14 inch graphic card

what 14 inch laptop has the 8600gt ddr3 or the hd2600 ddr3.
i have only found the asus f8sv right now to be good

is this a good deal? it has the ddr3 8600gt http://cgi.ebay.com/ASUS-F8SV-A1-14...yZ114205QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

Looks like a damn nice deal if you ask me. I didn't know it was even possible to get a 8600M GT in a 14".

 

its not ddr3. its ddr2

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=189437

the clock frequencies for ddr2 = 400 whereas ddr3 = 700

 

www.zepto.com

several 14.1" gaming lappys with 8600m gt

 

Zepto also have ddr2 in theirs laptop

 

The Zeptos are indeed GDDR2.

 

There are no 128-bit GDDR3 8600M-GT or HD2600 14.1" laptops in existence to the best of my knowledge, and believe me, I've looked. The best options are the Zepto 6224w/6324w or the Asus F8SV with the DDR2 8600M-GT, or the Thinkpad T61p with the 64-bit GDDR3 8600M-GT.

 

eww, playing games on 14 inch?! i think that size is meant for web browsing and typing up papers for school ;p

 

i have external 23" monitor. i want 14 so i can take it to class when i need it

 

the Asus F8SA has a 512MB HD2600, but I'm pretty sure it's GDDR2. You aren't going to find any GDDR3 memory in a 14" notebook.

On another note I just bought the F8SA from newegg for $1200, pretty good deal if you ask me.

 

I play games with my 14 incher. Its fun and feels good.

 

Who cares about DDR3 memory.

A 8600GT on a 14 inch notebook is amazing. Great deal too!

 

whaddya mean who cares? theres a pretty large difference between the DDR2 and GDDR3 versions of the 8600m gt, the GDDR3 version is about 30% faster.

 

@narsail:
No, it is something between 10-20%. Which in the real games will mean 3-5 extra fps.

 

Yeah, but to be honest the DDR2 card at native 1280x800 on a 14.1" screen will still look better than a GDDR3 card at 1440x900 or 1680x1050 on a 15.4" screen.

 

How do you figure that odin?

 

Well, on the F8 he's looking at native resolution is 1280x800, which the DDR2 8600M-GT can handle at pretty dang good settings in most games. However for something like the MBP (1440x900) or the G1s (1680x1050) you'd be looking at either lower settings and native resolution, or lowering the res. And if you lower the res your image resolution (in dots per inch) will be lower since than that of the F8, since it's a bigger screen. Hence worse image quality.

Of course, if you have an external monitor or don't mind non-native res, the point is moot.

Nope, at stock clocks the difference is right around 30% on average, from all the tests I've seen.

 

@Odin:
Are you mentioning 3dMark06? That value is in fact 30% higher for the GDDR3. Also, on which screen resolution?

 

Nope, I'm talking about the gaming performance comparisons I've seen, notably CS:S stress test, FEAR benchmark, and the varied Crysis performance reviews I've read.

Resolution is 1280x800.

 

@Odin:
That's funny, I have always heard that the 3dMark is not a reliable benchmark, that 1000 points in the 3dMark06 are not that big difference, and now it happens the contrary, or rather I would say the same... if you have any links to these comparisons I would really apppreciate that, I remember looking at a thread mentioning the increase in performance was 10-20%, I will also look at that and its sources.

 

If you really want links, I can try to find them, but these conclusions have been gathered from reading many, many threads in this and other forums. I've never seen a great comprehensive head to head comparison of the two cards, so you have to sort through a bunch of data to draw conclusions.

As for 3dmark06, it's pretty dang accurate when comparing two cards that only differ in one area (in this case, memory clock speed).

 

lozango: Its definitely 25-30%, I don't feel like finding links though sorry.

 

Re: One take on the DDR2 vs GDDR3 8600m gt

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seijun
How will the performance of the DDR2 differ from DDR3 on a WXGA (1280x800) screen? Anybody know?

There will probably be about a 10-15% performance difference in most games, maybe more if you're using memory-intensive textures or shading/lighting.
__________________

@Odin: That's what I was talking about, at higher resolutions or AA the difference will come out.

 

Yeah, it will be more visible, but from everything I've seen even at WXGA w/no AA, it's still 25-30% or so (i.e. the difference between 30fps and 38fps or so).

 

@ Odin: Ok, then there is some misunderstanding. The quoted text I put above is one of your answers from this thread: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=147708

Did you find something in these 3 months that made you change your opinion?

 

Yeah, at that time I hadn't seen results from games like Bioshock and Crysis. It seems the current generation of games are more susceptible to the memory clock difference, though perhaps that's partly due to the fact that these cards (8600M's) are barely powerful enough to handle them anyway.

For older, more traditional FPS type games the 10-15% figure is more accurate.