ATI 5870 1GB of DDR5 vs 1.5 GB of DDR5

Firstly, I have yet to find a thread on this so, i decided to start this one!



OK, iv been wondering what the performance difference is of this two Asus G73jh Gaming Notebooks. I would really like to know about the extra heat generated by this BEAST, if any.

Here is a link of the two notebooks to see the price difference as well and if its worth it






The 460M 1.5 GB DDR5

Buy the ASUS G73JW-A1 17.3 Black Laptop Computer at TigerDirect.ca





The 5870 1GB DDR5

Buy the ASUS G73JH-X3 Laptop Computer at TigerDirect.ca



Thx for you help!

 

Doesn't matter. The ram is used differently on the Nvidia and th AMD. Performance wise it's probably about the same, slight edge to AMD's faster memory controller.

Go with whatever you prefer, should be fine. With the JW you are getting BluRay, USB 3.0 and the proprietary Nvidia tech.

 

Where's the poll option for "I don't want to own a bloated piece of crap, and I like proper gaming"?

And the GTX 460M will be better.

 

Getting the PS3 version of Black Ops.

 

Uhh... That's great to know? ._.

Anyways, I would prefer the 460M because I'm a nvidia fan at heart, no point in denying it, but it's only gonna be better if you're into video editing and stuff like that. Otherwise, in pure gaming performance and OCability, the 5870M will be better.

 

Call of Duty is a garbage game.
5870 performs better.
Nvidia has more reliability and in-game support. Also PhysX.

 

Physx is not even worth mentioning. It exists in 3 games that matter and it kills performance unless you dedicate an entire video card to the thing in Arkham and Mafia 2.

 

This thread/poll is so damn confusing...

Are we talking about notebooks, or Call of Duty?

 

How is it confusing?

I have a question about notebooks

and a poll happening to ask a question about Black Ops

very simple, not much to it!

 

CUDA is though. In Adobe products and other CAD software, CUDA is widely used increase performance.

Physx is pretty much useless as you've said, but I think it does help out because there are always some people playing those support games.

 

The 5870 performs better in some situations and the 460 performs better in some situations. When it comes right down to it, they're fairly similar in performance and either are a great choice.

 

still not a huge issue, CUDA is somewhat a stopgap, STREAM tech from ATI is also supported and if you are a heavy Adobe CS user or CAD user, etc you would skip the 460 or 5870 entirely and go to a Quadro or FireGL anyways. especially for CAD, MAYA, Premier etc.

 

I used to be a huge fan of nvidia... not so anymore so I would go (gaming purposes mainly) with the 5870.

Call of duty, naww there are much better games out there Medal of honor... that i would buy, also can't hardly wait to get my hands on the new TDU2

 

Anandtech reviews the new G73jw and compare it with JH and other gaming laptops.

ASUS G73Jw: Out with the Old, In with the New - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

 

I found this thread on the Gaming seccion of this forum, basically the same...

http://forum.notebookreview.com/gam...rds/517793-gtx-460m-vs-ati-radeon-5870-a.html

After a few pages I got tired of it... but you might wanna give it a look...

 

They're pretty much the same. Some say ATI runs hotter, others say Nvidia isn't as reliable over the long term. Neither of these arguments are specific ONLY to the g73 ... seems like the same ATI vs. Nvidia argument that is true for almost all their products is true with the g73.

Long story short? ATI is hotter. But generally tend to last longer, even though they run hotter. Nvidia has better drivers, runs cooler but die earlier.

of course, when I say "longer life", I mean an nvidia card will last 5-6 years, and ATI cards never die.

 

I read most of the time ATI 5870 runs cooler than the 460, has more overclock room, and unless you want to wait 6 months for the card to actually deliver, the 5870 delivers performance straight out of the bag. The reason why I say 6 months is thats how long it took my 9600GT Via Nvidia drivers to see any noticeable performance boost just for L4D and that was a 8-9FPS increase.

 

Maybe this will help you.

When you compare HD5870M and GTX 460M with Vantage scores, what you want to look at is the GPU Score. Not the overall or CPU, just GPU score. Apparently GPU performance on PhysX is a CPU accoding to 3DMark idiots

800/1125 what I use for gaming for up to 4 hours in a session. I never game with clocks lower than this.


Just for benchmarking fun, 850/1200 (same clock setting as desktop HD5770)


All gaming benchmarks @ 800/1125 which are the settings I used to game Dragon Age: Origins for 5 hours today because it's raining and 0C outside and it's Sunday.





Dirt 2 Ultra Settings no AA



Lost Planet 2, Nvidia DX11 done stupid. Example: Why does background that should have been just efficient use of large texture needed to be tessellated when normally with Depth of Field never notice if it was tessellated or not?? Why does flat surface need to be tessellated? Tessellation is about makeing CLOSE object detail better. Not distant objects no one is paying attention to, GPU resources absolutely wasted. Why are bullet explosions tessellated? Something that appears for less than a second needs to be tessellated? An Nvidia paid game, DX11 implemented by morons. BTW it runs crap on Nvidia also, Nvidia screwing over their own customers, real smart...



Lost Planet 2 DX9: Another example of PC Gaming hate... And it's sponsored by Nvidia, the irony is just revolting! Any modern GPU is now DX10.1 compliant. DX10.1 is on average 30% faster than DX9 but these moron game developers continue to release DX9 that performs poorly.



Bad Company 2, used Fraps, attached benchmark Excel files with FPS, Min/Max/Avg.









Crysis Warhead

Ken has video of a massive OC on GTX 460M on the G73JW 820/1640/1420. I don't have camera, so I can only post benchmark. I'll use the same settings he used.
- But I can say while playing the same scene as he did, I was averaging between 38-60 FPS, avg 45. The benchmark has tons more explosions than in that scene.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/6772335-post370.html



Nvidia Heaven 2.1 Tessellation Extreme (top) vs Normal (bottom) visual comparisons, Tessellation done by morons. Images are of actual size 1080p

As you can see, visually no difference. Frankly it looks like crap, extreme vs normal. This is the face/nose of the dragon



With wireframe you can see how much more dense extreme is vs normal. But you can't visually see this unless you turn on wireframe.



Rest of the scene, tessellating everything to the extreme is idiotic, DX11 implemented by morons. Show up close of actual size of the tree and the cobblestone with wireframe to show how dense it is and how dumb this is.



The distant trees are seriously tessellated? Image is of ACTUAL size 1080p


Can't be serious right? So dense it's just a mass of white. Image is of actual size, 1080p

 

Thx everyone this was really helpful

 

Dell's shipping the XPS 17 with the GT 445M which has 3gb GDDR3! I came to the conclusion that there's no point.... but really, why?!

 

2 things.

Your poll makes no sense seeing as there is a wii version of Black Ops that will sell well over 1mil. On a side note, where is the option for "Not preordering because COD sucks and im sticking with the only real team based FPS right now, Bad Company 2"

Second. I have both versions. I have the ATI one and the GF has the Nvidia one.

Mine performs better in games but hers performs better with apps that support CUDA like Premiere and After Effects/

 

That's odd because CS5 supports AMD GPUs also.

 

Not in the video editing. For After Effects and Premiere's hardware GPU mercury acceleration, its Nvidia CUDA only.

Thats why in film VFX and game development, Nvidia is exclusively used. I love my 5870m for gaming but, man, much like apple, I would never use AMD/ATI for any real 3d work.

Thanks what my desktop is for