555M GT, how good is it really?

I'm stuck between the Sager NP5165, NP8130 and NP8150, and it all comes down to the graphics card. 555M GT vs. 460M GTX vs. 6970m (too poor for 485M GTX).

Now, I'm not that concerned about how good it looks, more about how well it runs. But, I am very much looking forward to Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim, and would like to play something like the Witcher 2 on this laptop, as well as future games. However, the one major advantage of the 555M GT is Optimus, which saves a whole lot of battery power, as I will be using this for class as well.

So, I ask you, is the 555M good enough? Or is there a switchable graphic solution for the 460M GTX or 6970m that isn't on an alienware (Either already out, or coming out sometime this summer)? Because I'd go for the upper level cards without a doubt if there was a switchable graphic solution for them, even if I'd have to wait a bit of time for it to come out.

 

Well, the first question you should ask yourself, if you intend to really use this laptop in class, is: Will a laptop with 460m/6970m have sufficient battery life for me to comfortably use it in that situation? If no, then that should make the decision easy (while maybe not too pleasant). The option would be waiting and see what comes out, but that could be a long, long wait.

edit: As for performance on coming games it's hard to say. You could read/ask in the alienware&dell-forums and see how people with the 555m and experiencing different games(e.g. witcher 2) if you can't find that information.

 

The gaming performance of the GT 555M isn't that great.

It's right at the minimum GPU requirement for The Witcher 2, and probably will be for Skyrim and many games going forward, as well.

If high performance in the future of gaming matters to you, take the NP8150 w/ 6970M. Even without switchable graphics, it pulls close to 3 hours.

 

Yeah, the 8130 and 8150 motherboards don't support optimus, they can't. They have a bigger battery than the 5165 that partially makes up for the lack of optimus and the power hog gpus, but the 5165 still has way more battery life.
The 5165 does support optimus.

Seems like no manufacturer support optimus on the 460 (except maybe alienware).

560m are coming out really soon, i checked MSI's coming laptop page and they don't list optimus for their model.

There's some comparable HP model with 6770m (similar to 555 performance) you should look at, err.. i forgot the model

 

A 6970 is basically twice the card of the 6770 or 555m and still considerably faster than the 460M.

If gaming is your think the 6970 is going to be a winner.

 

It depends on what you intend to do with it and which 555M you are talking about. That card is one of the contenders for the title of "most variety of hardware under the same name". Nvidia itself lists two different completely different chips with different memory types, different memory bus widths, different numbers of shaders and different clock speeds. The only thing these have in common is that they work out to roughly the same performance (not exactly, but close). However, if that wasn't bad enough, there is apparently a third variety of the card. It's similar to the DDR3 version on Nvidia's site, but crippled with a 128-bit bus. I think that's what the NP5165 actually uses so beware: that machine is probably not going to be very good at high resolutions.

Regarding the other two: they'll be OK for moderate gaming. As long as you are willing to put up with medium settings, you should be fine in most games. If you want to max things out, go with the 6970M -- you're not getting much battery life out that and it won't be very portable, but it'll play games.

There's also the HP Pavilion d6t Quad-Core which has the 6770M. It's appears to be slightly better than the 555M at medium-high settings.

 

The 128 bit performs nearly the same as the 192 bit version.

 

GDDR5 version with 128-bit bus actually has a higher clocked GPU and higher overall memory bandwidth than the DDR3 192-bit bus, 50.2 vs. 43.2. Interesting. Faster clocks FTW!

 

But its based off the same core as the GT540M and below with 96 shaders and less ROPs.

It needs those higher clocks to match the shader performance of the 144 core version, it will also be more limited in other areas of the core.

 

Yes, but on the other hand, it has more memory bandwidth (don't know how they overclock though). I think the GDDR5 and the 192-bit DDR3 are comparable, but the third one is bad. Here are the two different DDR3 versions. Both have 144 shaders, 2GB of DDR3 memory and are clocked at 590/900/1180.

1) The Nvidia one in the M14x. This has 24 ROPs and a 192-bit bus with 43.2 GB/s bandwidth.

2) The crippled one in the NP5165. This only has 16 ROPs and a 128-bit bus with 28.8 GB/s bandwidth.

The second one definitely drew the short straw -- that's almost 9600M GT bandwidth right there...

 

144 shaders, 24 ROPs, 192bit DDR3 (1.5GB or 3.0GB) GF106
144 shaders, 16 ROPs, 128bit DDR3 (1.0GB or 2.0GB) GF106
96 shaders, 4 ROPs, 128bit GDDR5 (1.0GB or 2.0GB) GF108

These are your options.

Also yes the 96 shader version has 4 Rops, just like the rest of the GF108 chips.

That means with the higher clocks it has 1/5th of the pixel output of the 144 shader version.

 

MSI's GT780R has 144 shaders, 128-bit GDDR5. ROPS unknown.

This version should end up being the fastest.

 

The mem controllers are in with the ROPs so it will have 16 which is still enough IMO.

A 555M with 16 rops, 128bit GDDR5 and 144 shaders is actually interesting.

 

Eh, now I'm reading in the MSI forum, that the GT780R is now using the GTX 560M. I guess the GT 555M was only in the pre-production model.

 

That was for the GX780R. Anyway does anyone here know what version the Lenovo Y570P use?? It has 1gb VRAM so it has to either be the ddr3 crippled version or the GDDR5 one.
Also how much of an improvement are we talking about with the GDDR5 version in terms of benchmarks(3d mark vantage specifically). Also how much of a downgrade with the 128bit ddr3 version from the 192 bit one.

 

There isn't going to be an advantage with the GDDR 5 since the ROP's got tanked to like 4 and the Shaders down to 96. Sure it has faster bandwidth, but that version has been severely crippled in pixel rendering. Ouch!

 

Depends on settings you like to run your games at.. if you are comfortable at medium settings then a 555 should suit you fine. But if you want ultra then obviously 6970 would be your best option of the listed. What are you willing to give up for the other?

 

No, it does not. It has 16 ROPS just like the other 128-bit variety. See here.

 

I'm sorry but in this case I don't trust GPU-Z.

If they truly are using the same core then there are a couple of issues:

1. A higher mem clock than the 460M.

The 460M memory is limited by the core voltage IIRC since it's the onboard mem controller limiting the speed of the ram. This would mean the core voltage is higher than the 460M which would generate a lot of heat.

2. A higher core clock than the 460M.

Same problem as above, disabling shaders does not affect power consumption all that much and having a higher core clock than the 460M would mean its TDP is higher than that of a 460M.

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

Now this is not certain evidence by any means, but I am going to need more than a GPU-Z photo that clearly does not support it yet.

I would want a photo of the actual die used in the machine or a ROP specific test being run.

 

How do you think a 192-bit 555m pushing 1600x900 would compare performance wise to an 8800GT pushing 1680x1050? Buying a laptop and really don't want it to be a step down performance wise from my 3+ year old desktop...

 

GPU-Z is not reading it incorrectly. The 96 shader version is based from the same core as the GT 500M and 400M.

The 192-bit GT 555M is about 10% faster than the 8800 GT.

 

Awesome! Thanks!

 

Ah its reporting the ROPs wrong on all of them, should report that.