8600M 512MB GDDR3 vs. 256MB GDDR2

I have a Dell Vostro 1500 on order, and probably only have about a day before I can cancel. After doing a little more reviewing of other notebook options, I can essentially get a Sager P2090 notebook with same config for $215 more except for the following two differences:

512MB GDDR3 vs. 256MB GDDR2 on 8600M GT video
Intel AGN Wireless vs. Dell G Wireless

Is there any real advantage of having the 512MB GDDR3 over the 256MB?

I am hoping to keep this laptop for a couple years as primarily desktop use, but do semi-frequent travel and like to do some gaming on the road, or for the occasional LAN gaming. I don't mind dropping the resolution down to 1280x800 (or 1024x768) so if I shouldn't see any real difference in performance at that resolution, then I'll just save the $215.

Thanks for any insight.

 

Doesn't both have the 8600GT DRR2? GDDR2 doesn't exist by the way, and the 128-bus 8600GT can;t utilize more then 256mb of VRam if I recall correctly.

 

In short yes very much, even a 256MB GDDR3 is better than the 256MB GDDR2.

Since GDDR3 is a faster memory than GDDR2.

However for your needs GDDR2 will also be sufficient

 

The NP2090 doesn't have GDDR3. It has DDR2. And the 512 is negligible, like coriolis said.

 

There is a 512MB RAM version of the 8600M GT in the Sager/Clevo and many other notebooks, and specs show them as GDDR2 or GDDR3:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8600M-GT.3986.0.html

Even the 8700M: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8700M-GT.3987.0.html

EDIT: But after checking again, I see the Sager has the DDR2 memory anyways. I swear I saw it with DDR3! I must be going nuts. Thanks for the insight!

 

Oh you will always see more performance. It's just that you can run higher settings with the former with equivalent framerates.

 

I believe the 8600GT in the Asus G1 is GDDR3.

 

Well, you will notice a big difference when playing at higher resolutions, such as 1900x1200 etc.

 

thats because it is.

 

LOL

the 8600gt can't handle 1900x1200 for most modern games due to the narrow 128bit bus

old games like hl2 and farcry = probably

bioshock or sup com = no no

 

Bioshock can play @ 1024x768 with medium setting

Don't wanna be a sony rootkit holder ,so i didn't try that game but my friend does.

 

I'm surprised you can't run Bioshock at 1024x768 with high settings. My 8800 GT on my desktop runs at 1920x1200 max settings all and runs smooth as silk. The 8600M running at that lower res seems like it should be able to run maxed out except for AA and Aniso.

 

Don't know about that.I never try the game due to secuRom ****

 

I actually run Bioshock maxed out 1280x1024 (and that was auto-settings) with a Sempron 3100+ and a 8600GT...


Oh and the 128bit bus killing it is just some bad rumors that were very popular because the first drivers sucked. In fact, benchmarks show that the 8600GT with GDDR3 1400 on a 128bit bus takes resolutions and AA BETTER than the 7800GTX 256MB (GDDR3 1200 on a 256bit bus) due to a very good shader usage on the GF8