ASUS Eee PC 1215N - Dead Space Test

A test to see which relatively-modern games will run on this netbook. I give you Dead Space. If you've never tried it, you should go out and get it now.

*Basic Specs:
- Intel Atom D525 @ 1.8 GHz (dual-core, 2x 512 kB L2 cache)
- NVIDIA ION 2 (512 MB, Optimus technology)
- 2 GB DDR3 memory (800 MHz)
- Windows 7 Home Premium (32-bit)
- 1366x768 pixels maximum resolution
- BIOS updated to revision 0605
- ION driver updated to version 266.58

*Running Apps:
Firefox, Yahoo Messenger, uTorrent, Avast (Silent/Gaming Mode), Fraps

*NVIDIA settings:
Triple Buffering (enabled), Maximum Pre-rendered frames (2), others on default

VISUALS:
Resolution - 1280x720 (60 Hz)
Full Screen - On
Vsync - On

ADVANCED RENDER SETTINGS:
Bloom - On
Glow - On
Depth of Field - On
Anti Aliasing - Off
Blur - On
Post Processing - On
Flares - On
Motion Blur - On
Decals - On
Shader Quality - High
Shadow Quality - High


*Framerate: ~11 to 31 fps
*Playability: Poor to Fair

*Remarks:
On considerably high settings, the game is quite playable. It can stay between 25 and 30 fps inside a small, darker room. Framerate only dips when there are lots of things going on in the scene and the area is large. On the low preset, the game almost always stays at 30 fps, even on busy parts (like having multiple enemies come at you). Low settings give a PS2-ish graphic quality -- only a little more polished -- which isn't bad, and the majority of the finer lighting is turned off. Still, it manages to give the thrill that would be expected from a survival horror game despite its mellowed look.

Framerate may be improved by doing one or a mix of these: lowering the settings even more, closing unnecessary processes, updating the graphics driver further, defragmenting the HDD, overclocking CPU/GPU, upgrading Windows 7 to 64-bit and make full use of the max 4 GB memory capacity, downgrading to Windows XP for an optimized, less demanding OS, among others.

Category:

Gaming

Tags:

• ASUS
• Eee
• PC
• 1215N
• Dead
• Space
• Test
• Intel
• Atom
• dual
• core
• NVIDIA
• ION
• DS
• Windows
• Home
• Premium
• 32
• bit
• netbook
• gaming

[TekGeekify]

With triple buffering off, and v-sync on, I got about 20 fps. Same thing with triple buffering on. You would think I'd get a sky-high framerate with the GTX 295 regardless of the v-sync/buffering setting(s)...what with it being "beastly" and all. haha (I really hate this card. v_v)

[thugsnw]

@TekGeekify Eh? That's weird. Triple buffering should work with v-sync turned on and give the same framerate (except capping the max to your monitor's refresh rate).  In any case, if tearing isn't an issue for you and you don't see a lot (or at least they're barely noticeable) with your original settings, by all means stick with it. GTX is a lot more powerful than a netbook's card. 2nd gen ION is simply a reintroduced 9400M, I've read.

[TekGeekify]

Turn V-Sync off and you'll get at least another 20 fps. I tried playing Dead Space with my GTX 295 with V-Sync on and was getting somewhere around 25 fps. Turning it off brought me into the 150+ fps range. It just kills your frame-rate. =/

[thugsnw]

@TekGeekify V-sync takes away screen tearing. And it doesn't affect framerate (in a negative way) if v-sync is paired with triple buffering, which I did. V-sync caps the max framerate to your monitor's refresh rate (typical 60 Hz = 60 fps), though. Also, framerate dips because of the other settings. If I set everything lower, I'd get higher FPS. Then again, this video was designed to showcase the netbook's performance in running some modern games on high-ish graphic settings.

[thugsnw]

@Jetty355 Nice. It's about time. I won't be able to test that until a few days, though, since I'm in the middle of encoding something.  I hope it improves everything. A few more fps on all games would be stellar.

[Jetty355]

@Jetty355

Nuuoooooo! It doesn't fix my problem. I had my hopes up. Oh well...

:(

[Jetty355]

@thugsnw

Great news: The new version (267.24) came out just today. However, it's a BETA version.

I hope it fixes everything.

[thugsnw]

@Jetty355 Yeah, I tested 260.99 last night, too. It was just as glitchy as performance on 266.58. Then I tried 257.41, it worked pretty well aside from some minor artifacts -- definitely not as bad as newer drivers, though. Haven't tried running the game on 266.58 on the lowest settings. But on the settings I run it, framerates on 266.58 and 257.41 were about the same.

[Jetty355]

@thugsnw

Hey I tested 266.58 in SC2 myself. Although the game eventually crashes and artifacts show up, I can say that the frame rate difference is very significant. When I used 257.34 with lowest graphics, my max fps was about 25. With 266.58, my max was 55. That's a... BIG difference!

Now I can't wait until NVIDIA releases the fix. I underestimated my 1215N all along!

Btw 260.99 has problems with SC2. :(

[thugsnw]

@Jetty355 Nope, don't have it yet. I think the minimum requirements for DS2 is the same as the first one, so I expect performance to be the same. I'll give 260.99 a whirl later too and will let you know how it goes.