Gaming Laptop GPU is Underperforming

K

kage

n00b
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
62
Last week I received the Sager NP9150 Special Edition laptop with the GTX 680m gpu. The results in 3DMark 11 are http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6576738. I also downloaded Bioshock Infinite and ran the benchmark utility in Ultra settings and got an average of 46 FPS and a max of 78 FPS. I'm using the latest nvidia beta drivers. Is my GTX 680m underperforming?
 
i would say no. Its quite acceptable. mobile GPU arent the same as the desktop one even if named the same.
 
arr4ws said:
i would say no. Its quite acceptable. mobile GPU arent the same as the desktop one even if named the same.
Click to expand...
yeah, as I recall* the 680m is more related to a high end 500 series card in performance.

*feel free to correct/thwap me if i'm wrong
 
FnordMan said:
yeah, as I recall* the 680m is more related to a high end 500 series card in performance.

*feel free to correct/thwap me if i'm wrong
Click to expand...

Respectfully, that's not right. The 680m is based off the GK104 kepler chip with 1344 shaders. It's esentially an underclocked, undervolted desktop GTX 670. The upcoming 780m (and 680mx.. confused already?) will have the full 1536 shaders and will have near-desktop-level voltage: it's essentially a desktop GTX 680.

Edit: the 675m (but not 675mx) is based off the older fermi architecture (what you're calling the "500-series"). It's confusing, and intentionally so by nVidia.

6079 in 3DMark 11 is right on the money for a single 680m running at stock speeds. Your card is working fine.
 
Last edited:
harmattan said:
Respectfully, that's not right. The 680m is based off the GK104 kepler chip with 1344 shaders. It's esentially an underclocked, undervolted desktop GTX 670. The upcoming 780m (and 680mx.. confused already?) will have the full 1536 shaders and will have near-desktop-level voltage: it's essentially a desktop GTX 680.

Edit: the 675m (but not 675mx) is based off the older fermi architecture (what you're calling the "500-series"). It's confusing, and intentionally so by nVidia.

6079 in 3DMark 11 is right on the money for a single 680m running at stock speeds. Your card is working fine.
Click to expand...

Yikes, what a confusing mess. Thanks for the correction.
 
So the 675mx is based on Kepler, correct? Would this make it close to the 680m then?
 
Technically, yes, but from what I've read on it is dissappointing, IIRC. I'll see if I can find the review I was reading that said it was much of an upgrade over the 670mx and couldn't justify the price difference
 
675MX is about 66% of a 680M.

Putting it as 3dmark scores

675MX = 4000
680M = 6000
780M = 7500
 
Meak, you got rid of your 16F2 with the 7970 in it?? How do you like the 680 in comparison?
 
I think meaker has moved on to even "greener" pastures in the GPU space :)
 
As you can see I now work with powernotebooks so I get to increase my budget :)

The 680m is a joy running at 1033/2600 but I look forward to the 780M :)
 
Yeah, I noticed you pushing PN quite a bit. Must be nice to get paid to work with a bunch of fun stuff. I don't think i'll be upgrading until this thing dies on me. The 570 is still working good enough for me :)
 
Do you have the ac adapter connected while testing? Make sure that the cpu is not clocking back its speed because it does not have ac power.
 
He would not get those scores on battery since the GPU would underclock too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top