Gaming Benchmarks - Battlefield 2

For our gaming benchmarks, we ran the systems in two different modes: a lower quality mode that allowed the IGPs to get relatively playable frame rates, and a higher quality mode that was a more realistic setting for the discrete graphics cards. Most of the discrete graphics cards will be system/CPU limited in the low quality mode, but that information can be interesting as well. Obviously, the IGP solutions really aren't intended for serious gamers, but we wanted to see if they could still provide a playable gaming experience with lower detail settings.

Click on images to enlarge.

The above screenshots show the settings that we used in Battlefield 2. Our low quality BF2 configuration uses the "Low" preset, with texture quality also downgraded to low. Anisotropic filtering and antialiasing are disabled, and we tested at 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, and 1280x1024. (We don't consider 640x480 playable in BF2, as the text is unreadable, but it was included for reference.) The higher quality mode uses the "High" preset, with textures also set to high. Antialiasing is disabled, and anisotropic filtering is set to 8x. The 7800 GTX generally wouldn't have a problem with 4xAA on the tested resolutions, but realistically, we don't expect users to put a 7800 GTX in this type of system.

Starting with the low quality performance modes, even a stock 6600 is almost 3X as fast as the best IGP solutions. It's a bit surprising to see that the ATI chipset appears to be system limited to 25 FPS, while the 6150 scores significantly higher at lower resolutions. We would venture that the limitation is caused by the HP BIOS, as we have not seen this sort of behavior in previous testing on the ATI Xpress 200 chipset. It could also be something specific to Battlefield 2, as none of the other games show this behavior. At 1280x1024, the two IGPs are basically tied, though neither is really playable at 20 FPS or less. Surprisingly, I actually played through a map with the 800x600 setting on the ATI IGP, and I found that the game worked okay. Battlefield 2 doesn't really seem to require much more than about 25 FPS for casual gameplay, though higher performance is obviously preferred.

While the integrated graphics solutions struggle to maintain playable frame rates even at the lowest resolutions, sticking with low detail levels and switching to even a 6600 provides very good results. In fact, the 6600 is capable of running very well in the medium quality modes while still maintaining reasonable frame rates. With the more powerful graphics cards, we can see that the faster memory and lower latencies provided on our custom system end up winning out - even with the slower processor. The 3800+ Venice core is limited to 171 FPS, while the HP system is limited to 157 FPS.

Moving onto the higher-quality mode, the IGP solutions are way too slow. Both systems were providing single digit frame rates, so we halted benchmarking rather than waiting for each test to complete. With the other graphics cards, the custom system ends up leading by as much as 9%, but you really wouldn't notice the difference in practical use. It appears that the improved memory controller and cache subsystem on the Venice core makes up for the lack of cache relative to the ClawHammer core. At that point, the lower latency RAM takes the lead.

Multimedia and Networking Benchmarks Gaming Benchmarks – Doom 3
Comments Locked

48 Comments

View All Comments

  • ozgure - Thursday, February 2, 2006 - link

    You have said "Full 5.1 audio is supported with speakers". I couldn't manage to get a sound from line-in port. Are you really sure?? Can you share me howto?
  • bzsetshot - Thursday, December 22, 2005 - link

    I standarized my company to this machine almost as soon as it came out and I have not regreted this decision for one second. Ultra stable, ultra flexible and perfect size. It even has integrated RAID!! I highly recommend this machine.
  • trexpesto - Thursday, December 15, 2005 - link

    quote:

    It may become necessary to install a faster GPU once Windows Vista ships


    That is so wrong. Or very funny. Can't tell if you are serious == great writing.
    :D
  • JarredWalton - Friday, December 16, 2005 - link

    Oh, I'm serious about that. Vista will have a bunch of graphical effects that will actually leverage the power of the GPU. You should be able to drop back to a Windows XP style interface, and technically the DX9 integrated graphics should be able to handle the new UI effects... but then, technically the DX9 IGPs can run all the latest games at reasonable rates. :)
  • mino - Saturday, December 17, 2005 - link

    Have you tested it or is it just a guess? Actually many would like to know how high performance is necessary to achieve acceptable performance of aero-glass. Nice theme for a short folow-up article IMHO.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, December 19, 2005 - link

    Just a guess, hence the "may" part. What I'm basically saying is worry about Vista when Vista is actually available. If it turns out that the graphical effects don't work well with an IGP, then you can upgrade.
  • Ditiris - Friday, December 16, 2005 - link

    I believe the integrated GPU, the X200, supports the 3d Aero Glass theme in Avalon/WPF. So, there shouldn't be any need to upgrade.

    I don't think this is much of an issue for business users, but home users considering the model might want the eye candy.
  • Foxbat121 - Thursday, December 15, 2005 - link

    I bought a HP a1250n from CC recently. It comes with x2 3800+, 1GB memory, 250GB HDD, 1 16x LightScribe DL DVD Burner and 1 DVD-ROM Drive, meida card reader, 300W PSU, MCE 2005 OS. All for just $799 AR. Upgraded to a 6600GT and plays BF2 and HL2 just fine. I configured a DIY system on NewEgg, and it is around $1,000. When compare OEM system to DIY, please also take into account of OS cost (for your DIY). I know it's not much for OEM, but it will cost you $100+ for MCE or XP Pro legally.
  • Lifted - Thursday, December 15, 2005 - link

    Bought one of these a while back to have a user test out and it's working out great. I am ordering another 10 next week, from CDW since they have them in stock, for $850 or so in a bundle with an HP 19" monitor. $599 for the system and $250 for monitor is a great deal, especially considering they both have standard 3 year next day on site support. 4 and 5 year warranties are also available for not too much more.
  • Lifted - Thursday, December 15, 2005 - link

    Oh, one odd thing though. I comes with two video ports but the DVI is digital only, meaning no DVI - VGA adapter. So if you want to use two montiors, which IS supported by the on board ATI chip, you have to use one analog monitor and one digital monitor, or buy two analog/digital monitors which cost more. I think they did this to sell the optional PCIe cards. The system is cheap enough though so I'm happy with it.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now