm

I installed 9.0c and now I'm getting 9005 in 3dmark01. good enough, but if anybody has any ideas let me know

thanks

RS_003 · #36 Post by **RS_003** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:22 am

Flightvector wrote:It really is the CPU before the GPU that is reaching the critical temperatures in the T42s. I never had any issues with the GPU, but it is likely that the moderate heat from the GPU is taking away a lot of heatpiping ability from the CPU. But because the GPU has a dedicated heatpipe, it seems fine; I'm sure that the CPU would throttle before the GPU would create artifacts.

I tested with a DX9 game that uses shaders and generates high GPU load in a steady state, but I never had my CPU hit throttling temperature (88.5C). I topped out at about 76C which is the highest temperature my CPU has reached. Make no mistake though, I certainly wouldn't be calling this a gaming laptop, though it fares very well in games for a thin and light. I can't run any pre-DX9 game on my T42 near the resolutions my desktop can do with the same amount of memory, a slower GfTi4600 GPU, and a 2.26GHz P4 processor. A T41p is better than my T42 2378-DXU but not by large margin.

So what I say to you is, if you consider gaming as the primary use, a T41p will not get by for you. But for moderate and occasional gaming, it is definitely a great package with very good processing power. I balance my T42 for use in school for general work, CAD engineering/2D aero analysis, and occasionally for gaming, but I do have a fast desktop to back it up.

I don't really want to game. I will mostly use it for My ICT School. But when I have some time to spare I would like to play some games.

But after reading your post it seems to be that that isn't a big problem. And that's good to hear, because I was a bit afraid I would have to send my laptop RMA, as I had to do because my Acer Travelmate 800 burnt down because the VGA card got to hot.

Humpa · #37 Post by **Humpa** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:49 am

I only(?) have the Radeon 9600 and 1GB RAM (T42 2378-DXU).
For video drivers, I'm currently using the Catalyst 4.9beta's (installed with Patje's Mobility Modding).
I'm also using the "shader file edit" for Doom 3: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14874

Doom 3 timedemo (1024x768 Med qual): 18.1 fps
Doom 3 timedemo (800x600 Med qual): 28.5 fps
3DMark01: 9758
3DMark03: 2500

When I still had the latest IBM/ATI drivers installed, Doom 3 would crash to the desktop after a couple of minutes (even running 800x600 Med qual).
I've had no crashes since I installed the 4.9Beta's (running 1024x768 Med qual). And, 18.1 fps seems very playable

Leon · #38 Post by **Leon** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:55 am

have you tried the mods in the windows thread?

Humpa · #39 Post by **Humpa** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:16 am

Leon, are you talking to me?

Do you mean the "How to boost your Doom3 performance by 40% on ATI hardware" thread? ... http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=2665
I've only tried that shader edit, but I think that's what you are referring to. Though I didnt do any Doom 3 timedemo's before I did the edit.

Leon · #40 Post by **Leon** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:54 am

ok.

, just wondering how effective it was... anyone else do before/after?

kki000 · #41 Post by **kki000** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:03 pm

yes, as i posted earlier. No difference on my benches at all. I still have it installed. Double checked to make sure the pk file contained the fix.. no difference.

Theres a theory that this makes most difference with a x800 class chip, with aa and af turned on. Since those settings are min or off on the med settings i dont think it makes much of a difference. just my 2 cents.

Best way to get more frames is overclock. 9600 has alot of legroom to stretch.

K

darrenf · #42 Post by **darrenf** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 8:31 pm

The shader file edit mod took my 9600/64M from 26.1 to 28.4FPS in 800x600 high qual, no AA, no sync on a 1.7G Dothan (2378FVU). Omega drivers and slightly OC. I ran both tests *after* having run timedemo once because I pick up about 2 fps after the first test because the hard drive isn't accessed in the 2nd, 3rd, etc. presumably due to windows drive cacheing.

FYI: D3 crashed a lot with stock drivers (IBM?) before I switched to Omega drivers. No crashes since.

-darren

lewdvig · #43 Post by **lewdvig** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:16 pm

High detail on a 9600 or Mobility GL is just silly.

I run Med settings on 9800 Pro in my 3.2 GHz P4. You won't be able to tell the difference between med and high unless you look really hard.

darrenf · #44 Post by **darrenf** » Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:12 pm

Medium quality does get my fps up nicely to 34.5.

The only thing I can notice right off in timedemo is that brightly lit surfaces and the flashlight seem to be less bright and less distinct against their background in medium detail. This looks a bit more cinematic, but I think the flashlight beam in high detail looks better. Perhaps not enough to sacrifice 6fps though!

What are the differences between high and medium?

-darren

UCI2CI · #45 Post by **UCI2CI** » Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:29 am

t42p (KTU), 17.1 timedemo 1 @ High quality, 800x600, vsync off, all other options on, AA 2x.

Not that bad, but not really playable either, it just looks nice. Im using the IBM drivers btw, since i cant get the modded drivers or the omega drivers to work right. I knew i should have gotten a bright snot green alienware deskbook.

How did you guys get the modded drivers to work with your fireGL t2? The drivers limit the desktop resolution to 1280, and
Doom 3 and even GL screensavers wont run.

hhy2k · #46 Post by **hhy2k** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:49 am

OK some hope for the little guys:

T40P w/ ATI 9000 fire GL/512

Doom3 800x600 22fps
doom3 640x480 30fps (very nice)

3dmark01 7800
3dmark03 1150

card is overclocked 10% (both core and ram to 275/220) with radlinker
timedemo run twice !!! all extras off lights shadow etc, AC power on!

heavybyte · #47 Post by **heavybyte** » Fri Oct 08, 2004 2:15 am

Hey. I just tried some Doom too on my new T42.
I got the radeon 9600 and 768MB Ram. I overclocked the Radeon like 10%, put the shader file in the directory and put another value in DoomConfig.cfg under "seta image_cache megs" I changed the 20 to 128.
This config leaves me with 22FPS in Timedemo1 with 1024x768 Medium detail and 30,3FPS with 800x600 Ultra high. That's serious fun, never expected that from the R9600 Mobile.

POST YOUR DOOM 3 FPS

Who is online