Both 64mb SDRAM video cards

My current notebook I have been using is a Sony PCG-R505ESP and I installed Windows 2000 Pro since it runs smoother. What came with my notebook is Windows XP Pro. But anyways I was always wondering about this but my video card on my notebook is a Intel 82830M and it is a 64mb SDRAM. Now why if a desktop PC that has very similar specs as this notebook and has the same amount of mb for the video ram runs my games like Quake 3 Arena better? My desktop PC has a PNY GeForce 4 MX 420 AGP and it has 64mb SDRAM. My notebook also has 64mb SDRAM so why doesn't both play and run the same?

 

VRam has very little to do with performance. An integrated Intel card has no real processing power, where as a discrete card does.

 

Well, the ammount of memory means almost NOTHING when it comes to performance... In the laptop you have a Integrated Graphics Processors (Intel 82830M) while in the desktop you have a Dedicated Graphics Processors (GeForce 4 MX 420 AGP)...

The IGP use memory from the RAM while the DGP have it's own memory modules and higher clocks, hence, performing way better...

The IGP's aren't meant for gaming... Read This

 

It is not about the video RAM, but the graphics chip itself. Your notebook has an Intel integrated chip which is not a gaming solution. Your notebooks graphics chip is just not powerful enough hardware wise. Your desktop on the other hand has a discrete graphics card which has a more powerful core (shaders, clocks, etc).

 

I remember I put the GeForce 4 MX 420 video card on a 700Mhz machine and it played Quake 3 Arena much better then my notebook did even my notebook is alot faster than my old desktop was. So does that mean that just because the Intel 82830M video card isn't as good as the GeForce 4 MX 420 my games on my notebook won't play as well as the desktop PC can? I mean my old desktop was alot older than my notebook so I think it is strange that just because the video card it make my games run better on my older machine.

 

Your laptop might be newer than your desktop, but your desktop has a much faster GPU. Note that the GPU in your laptop probably supports more and newer graphical technologies than your desktop GPU, and therefore might render games in a more impressive way, but it lacks the raw processing power of the desktop GPU, resulting in a drop in frame rate.

Since games are heavily GPU dependent, putting a fast GPU in an old PC will provide you with a significant boost in gaming performance.

 

When I first install a game called UT 2004 on my notebook I know that when I first time run the game it checks the video card and other specs to see what is the best settings for the game. But the thing is if it automaticaly sets to run in 32 bit color and have some items checked for the graphics does that mean it will play and run fine with the auto detect settings? I did play the game with the settings that it automaticaly set but I noticed it's a little laggy.

 

Is the GeForce 4 MX 420 video card way better than a Intel 82830M even both are 64mb? When you say my notebooks GPU is better do you mean that my notebooks video card is better than the GeForce 4 MX 420 video card that is on my older machine?

 

Yes, the GeForce is Better, no matter if both 64MB, in fact, even if the intel was 128Mb the GeForce will still be better... Like we told you already, the Intel is an INTEGRATED GRAPHICS PROCESSOR... It's made to render simple video things and the windows interface, not meant for games... So, it doesn't matter if you actual laptop have way better processor or memory than your old desktop, FOR GAMES YOU NEED A DEDICATED VIDEO CARD (for example the GeForce 4) Games Depend on Graphic Cards, that's the most important hardware when it comes to gaming...

Your notebook GPU might be newer (supporting newer technology) but like Budding said it doesn't have the RAW power of a DEDICATED VIDEO CARD, thus it will perform worse...

 

How about this question I was asking? Basicaly I needed to know that even if the game detets the settings do I need to lower the settings like the color to 16 bit. Or is it fine with the auto detected settings.



"When I first install a game called UT 2004 on my notebook I know that when I first time run the game it checks the video card and other specs to see what is the best settings for the game. But the thing is if it automaticaly sets to run in 32 bit color and have some items checked for the graphics does that mean it will play and run fine with the auto detect settings? I did play the game with the settings that it automaticaly set but I noticed it's a little laggy"

 

If there was the same Intel 82830M video card but that is a dedicated card for desktops will the GeForce 4 MX 420 card still be better even if both are 64mb?

 

Don't rely on auto detect settings... If the game lags, use lower settings (resolutions and quality)... Sometimes it will auto detect settings over your actual posibilities, and sometimes it will set the thing lower than what you can use... For example, when i play Call of Duty 4 the game auto detects everything on Medium at 800x600 resolution... I can play the game without lag at everything HIGH at 1400x900... So those auto detect settings aren't reliables at all...

Umm depends... Like we told you, the memory isn't the most important thing... The clock speeds are... For example, a Geforce 8600 with 512 MB isn't even close to a GeForce 8800 with 320 Mb... Why? Because the 8800 has higher clocks

 

Are Intel graphic cards good as GeForce cards like if both are low end cards will they both play games the same in general? I' am just seeing if Intel cards are good cards like GeForce cards.

 

I do know that games like Unreal Tournament 2004 wasn't designed to play in a newer PC that came after the game. But if you have a PC that is the time when the game was made or that is older then it should auto detect the right settings. But somereason when I play Unreal Tournament 2004 even my PC was made about the same time the game was made or even before the game was made it still sorta little bit lags on the auto detect settings so that is strange. I talked to one tech guy long time agao and they said that when you have a system that is newer than the game was made then the auto detect settings don't detect right.

 

No... Intel make Integrated Graphics Processors to render the Windows interface and some video, but not for gaming... Geforce Graphics Processors (Dedicated ones) are meant for Games so they will outperform the intel IGP...

Now if you compare the intel with a INTEGRATED GRAPHICS PROCESSOR from Nvidia (Geforce 6150 for example) they might be similar in performance...

 

Again, that's false... take this as example... When a game is about to be released, the game developers publishes the "SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS"... Very often they give "Minimum System Requirements" and alot of people plays the game with even lower hardware... So those "auto detect settings" are the same... Means nothing... Just try the game, and if it lags, lower the settings... if it's running flawessly, try higher settings and see if it's still smooth

 

The intel extreme graphics is quite old, it get trounced by any decent dedicated graphic card, hell even a geforce 2( which the gf4 mx is) destroy it performance wise...

 

I was thinking but if the Intel cards are old then why even todays notebooks have Intel graphic cards? Are Intel graphic cards that bad meaning not good as other notebook video cards?

 

Is there a way that I can upgrade my notebooks video card so I can play games better? My notebook is a Sony PCG-R505ESP

 

You can't upgrade you graphic card. Today laptops use today intel IPG are they are better than the previous one. And as long as you are not gaming, they do what they are supposed to.

 

Moral of the story, research research and research BEFORE you buy.

 

Can todays notebooks Intel graphic cards play todays games then? In this case since my notebook is older I just have to play older games like I have been playing since the games I' am playing were made around when my notebook was made.

 

The INTEL INTEGRATED GRAPHICS aren't made for gaming, PERIOD... No matter if they are released today, they won't play any actual game at high quality/resolution... If you wanna game in a laptop, get one with a DEDICATED video card (8600M GT and above if Nvidia, 2600 HD XT and above if ATI)

 

Intel Integrated Graphics isn't a graphic CARD in the first place. Laptops are made with Intel Graphics because they are sufficient to run your OS (Vista, XP) and are totally fine for someone who is not going to use heavy 3D apps ie. video games. If back in the day when you bought your laptop and bought it for gaming then you were really really wrong. Don't buy an Integrated Graphics solution if you plan on gaming.

 

Well my notebook back then cost around close to $4,000 when I got it so I was expecting to be the top line notebooks for anything like gaming and watching DVDs and Music etc.

 

It might be true if it's a DELL or AW but SONY. =))
Sorry, I don't have anything against SONy but it's just SONY laptop isn't made for gaming IMO. They're too thin to handle the heat and you pay a premium price for the stylish part instead of performance.

 

So you judge a notebook's performance by its price? Expensive notebook = high end notebook? You've gotta research a lot more than that my friend. Sony notebooks are always expensive even for not much. People complain a lot about Alienware premiums but at least with Alienware you're getting something, with Sony you don't seem to get much for the high price.

 

To be honest i don't see that laptop costing 4 grands even when it was new, unless you bought it in a country where companies OVERCHARGES customers (ALOT)...

Anyway, if you wanna game, buy a new one (of course, if you can) with at least a 8600M GT (for 1300$ you can get a gateway with an 8800M GTS)...

One thing, small laptops aren't good for gaming, so if you expect to play new titles in a laptop, be ready to buy at least a 15'' pc...

And last but not least, even if you buy a TOP of the LINE laptop today, it won't be good in 3 years from now... So don't expect to expend 4K in a laptop and get a ULTIMATE GAMING MACHINE for 3~4 years, that won't happend, not even with desktops...

 

Well actualy I can't remember how much did my notebook cost exactly I just think and remember it was at least between $3,000 - $4,000. I know it was a top line Sony notebook when I got it since it had Windows XP Pro and most others had XP Home still. Plus it has a DVD and a CD Burner combo and wireless LAN and 40 gig hard drive and so much more features. I really liked my notebook for years but I never knew that my graphic card was that bad since I was assuming since it was top of the line Sony notebook it would have a great graphic card since as you know 64mb is alot for old machine. When I first got it it only had 256mb ram and the video card was only 32mb but when I added another 256mb and made it to 512mb then my video card went to 64mb and I was like WOW that time it was alot of mb for a notebook. I always like Sony stuff like headphones and TV etc so I thought that Sony notebook were the best back then so then I got the PCG-R505ESP and it has a docking system plus alot of USB ports too. For an old notebook its really great. But I kinda wonder why didn't my notebook have a GeForce video card even it was top line.

 

Because it's Sony and overpriced.

 

Just how old are we talking about here? My old HP laptop (R.I.P. February 2008 ) cost me $1500 in August 2004 and had a 128MB Mobility Radeon 9600 and 512MB initial RAM (upgraded to 1 GB later on). Unless somebody well and truly ripped you off, your laptop must be either ancient or old and ultra-portable.

In either case, as multiple people have told you, it is not designed for gaming beyond stuff like Minesweeper.

 

I got this notebook around when XP Home and Pro first came out so it's probley around 2002 when I got it. So I would say my notebook is old since today is 2008. I was assuming my system was the greatest notebook ever for anything at that time. I' am even supprised that it plays games like UT 2004 even that was around 2 years later after my notebook came out. But it seems like you guys say that even my notebook is very high end back around 2002 it's still wasn't meant for games.

I am still using this notebook today since there is nothin wrong with it and still everything works and runs great. This is my only PC I have. I can say my notebook even plays The Sims 2 without no problem since I set the settings to low.

The notebook I had before this one was the Fujitsu E6540 and it was older since I got it around 1999 or 2000. It was one of the high end notebooks back then but I wasn't able to use it anymore since the DVDROM stoped working and the video card had some problems and the battery only lasted 2 min and it was empty. It had Win 98 SE on it and was able to run even Win 2000 Pro. I was able to make the ram go upto 512mb on that notebook too. But the video card back then was great since it was a ATI Rage Mobility and it had 8mb VRAM. But my newer Sony notebook I been using for long did cost more than my Fujitsu one did.

 

Before you buy a laptop you need to research.

Friendly piece of advise, avoid triple posting, just edit your first post

 

As of today, ANY Intel GPU is slower than ANY GPU by ATI or Nvidia. Just use that as a total and undeniable rule. Intel GPU's are for people who do not play games. They are cheaper and use less power. It doesn't matter that your Intel GPU is from 2008, because it is not for games, it is only for web pages and watching DVDs.

Here is a rule to remember: If you want to play games, do not get a computer with an Intel GPU. Get an Intel processor and a GPU from Nvidia or ATI.

 

I did notice this that when I had Windows XP before since my notebook came with XP I opened Windows Media Player 11 and when I play music on it and as you know they are graphic motion that are very colorful and it was lagging alot. I wounder why even if it's not a game it was lagging. I can say if something like that lags I guess of cource games will lag too. But if I set the graphic settings lower on my games then it will work right.

 

I' am guessing that the lag on Windows Media Player is because my Intel graphic card isn't that good like ATI or Nvidia.