is x300 for 6000 good enough for multimedia apps?

Hey everyone, I was thinking of taking advantage of the $750 coupon before it ends tomorrow morning but am hesitant due to all the skepticism on the x300 graphics card. I'm looking for a laptop that can handle mutiple apps (notably graphics/video editing/design such as Adobe Premiere, flash, photoshop, etc.).

The specs I'm drawn to are:
WSXGA
256ram (I'll upgrade myself)
60GB 7200rpm
x300 graphic card, 128mb

Can anyone tell a significant difference between Pentium M Processor 760 2ghz, 750 1.86ghz and 730 1.6ghz. I have the choice in either picking a faster CPU, or getting the DVD-R to reach the $1999 minimum for the $750 coupon.

Please help soon as the coupon is expiring... tick tock...

 

The CPU differences won't make that much difference to your apps listed so I would get the DVD. Seems like a great setup.

--------
Ordered:
Inspiron 6000d
PM 750(1.86GHz)
15.4" WSXGA+
1 GB RAM
128MB ATI X300
60GB 7,200 RPM
DVD burner
Bluetooth...yada yada

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Only thing holding me back is the criticism the x300 is getting. If I do place the order tonight, I also might take the following advice:

"If it can be confirmed that the i6000 does support 533 memory and dell is just not allowing it to be configured that way, it might be a good idea to order from dell with the cheapest memory config (256mb) and then buy two 512mb pc2-4200 (533mhz) dimms on your own."

 

Yes I'd like to see that memory issue confirmed as well.

--------
Ordered:
Inspiron 6000d
PM 750(1.86GHz)
15.4" WSXGA+
1 GB RAM
128MB ATI X300
60GB 7,200 RPM
DVD burner
Bluetooth...yada yada

 

Unless you are going gaming or 3D modeling, it shouldn't matter if you get the X300.

 

Hmmm, was there a $750 off coupon around here that expired yesterday? I am thinking of buying a I6000. I usually look at Techbargains.com. They had no $750 off deal. Was that on this website?

 

The performance of the x300 with discreet graphics memory will be on par, if not even slightly faster than that of the mobility 9700. So yea for what your needs are, it should be perfectly acceptable. [ ]

cheers,

yass

 

I thought the x300 was based on the radeon 9600, which is not as good as the 9700... Wait, the mobility 9700 is not the desktop one. Duh. Do you have any links to benchmarks? I just happened to have ordered a dell 9300 with the X300 and I'm currious how it will perform.

 

As a rule of thumb, you don't buy a laptop for gaming. The x300 should be adequate for any sort of laptop-based gaming you want to do. If you are buying a laptop to run FarCry you're making a big mistake, since for much less money, heck about 1/2 of the price of a laptop (even one on sale with a kick ass coupon) you could get a MUCH better desktop.

 

The x300 compares to the 9700M, i have posted a few times a link comparing their stats, nearly identical. In a few tests i have read, the x300 is right up there with the 9700M.

If this is the case, then the x300 would perform well. I have a 9700M, system specs in sig, and i can run Unreal Tournament 2004 at 1280x800, 32bit color, trilinear filtering, everything thing maxed, with very little slowdown. Also i play WoW at the native resolution, 1440x1200 and have no problems with most settings turned up almost all the way, only bilinear filtering here though.

Mind you this is with this system tweaked. I have disabled, deleted or turned off all the worthless features of windows. Also i run Diskeeper Pro to keep the harddrive at little to no fragmentation. I have also overclocked the GPU to 475/270. So this system is setup to utilize every ounce of resource. [ ]

my .2 cents! [ ]

*Dell Inspiron 9200, P-M 2.1ghz 400mhz FSB, 1 GB Ram 333mhz, 60gb 7200rpm HD, 128 ATI M Radeon 9700, XP Pro SP2, Wifi + Bluetooth*

*Sony MDR-G74SL Headphones for music and gaming, best 40 dollar pair i have ever bought! *

 

yassarian you are correct on the stats of the two cards. Heres the site i got my info. on the card stats.

http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=162&var2=0

I need to get a version of 3dmark20XX, and test my system out. Im pretty sure this laptop i own runs faster than the Dell 4550 we have (P4 2.4ghz, 1gb 333mhz ram, 128mb radeon 9800 pro)

Most people have a mind set that the graphics card is the ONLY factor in determining graphic power. For FPS games, this holds mostly true, however its still a combination of all 3 (CPU/RAM/Graphics Card). Even the speed of your hard drive can affect gameplay in some games. Don't diss the x300 just because its the lower end of the x-line, it can still hold its own, just like my 9700M, in most newer games. I can play WoW and UT2K4 with settings maxed or just about maxed. If you want/need the best possible look and performance, these Graphic cards are not for you but they get the job done!

*Dell Inspiron 9200, P-M 2.1ghz 400mhz FSB, 1 GB Ram 333mhz, 60gb 7200rpm HD, 128 ATI M Radeon 9700 (OC: 485/270), XP Pro SP2, Wifi + Bluetooth*

*Sony MDR-G74SL Headphones for music and gaming, best 40 dollar pair i have ever bought!*

 

Yep, it seems most ppl when they see "x300", they just automatically assumes that oh, it's gonna suck because we are at "x800" now... lol
Lets look at it's almost identical twin the mobility 9700:

The m11 is actually a mobility 9600, and therefore NOT comparable to a desktop 9700. Yes, the x300 (aka m22) has only 4 pipes -- just like the mobility 9700 (m11), m11 is slightly faster clocked, but m22 has the greater bandwidth. I believe the fillrate of the m11 is 1800Mtexels/sec vs m22's 1400Mtexels/sec. The m22 actually scored 720 on 3dmark05 while the m11 scored about 580ish(both the 64mb version). So yea, if you think your m9700 is adquate, you should be perfectly fine with the x300!

cheers,

yass

 

the x300 IS abysmal. i can always pull another test site out of my rear for you guys:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/2004-27gpu2_3.html

If you notice on the game tests, the x300 is consistently the worst performer. have fun with your x300 mates'

 

Those benchmarks look a little suspicious. I looked at C&C Generals Zero hour I would not believe that the x300 would do worse than my current desktops GF 4 MX440 64MB.

Some benchmarks I have seen that compared the x300 to the ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 weren't so bad at all. It was slightly worse frame rate wise than the 9700, but not by much.

That article says that they tested these cards by maxing out all quality settings. I bet if you turned off some advanced features and scaled it back just a tad you'd get pretty damn decent framerates. So that article/test site you just posted is a bit misleading and would tend to negativley exaggarate the quality of the card, because some of those advanced features are game are very intensive for a GPU.

Obviously the x300 ain't a top of the line card, not even close, but if you're playing any of those games that they benchmarked and are willing to turn down the quality and some of the most graphically intensive options on a game you can get an acceptable experience for occasional gaming.

But as I've said before, if you're buying a laptop with the intention of doing primarily gaming you're buying the wrong type of system. Laptops are not gaming machines. But for someone who uses a laptop and wants to play a game or two on the side the x300 should be perfectly adequate so long as you don't max out your settings and expect to be dazzled.

If you want a pretty graphics show, buy a desktop with the new 64-bit Pentium 4, 2GB of RAM, and a GF 6800 Ultra. It will cost you less than the Dell inspiron 6000d or almost any other laptop too.

 

so much hostility... [ ]

It shows that the x300 and 9700M can hold their owns for the time being but don't expect any real great graphics. Coupled with a higher end system, these cards will be able to play Doom 3, Half Life 2 and Frycry but don't expect great detail or speed.

*Dell Inspiron 9200, P-M 2.1ghz 400mhz FSB, 1 GB Ram 333mhz, 60gb 7200rpm HD, 128 ATI M Radeon 9700 (OC: 485/270), XP Pro SP2, Wifi + Bluetooth*

*Sony MDR-G74SL Headphones for music and gaming, best 40 dollar pair i have ever bought!*

 

LOL? If ya gonna pull something out of your rear, at least make sure the sh** doesn't stink so much... [8)]

First of all, all those are desktop systems, I do not even see a card that's equivalent to a 9600 on that list. In case you do not know, the ATI 9500 Pro is actually a FASTER card than the ATI 9600, the 9500 Pro has 8 pipes while the 9600 only has 4! The *ONLY* card on that list that has 4 pipes is the x300SE.

Secondly, I only see the x300SE on there. Do you have ANY idea what that desktop card is? No, of course you don't, you see the number and just assumes it's comparable, right? The desktop x300SE has its GPU clocked at 325mhz(vs. the Mobility x300's 350mhz), and the x300SE has its memory clocked at an *astonishing* 200mhz (vs. the Mobility x300's 300mhz). Oh, did I mention that the "SE" only has 64bit memory path whereas the x300 has 128bit?

So, basically you are comparing the CRIPPLED version of the x300 to cards offering twice the # of pipes and say that by comparison the x300 sucks. Well DUH? We are talking Mobile computing here right? Lets compare the x300 to the popular m9700 instead -- wouldn't that make more sense? The fact is, the Mx300 is only *marginally* slower than the m11 part, and in fact, the x300 OUTPERFORMS the m11 on some of the newer, more bandwidth intensive tests.

So, like on that same website, they did a review of the x300SE and has some numbers of the x300 as well... see these doom3 numbers?

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/powercolor-x300se_6.html

yes? OK, lets compare them to the mobility 9700's shall we?

http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=3&var1=162&var2=0

WOW, holy crap 2 frames difference! yes this card sux, then again so does the m9700. But hey lots of ppl are perfectly happy with THAT one! It must be the bigger model number then -- cuz 9700>300, and that probably added at least 10% performance increase!

that's enough misinformation for one night I think,

cheers,

yass

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by AdamMD

 

Someone over on notebookforums.com finally benched his 6000d w/ 128mb x300 and here's what he got: 3dmark05: 964

hope this clears up any confusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by deheinx
I ran 3D Mark 05 Pro and the score was 964.

At last! We have a benchmark for the X300! People have been speculating forever.

X300 = 964
MR9700 = 1432
go1400 = 2688
MR9800 = 2733
go 6800 ultra = 5242

 

Well what do those benchmarks mean in actual framerates?

I'd like to see some framerate comparisons over some score #s I know not how to read.

 

Those numbers... what settings were they run on? Are they all equal across the different machines? i.e. same res?

Cuz i've seen x300 numbers mostly in the 700s, and the m9700 to be anywhere from 500s to 900s...

cheers,

yass

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by AdamMD

 

Damn, that sucks to hear. Anyway, im downloading 3dmark 2005 tonight and ill run it tomorrow, ill post up my results to see how i fair. Ill try to start a thread so everyone can add in and we can see the comparison between like systems with different configurations.

*Dell Inspiron 9200, P-M 2.1ghz 400mhz FSB, 1 GB Ram 333mhz, 17inch WSXGA+ Screen, 60gb 7200rpm HD, 128 ATI M Radeon 9700 (OC: 485/270), XP Pro SP2, Wifi + Bluetooth*

*Sony MDR-G74SL Headphones for music and gaming, best 40 dollar pair i have ever bought!*

 

DeathMOJO what about the test about your X300? have you already done it? ... has anyone try to use it with AUTOCAD INVENTOR or SolidWorks? how does it work? ... what about the general performance about your CPU, RAM, HDD, and VIDEO on running several applications at the same time? ... thanks a lot in advance

 

Hi,

I was looking in the net for informations about the performance of mobility radeon X300 (128M) vs mobility radeon 9700 (128M) and I ended up in this fórum. Just when I was sure that X300 was the successor of 9200 with lower performance than 9700, that uses hypermemory so it has only 32M of local memory, sharing the rest (up to 128M) with the system….now I’m confused!

I’m not a gamer like you are. I just want a notebook with a good definition for some DVD playing and that I don’t get tired after a while working (I thought that 9700 would have a better “image refresh”?? – 450MHz core clock and 1800 mTexels/s??).

So, maybe you can help me on my choice. I have two options for my budget:

1- Intel Pentium M 745 (chipset 855GME), front side bus 400MHz (2 MB)
512MB DDR RAM
ATI mobility radeon 9700 (128 MB dedicated)
80 GB HDD

2 – or the new Intel Pentium M 740 (chipset 915PM, front side bus 533MHz (2 MB)
512MB DDR RAM
ATI mobility radeon X300 (128 MB)
60 GB HDD

Thanks for your help
[ ]