ATI mobility Radeon 9200 v/s Nvidia Geforce go 6100 (integrated)

guys....I want to know which one is better for a casual gamer like me....coz condition zero gives nearly same performance for both....was installing nfs monst wanted..

 

The 6100 would be a better option, it's newer and more powerful. Out of curiosity, which laptop are you looking at that offers a MR 9200?

 

I would LOVE to know that myself! they havent sold those since late 2004 !

 

my older laptop has ATI MB 9200...hp presario x1000 ... newer laptop is f500 series...it has geforce 6100 ...i am looking forward to play some fps games...would 6100 be good enough for directx 9.0c shader 3 supported games? ..even if it runs on 800X600 i am good... games like rainbow six vegas etc, fear, lost planet????

 

I believe it has full hardware support for DX9.0c, yes. However, you'll have to expect to play the games at very low settings, and likely at 800x600 or below to get smooth gameplay. It really depends on the game. For more info look here:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3591

 

I wouldn't recomend either of those solutions for the games you want to play. I would suggest a much more powerful graphics card, minimum Geforce 7300 but preferably a lot better.

 

beautiful article....so i have some hope..hehe...well..thanks

 

even a 7300 will severely struggle in R6 vegas, I'd say no less than an MR HD2600XT or 8600mGT, not even a 7600GT or X1600 can run that game playable on minimum settings in 640x480.

 

ic....anyway...i have a desktop pc too...so will put a new graphic card there ....but the processor chip is not dual core...can the processor chip be upgraded like the RAM ?

 

Yes and no. Yes the chip can be upgraded, but the question is how far can it be upgraded. I recommend that you post your desktop specifications in our Desktop Hardware forum and then ask for suggestions on what to upgrade. It may or may not be worth it to upgrade.

 

Were you being serious while writing this? Because it sounds like BS. The 7600GT or X1600 Should be more than enough to run any game at minimum settings in 640x480

 

btw how is R6 lockdown as a game? its compatible with 6100 although not recommended

 

i agree with fabarati.

Also the go7400/x1400 are very capable of playing new games at minimum settings and ok resolution 800x600 or 1024x768 and that is Stalker and Oblivion and supreme commander and R6 vegas is alot less demanding game

 

http://www.behardware.com/articles/653-9/entry-level-graphic-cards-and-integrated-chipsets.html

Read through that, apparently the poster was being serious. I don't have any experience with that game, but from the tests at that link it appears to be very demanding.

 

Wooow. That's one crappily ported game. But the 7600 GS or x1300 XT can play it in low quality 640x480.

 

Well the same developers Ubisoft...
was having the exact same problem with GRAW
a very poorly coded game

differnce in framerates between 1280x800 with everything on max

vs 800x600 with everything on minimum was under 10FPs

Again nothing to do with superb graphics but developers fault

 

Yeah, but remember that those are the desktop cards.

 

Isn't the go7600 faster than 7600 GS? That's just something that I read somewhere. And that the Mobility X1600 is about the same as a X1600 desktop.

 

I'm pretty sure the 7600GS is about 25% faster than the Go7600, and the x1600 Pro is around the same as the mobility x1600 (though the x1600XT is again about 25% faster than the MR version). So by saying that the 7600GS and the X1300XT can play it at low settings and res, you're saying you need a Go7700/8600M-GS or an x1600/x1700 minimum.

 

That just feels wrong. A go7600/x1600 should be better than that on a game released in late 2006. It is better than that in pretty 2007 games (bioshock).

 

Yeah, I know. I guess it's just an extremely poorly coded game.

 

Well, it's a Xbox360 game, so they just didn't port it very well. This happens (like GR:AW).