Mobile Radeon Xpress 1100 performance..

[TheVrolok]

I've got the Xpress 1100 in my laptop and I tried to play some Warcraft 3, with a number of heroes and other casters on the screen it basically becomes unplayable when casting starts. I'm just kinda surprised that its that bad with this brand new laptop. I've got a gig of RAM in it, and a Turion ML-50 x2 (64 bit dual core). RAM is nice, but I guess since the game/my windows version (32) doesn't support 64 bit or dual cores it's no different than playing the game on a single 1.6ghz CPU. Any suggestions for performance increases? I've already got ATI's Control Center cranked to "best performance."

I just noticed my P4 1.7 with 400 mb RAM and a GeForce 3 Ti200 is outperforming my laptop

 

[IlllI]

i think the x1100 just a renamed x200. i could be wrong, but thats not much better than the integrated graphics that intel uses.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: clandren
i think the x1100 just a renamed x200. i could be wrong, but thats not much better than the integrated graphics that intel uses.

Yeah I realize, but still, Warcraft 3

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

should be fine running at 800x600 ish. Maybe even 1024 with medium/low settnigs. What res are you trying to run at?

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch
should be fine running at 800x600 ish. Maybe even 1024 with medium/low settnigs. What res are you trying to run at?

1024x768 minimum settings. Gets entirely too choppy during heavy battle. However, taking something from a forum I found, I removed ATI's parental controls and it seemed to have some positive impact on performance.

 

[beggerking]

how much ram did you allocate to your videocard? typically 64/128 mb is enough for wc3.. leave the rest for the system.

I thought winxp all support dual core....?

 

[IlllI]

ATI's parental controls?

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

Originally posted by: clandren
ATI's parental controls?

:Q

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch

Originally posted by: clandren
ATI's parental controls?

:Q

My thoughts exactly. I don't understand it.

 

[IntelUser2000]

1024x768 minimum settings. Gets entirely too choppy during heavy battle. However, taking something from a forum I found, I removed ATI's parental controls and it seemed to have some positive impact on performance.

Are you sure its not that your definition of "playability" is too high?? .

My system:
Celeron D 325J 2.53GHz
1x1GB DDR2-533
WD360 Raptor
GMA950

I face similar playability issue but only when i am playing 4vs4(ladder game) with all 4 players' armies in one screen all casting everything.

1024x768x16
All high except animation quality, lights, spell effects, which are on medium

I get 45 fps on menu, and 35-45 fps when the game initially starts using fraps.

I just noticed my P4 1.7 with 400 mb RAM and a GeForce 3 Ti200 is outperforming my laptop

That's just wrong...

 

[rogue1979]

Yes.

Newegg has several single core Turion laptops with the Geforce Go 6150 for less than $750 that would worked significantly better for light gaming.

If you had to have a dual core they have a Tecra A6 with a Geforce 7300 for only $999.

 

[Dean]

Not sure if this will help you:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Tec...alResources/0,,30_182_871_9706,00.html

 

[IlllI]

what drivers are you using TheVrolok? i was doing some looking and went to ait's site to look and only 3 are listed xpress 1150, xpress 200 and xpress 200m. i'd assume the x1100 would just be a slower clocked x1150.


btw, i found this Text which basically states that the x1100 series is based on the X300-core, BUTTTTT its actuallly a chopped down version of the x300. and, i could be mistaken, but i think the x300 was based off the 9600 chip (similar number of pixel and vertex shaders at least)

so what i can gather is that the x1100 would perform worse than the 9600, which might explan why the ti200 got better frames for you.

 

[postmortemIA]

F*** ATI rebadging.. does that mean that X1100 has no SM 3 support?

 

[IlllI]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA
F*** ATI rebadging.. does that mean that X1100 has no SM 3 support?

you didnt look at that link did you
the chart states : Shader Model Support SM 2.0

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

the x1100/x200/xwhatever are all basically the same thing. They're all x300s with half the pipes. A Ti200 might perform faster, I'm not sure.

 

[rogue1979]

From what I remember the performance of ATI onboard 200M was more or less a Radeon 7000 with shared video memory.

 

[unfalliblekrutch]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
From what I remember the performance of ATI onboard 200M was more or less a Radeon 7000 with shared video memory.

It's a little better than that, I believe, and with dx9 shader support

 

[IlllI]

well i did some more searching and basically it seems like its crappy drivers
this guy has been documenting his problems with the xpress 200m, which is basically the same as an xpress 1100m (just renamed).

looks like the last update was in october 06, so maybe driver support has gotten better since then (or maybe not).

i also found a couple of other articles which others might find useful Text and
Text

 

[note235]

thanks

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch

Originally posted by: rogue1979
From what I remember the performance of ATI onboard 200M was more or less a Radeon 7000 with shared video memory.

It's a little better than that, I believe, and with dx9 shader support

I think it's just a two pipeline gpu, no real power to run DX9 shader stuff.

So the Radeon 7000 (four pipelines) will render all DX9 in DX8 and actually give much better framerates minus the eye candy. Which is a working solution when you are chugging at unplayable framerates.