1GB Nvidia GeForce GT 230M vs 1GB ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 4670

1GB Nvidia GeForce GT 230M vs 1GB ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 4670..... which is better? how much better(in percentage)?

thanks in advance

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=426732


search function ftw. or even, clicking on page 2 to see if it was asked recently.

 

ok that might've answered my 1st question. but wht about the second? how much better?

thx

 

how do you calculate percentage in "better-ness"? What if I said 30%?

It is 30% better in looks, performance, heat dissipation, 3dmark scores, and most of all cool-ness.

You'll need to be more specific. Here's a chart of specs:

Manufacturer ATI
Series Mobility Radeon HD 4000
Codename M96-XT
Pipelines 320 - unified
Core Speed * 675 MHz
Shader Speed * 675 MHz
Memory Speed * 800 MHz
Memory Bus Width 128 Bit
Memory Type GDDR3, DDR2, DDR3
Max. Amount of Memory
Shared Memory no
DirectX DirectX 10.1, Shader 4.1
Current Consumption 35 Watt
Transistors 514 Million
technology 55 nm

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-4670.13881.0.html

Manufacturer NVIDIA
Series GeForce GT 200M
Codename N10P-GE
Pipelines 48 - unified
Core Speed * 500 MHz
Shader Speed * 1100 MHz
Memory Speed * 800 MHz
Memory Bus Width 128 Bit
Memory Type GDDR2, GDDR3
Max. Amount of Memory 1024 MB
Shared Memory no
DirectX DirectX 10.1, Shader 4.1
Current Consumption 23 Watt
technology 40 nm
Features DirectX Compute Support (Windows 7), CUDA, OpenCL, HybridPower, PhysX
Notebook Size medium sized
Date of Announcement 15.06.2009
Information 158 Gigaflops

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-230M.17646.0.html

 

how much better in powerfulness in playing games or rendering hd vids.

 

It depends on what game you're playing and at what resolution and quality.

 

does it? If i play the same game(any game), same resolution...how much better?

 

Read any review for any GPU. You will see that each game has fluctations in performance with the same GPU. Some games favor (or scale better with) ATI cards, others nVidia. Also, while most games are GPU limited, some are CPU limited, which can affect the outcome.

 

I see.

btw, i envy ur internet speed....daaaaaaaamn

 

Here is an example at the same settings, comparing different cards in different games:

Fallout 3, the HD 4890 gets 45.9 vs. GTX 275 43.9 FPS on average

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/10/05/xfx_radeon_hd_4890_extreme_review/7

But in Ghostbusters, the HD 4890 gets 42.5 vs. GTX 275 43.9 FPS on average

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/10/05/xfx_radeon_hd_4890_extreme_review/5

In the first game ATI is better, but in the second nVidia is better. So, let us know what games you want to play and check out to see how that game performs btw similarly powered cards from the two companies. And my internet speed is b/c I'm living on campus.

 

i prefer getting a rough comparison by reading the 3dmark06...though it is not 100% accurate and is not the best of benchmarks, i prefer it. the ati 4670 gets ~8000 3dmark06 score...the gt240m get ~6000 3dmark06...so the ati4670 is ~25% more powerful than the nvidia gt240m.


Edit: oops i thought it was the gt240m....well the gt230m is weaker than the gt240m...so you get the rough idea...

 

thanks for the thorough and informative reply

 

damn your reply made it harder for me to choose between the the laptop im eying ......


thanks a lot

 

The gt230 is more than capable of playing games on high though depending on the resolution. Thats why listing your games is useful. I for example am opting for a 230 machine over a 4650 because the 230 comes in a 14" body (the sony cw line) that I really like for a good price. I know ASUS as a better 14" but don't like the feel (and the price) of that model very much. And none of the 15" laptops with those cards really caught my eye.

 

@Luke: What machines are those 3dmakr06 scores from though? If the CPUs are different, there should be a major deviation as 3dmark06 is CPU dependent. The Gt240M should actually perform similarly to the HD4670 from what I recall.

Idk why people persist on using 3dmark06(rather than say Vantage) for pure GPU performance as it is a CPU bound benchmark.

@OP: yes a precise list of games would be good. Also, if you have other preferences in your laptop purchase then perhaps you should fill out a FAQ and post it in the "What Notebook Should I Buy?" section. As said before, the HD4670 should be more powerful, but it's not really a deal break power difference. Games that are unplayable on a GT230M will still be unplayable on an HD4670 as they're in the same power level.

 

Dear kidney, it would be best for you to give us the details of the notebooks you're looking at, because it's about more than the GPU.

That said, unless there's a large disparity between the CPUs, I'd pick the 4670 equipped machine every time.

 

agreed.. a 4670 is way superior to a 230M.. could you tell us what are your 2 notebooks which u want to consider?

 

Wait...an HD4670 is way more powerful than...itself!? O_O

 

that is impossible, by definition of self.

however, he clearly meant the 4670 is better than the 230m, by quite a bit.

its actually a pretty easy choice.

 

i googled for 3dmar06 of these cards...yeah i know that cpu also plays a role but the results won't differ by a too large scale...i'm used to 3dmark06 scores...it's my way of comparing systems though i know it is not 100% accurate...

i think sean 473 meant the 4670 is superior to the 230m...

personally i would go with the 4670

 

It's not a huge difference though; both are still mid-range GPUs. Something that doesn't run on one will most likely not be able to run on another.

There is still a noticeable difference though, I'll agree to that.

 

Sorry, but the 4670 will NEVER get 8000 points.

 

what HD4670? the mobility hd4670 won't but the desktop will lol

 

I was actually eying the new Vaio CW190 build-to-order as well. I don't think you will actually see 25% difference between say 4650/4670 and GT 230M, not to mention GT 240M.

Here is some info from notebookcheck.net, and they can be iffy with benchmarks.

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4670 6842 3DMark score
Nvidia GeForce GT 240M 5857 3DMark score

This is 15% or so difference and I doubt we'd see that in games. Also, GT 230/240 are based on 40nm process and are from the desktop 200 series core, with about 22W use (and decent standby parameters). Personally, I like the ATI card better, but it's in more bulky laptops, and I think Nvidia has better notebook drivers.

 

Where did you get the 8000 3dmark06 score for 4670 from? some desktop review site? Mobility HD4670 will never be able to reach 8000, not even close, dude.

4670 will be more powerful than the 240M if they are equipped with same memory type, but the difference will be nowhere near as 25%, they are still in the same league.

 

hey sorry for the misinformation guys....i realised i took this info from a desktop card... According to oblomschik, the ati 4670 is ~15%more powerful....we can take these numbers as an approximation as i heard that notebookchek.net is not completely accuate..

 

http://it.enorth.com.cn/system/2009/09/17/004203954_04.shtml

This is from a Chinese website (I cannot read Chinese ), GT 240M GDDR3 3DMark06 score was 6540 at 1366 x 768.

If the benchmark do at 1280 x 800 and with faster CPU, we can expect GT 240M to score around 6.8K.
GT 230M will be a bit slower than GT 240M.

 

I meant that the 4670 is faster than Gt230M... if you really want a powerful card you're gonna need to look at NVDIA 9800 series or GTX260M or GTX280M or ATI 4000 series.

 

Hi first post here. I am looking for a laptop and the one that i am interested in actually getting is this one:

http://www.jbhifionline.com.au/computers-laptops/laptops/hp-dv6-2005tx-pavilion-15-notebook/466540

At that price range, there is nothing that sells in a retail store that comes close that i can find. Would this be a decent work/gaming work horse?

 

Wow, that's actually quite a reasonable price, especially considering that you are buying locally in Australia. Yes, that should play most current games at medium to high, and you'll find that it should last you a good 3 years of gaming at medium to high.

Next time, you should post this in the "What notebook should I buy?" section.

And also, welcome to the forums!

 

Sorry the reason that i posted in this thread was because this particular laptop has the GT230M.

After reading this thread, im a bit unsure of whether to get it or not, but yes the price is good.

 

If you base your decision purely on the graphics card, you are making a mistake. You have to live with the whole laptop and you'll spend a lot of time doing other things besides gaming.

I think the ATI 4650/70 beat the 240/230 but not by so much as you might think. In real life, will 3 fps matter? (Yes, in some exact situations it might, but 99% of the time probably not).

The GT230M is roughly the same as the 8700M GT and that was a very fine card. Other factors such as the resolution, drivers, memory type play a big role, but again, we all obsess way too much over what are relatively minor performance differences. At least I do -- and then I wipe the drool off my chin and come back to reality and get the best value machine that I know I'll be happy with and leave the sportster on the lot.

Sounds like you do like the unit with the 230M so I say go for it.

 

It looks like your eyeing the model I bought. First note is go for it! Its a sexy beast. It runs Mass Effect, Oblivion and Fallout three well on medium settings (I dont care about maxing graphics, onyl going by eyeball test). From the cw owners thread about benchmarks on my rig:


Just a note. I ran 3Dmark 06 on my laptop last night (but fell asleep LOL). Reran it this morning. I didn't full close the programs(avira backround protection was on, though not a actual scan of course) or touch the CPU/GPU. Got a 5659 score on 1280*768 (default setting on the free version). The CPU (p7450) seemed to really bottleneck the test than the GPU (230m).

 

Um on my XPS 1647 with i5 and the 4670 im getting 7880 on 3dmark at 1280.