Confused about the graphics card A8Jm and W3J

i just want to know which has the more powerful card, the GF 7600 512 mb dedicated vram of A8Jm or the ATI X1600 256 mb dedcated vram of W3J? Does the additional 256 mb of vram of 7600 does make a difference? because i think i saw a 7600 which only has a 256 mb of dedicated vram.

 

a8j has 512? so does the w3j. 256mb dedicated plus 256 hyper ram, x1600 is noticeably more powerfull but also more expensive

 

A8JM has 512 dedicated, not 256 + 256 shared.

 

so the 512 dedicated ram of 7600 is neglected compared to the 256 mb of x1600 in terms of power right? i thought there were 7600s that have 256 mb of ram and it is the one comparable to the x1600 w/ 256 mb and the 7600 with 512 is the most powerful compared to the cards mentioned earlier.

thank you very much..

 

The 512 mb of RAM makes little difference.

Both cards offer similar performance. The X1600 is not "noticeably more powerful." It may depend on the game you're playing. Some reviews of the A8Jm and W3J have shown benchmarks (3dmark) where the 7600 has been able to beat the W3j, and also vice versa.

I believe that generally speaking, the 7600 may perform better in 3dmark06 while the X1600 may outperform in 3dmark05.

 

Yeah, the x1600 is not more powerful than the Go7600.. as has been said, they're about equal and it depends on which game you're playing, and in benchmarks, in 3dMark05, the x1600 tends to win, while in 3dMark06, the Go7600 tends to win...

And the Go7600 has 512MB dedicated memory

 

That's synthetic benchmarks though, i think in terms of real world gaming the x1600 is slightly more powerfull, regardless of RAM configuration.

 

As I said, depending on which engine your games are based on.. some are optimized for ATI and some for NVIDIA.

I think saying a blanket statement that x1600 is more powerful in real world gaming is misleading without concrete proof. There have been threads in here that compared both cards side by side in certain games where the 7600 has been noticeably smoother... and I have no doubt there are games where the x1600 will be smoother...

In any case.... they're equals in terms of power and performance... choose either and you'll be happy.

 

Both cards are really close in terms of performance. I do agree that right now in most games the X1600 seems to do slightly better than the 7600. But if your hooking your notebook up to a high resolution monitor that extra 256MB's of dedicated memory in the A8jm will come in handy. With the 512MB's on the 7600 go, it might be a better card for the future, when games start really demanding that much memory...

The good thing is, these two cards are the most powerful cards available on the market for 14" notebooks. Can't go wrong with either.

 

The x1600 has 12 pipelines whereas the 7600 only has 8. And the 512mb RAM on BOTH is split 256 Dedicated and 256 Hypermemory/ Turbocache. So pound for pound the x1600 has a bit of an advantage with having 4 more pipelines.

Also for my part I have had an all around better experience with ATI pruducts on my desktop.

 

The X1600 can push more pixels with the extra quad enabled but the 7600 has more powerful vertex shaders and since both GPUs have 5 vertex shaders if a game is using heavy amounts of shading the 7600 willbe slightly faster, as is said all depends on the game. And just fyi the desktop 7600 has all 12 pixel quads enabled and it beat an x1600 with slight higher clock speed, now if ATi released a midline GPU based on the x1900 we might have better results.

 

hmm ya from what i can see seriously they are about equal, or have really very little and unnoticable difference...

look, if for no other reason, ill put it this way - if you were CEO of NVidea, would you still be sitting in that seat if you released something that was not a substitute to your competitor's product, but rather something thats a lot weaker?? i think not eh... technology-wise im sure they dont differ greatly, especially at the high but not really really high end of graphics cards... so ya, why worry too much about it?? like the dude above said, these are all synthetic benchmarks.. most of us dont have the hardware to truly test GPUs to their true limits so ya, go with the real live experience test - im sure youll find they really dont differ too much...

 

Wrong.. the Go7600 has 512MB dedicated, no TC at all... while x1600 has 256MB ded and 256MB Hypermem

 

Two things are kind of depressing about this thread:
-it's one of dozens asking the EXACT same thing
-despite the above, people are STILL getting their facts wrong. If you don't know, please don't answer! e.g. the 7600 doesn't even support TC, so it can't have it.

 

The X1600 does not have 12 pipelines. In fact, the X1600 is a 4 pipeline card. However, the difference is that there are 12 pixel shaders. In comparison the Go7600 actually has 8 pipelines. Performance-wise, as others have mentioned the X1600 and Go7600 are pretty similar. However, in pixel shader heavy applications like Oblivion the X1600 will pull ahead with it's 12PS vs 8 PS. In texture heavy applications the Go7600 will pull ahead with it's 8 TMUs vs 4 TMUs. Theoretically in the future more games will use more pixel shaders so in theory the X1600 is more "future-proof". Realistically though, the 4 TMUs will almost always be a limiting factor.

Personally, I always thought a 2:1 ratio would be better instead of 3:1 that way the X1400 would be 4 TMUs/8PS while the X1600 will be 8 TMUs/16PS. That's why the X1900 just can't take off with it's 48 shaders because it's 16 TMUs is really holding it back compared to the 7900's 24 TMUs and 24 PS.

In regards to the extra RAM on the 7600 I wouldn't worry about it. Very few games can possibly take advantage of more than 256MB of video RAM and even at super high resolutions the 7600 would be too slow to matter anyways. I believe the tests on the desktop X800XL with everything identical except for 256MB vs 512MB didn't show any worthwhile advantage. And if I'm not mistaken the desktop X800XL is faster than the Go7600 so if there was an advantage the faster X800XL should have showed it. Besides, the only effect the doubled RAM would have is to cut into battery life.