Unreal Tournament 2004

Unfortunately, Unreal is very limited by the 2.13GHz Dothan. Performance without AA/AF was steady at about 57 frames per second. We even saw 57fps at 1920x1200 (the system's native resolution) with no AA/AF. And yes, we triple checked the vsync and UT2004.ini settings.

Enabling AA/AF dropped performance only at higher resolutions as well. We even saw playable frame rates at 1920x1200 with AA/AF (about 40 frames per second).

Unreal Tournament 2004 Performance


Unreal Tournament 2004 Performance


Unreal Tournament 2004 Performance


Unreal Tournament 2004 Performance


Halo Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

48 Comments

View All Comments

  • sbuckler - Friday, February 25, 2005 - link

    How much memory has it got - from the drop off at high res I suspect 128mb, it might have been nice to mention that in the article.

    #16 - you can get a audigy 2 card for laptops now.
  • whooosh - Friday, February 25, 2005 - link

    how about comparing to other Geforce GO chipsets?
  • ZoZo - Friday, February 25, 2005 - link

    Why does does this review leave the impression that the Pentium M 2.13Ghz is weak?
    From benchmarks I've seen here and there, it's actually out there with the top lot in performance, sometimes beating the most powerful Pentium 4 EE!
  • mickyb - Friday, February 25, 2005 - link

    First off...you could have put the previous M28 benchies with this article from November along with the original GeForce 6800 Go. Looks like this new nVidia card might be competitive. If I were nVidia, I would have been worried after the November article. Second, I would like to see the Star Wars and BattleField: Vietnam benchies. It looks to be the one that shows ATI dominating.

    This will look messed up with prop fonts.

    Game ATI M28 6800Go 6800GoUltra
    Doom3 47.6 51.4 83.2
    HL-2 88.4 77.8 101.9
    UT2004 48 45.8 57.5
    Halo 52.9 46.8 55.6
    Wolf 74.1 76.5 N/A
    FarCry 87.4 65.3 88.5
    Sims2 41 39 N/A
    Battle:Viet 152 127 N/A
    StarWars 63 33 N/A


  • DerekWilson - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    deathwalker --

    We haven't had any comparable gaming laptops in our labs.

    Also, the review is of the GeForce Go 6800 Ultra, not of the Dell Inspirion XPS Gen 2.

    ...

    I'm sure the notebook was using the higher speed HD, but that generally doesn't make a difference in the gaming experience except in load times.

    The Pentium M should be more resilient to DDR2 than the P4. The low latency cache is what counts.
  • deathwalker - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    Oh ya..if forgot to mention in my previous post..Tom's Hardware has just posted a reiview on this system also...they did it right. Compared it to other high end gaming laptops.
  • deathwalker - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    Dissapointing review...if i want a Gaming Laptop I want a review to compare it to other Gaming Latop's. Comparing it to desktops sure doesnt answer any questions of mine!! I think you missed the boat.
  • bobsmith1492 - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    Wow, that's an amazing sounding machine; pics???

    Since when did they make DDR2 for the P-M? I would think its high latency would rather offset the M's best strength - low latency; although, it does retain its cache I suppose.

    So is the mobile 6800 ultra a 12 or 16 pipe card? By the looks of it it must be 16, or else that extra 50MHz is doing a lot of work.
  • kmmatney - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    Tom's Hardware showed the system running Forceware 75.80. You can get 75.90 from here:

    http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=999

    I can't find 75.80 anywhere...
  • kmmatney - Thursday, February 24, 2005 - link

    #18, I doubt they much choice - they had to use whatever drivers came with the laptop 9and those would obviously be optimized for the new moobile GPU). It would be interesting to see if the drivers help out desktop cpu's, though.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now