??'s about Fire GL V5200

Just wanted some feedback on the fire GL V5200 256MB GDDR3 dedicated memory. In the GPU comparision chart it is stated that many cards that have, for example, 128MB of memory don't have the architecture to use its total memory. I also remember someone writing that a gpu as the x1400 with 128mb dedicated, can't really go beyond the dedicated memory into the Hmemory because of its limitations as a graphics card. My questions are:

Is the Fire GL v5200 built well enough to use all 256MB of memory if necessary and though it is primarily designed for high end applications, will it (i am assuming yes) function equally as well for some good gaming?

znet

 

The V5200 is based off an X1600; that's a very fast card, but can't use all of the 256MB of dedicated memory. It can use a lot more than 128MB though, so the 256MB is effective. The V5200 can play games fine, although it is desgined as more of a workstation card.

 

What Chaz said. But yea, if you're gaming better to go with a standard x1600.

 

Though is is a workstation designed card, am I correct in saying that the v5200 would still be a step up from the x1400 with 128mb dedciated and 384 hyper (which I understand it can't really use) for a total of 512mb...even when it comes to gaming?? Also, though the x1400 is limited and has only 128 dedicated ram compared to the v5200, is there any reason why it might be better than the v5200 for gaming itself seeing as it is designed for that purpose. I have the option of the x1400 (128mb ded and 348mb hypermemory for 512mb total or the Fire GL at 256 dedicated). Which would you choose. Both working with 1.5GB RAM and a core duo 2ghz.


Though I don't have the option of the x1600, I was still wondering what makes the x1600 better for gaming itself (structurally) that might lack in the v5200. Also, can you explain what a unified grahics engine is? The fire gl is the first place that I have seen that listed.


This is all a real great help.

thx
znet

 

Yes, the V5200 would be much faster than the X1400. HyperMemory is, in reality, just a marketing term - a cheap way for manufacturers to advertise a product with more than it has. Shared memory is in no way, shape, or form a substitute for real dedicated memory.

I would go for the V5200 without a doubt. As for the term "unified graphics engine," I haven't heard that before either.

 

So you don't see the V5200 not being able to play any games based on the fact that it is design for applications primarily?

I read somewhere that it is not good for gaming. But as it is that or the x1400 (I need to purchase a T60 for other reasons), and since the graphic choices are x1400 or v5200, I want to make sure that the v5200 will play since the graphics part of the computer will be used more for gaming than for applications.

Also, is it likely to play older simulator games as MS Flight Sim 2000 and the original Korea F/A 18, or will the new GL technology not be compatiable with the older gaming technology?

a great help.

thx chazman

 

You shouldn't have any problems with older games; newer games should be the same case. You may run into compatability problems on some games because the FireGL may not be supported.

According to what I have heard and seen, the FireGL V5200 isn't exactly as fast as the X1600 in gaming, but it is close enough (about 900 pts off in 3DMark05). However, it will be signifigantly faster than the Radeon X1400 either way.

 

take a look at this review of the t60p:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2864&Review=Lenovo+ThinkPad+T60p

it has benchmarks comparing the firegl to the x1400 and the x1600.

 

Thank you.

yes, Chazman, I have noticed that the 1600 scores higher on benchmarks and the x1400 lower with respect to the v5200 and unfortunately one can't find specific game ratings for the non consumer gpus. I think all this will help me make up my mind, though.

znet

 

Has anyone tried the normal drivers for the 5200 and then benchmarked it?

I was wondering if it could get the same numbers as the X1600 if it were using these drivers.

What about overclocking it?

 

Omega drivers do give a boost. As for overclocking, not all tools that can overclock Radeon cards can recognize the FireGL properly and overclock it. I think I heard someone mention that he successfully overclocked his FireGL V5200 using PowerStrip, but ATITool didn't work. Situation may improve with newer versions of the drivers and tools.

 

so everyone here knows a LOT more about me in terms of these gfx cards... I'm wondering, as a casual gamer and future college student (i.e. less time to play games ) and my most graphics intensive game currently is between Doom3, Far Cry, CS:S or BF2, should I really spend the extra $200 to get a FireGL? Right now, I'm torn between the T60, model #200763U, and the T60p, model #2623D8U. I know the T60p comes with WWAN, but that's not necessarily important to me. Are there any other major differences? Also, the NBR review of the T60p with the Radeon said that it would play Doom3 at medium settings just fine... would this also apply to the 14.1" screen model (with Radeon or FireGL?) There shouldn't be a difference, right? Finally, is the 14.1 screen FlexView as well?

 

AGUPTAWEB,
I've heard, though cannot confirm because I haven't tried it, that the FirelGL (256 mb) in the T60P will run Doom 3 smoothly. I have heard though that the FireGL, being workstation GPU, sometimes does run into problems when it comes to gaming.

Hope this helps.

znet

 

AMURAIVEL,
I believe that, according to NBR of the T60P by Mandrake; http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2864&Review=Lenovo+ThinkPad+T60p
the FireGL v5200 scored a 3dmark of 3200+ with its native drivers.

znet