Different Resolution.. ATI 200m x1400 Apples vs. Oranges

I have a bit of an odd question but I need to get an answer to see what I am getting into with a new laptop.

I am currently on a 1.8ghz Turion 64 system with integrated Xpress 200m graphics. The screen is a native 1280x800.

My question to you guys is, how will a Core 2 Duo laptop with an x1400 compare when gaming @ 1680x1050.

I know it is hard to compare these setups because they're not only different cpu's and different graphics cards, but I want to compare their performance at different resolutions.

Anyone who's had their hands on a lot of notebooks and have done any testing that might be able to offer some feedback, it'd be much appreciated.

Will games like Counter-Strike run better on the x1400@1680x1050 or x200@1280x800 ? I know the x1400 is a better card, but will the higher resolution of 1680x1050 put too much of a strain on it, and have it end up performing worse than the 200m @ 1280x800 ?

 

Even though the X1400 will run it on a higher resolution, but no integrated graphics cards can compete with a dedicated one. So get the computer with the ATI X1400 GPU.

 

It's not a debate of "which one to get" I am currently typing from my fathers Gateway 1.8ghz Turion64 200m laptop. I am buying one for myself. I was hoping to use this notebook as a watermark for how a x1400@1680x1050 would be. It's an option to get a 1680x1050 screen on the notebook I am looking at, and unfortunately that screen has better stats than the standard 1280x800 screen option. It's brighter and has better viewing angles. I am just afraid the higher resolution will kill the performance of the laptop at the cost of a small screen improvement.

 

Well, you can always game outside the monitors native resolution, which you'll probably have to on a lot of new games anyway. 1680x1050 is pushing it for an X1400 really, of course it depends what games you are playing. If we are assuming first person shooters then older titles will be fine, newer titles (Prey, FEAR, Quake 4, HL2) then no. RTS games should be fine though.

I've got an X1300 which is the model below the X1400, and RTS games play ok at 1280x800, FPS games less so, to give you an idea here are some games and the levels I play at;

FEAR - 1024x600 Low Detail (Widescreen Res)
Quake 4 - 800x600 Medium/Low Detail
HL2 - 1280x800 Low Detail
CoD2 - 1024x600 DX7 Mode
Sims 2 - 1280x800 Medium Detail
Star Wars Empire At War - 1280x800 Low/Medium Detail
Lego Star Wars 2 Demo - 1280x800 High Detail

 

is x1300 better than radeon 9700?

 

So you guys are gaming outside of native res .... do you have widescreen laptops? Because 800x600 isn't widescreen ....

I dunno, I guess I am afraid to have to game outside of native res after having tried it on my 19" Desktop LCD .. looks Terrrrible!

 

as long as its not too far off it will look okay, just not as crisp. its only when you cut it in half does it look horrable. when a screen is widescreen, but the res you are playing at is not then everything is streched out a bit, but it doesn't look awful.

 

From my experience with my x1400, I'm pettry sure you won't play any new game (FPS other no too graphic demanding will) on a native resolution (and I have a 1280x800) unless you do it at a very low detail. The only new games that's runs fine on native resolution and high detail is HL2 and source games.

 

Do you mean Mobility Radeon or Desktop Radeon? If Mobility then they are pretty much the same performance. If desktop then 9700 is quite a bit faster.

 

Yea x1400 is for playing your old favorits, unreal2k4, WoW (and the other mmorpgs out there), sports games (since most havnt even touched DX9 level of graphics yet), HL2, and even squeeking in some quake4. But youll be hard pressed to play games like fear, oblivion, and probably no luck in playing games based on unreal3 and crysis.

 

Eesh, you guys make me want to reconsider the Acer 5672wlmi to improve on graphics power a bit ... or save and spend more money haha!