GTX 680M vs GT 650M?

I'm thinking about getting a new laptop.
Money isn't an issue since I hardly ever spend it, thus I think I'm going to go with a custom pc site like xoticpc or something.

Now the question is, what are the main differences between the two gpu's?
I've read the specs, but they are kinda meaningless to me.
Bigger numbers usually mean better like 32 vs 8 gigs of ram, but for most people, 8 gigs is more than enough, so 32 is just pointless.

What I do:
-no hardcore gaming, I like to test some games out to see if they run, some Assassin'sCreed here and there, never any online ones.
-Adobe's Ae, Photoshop, En, Ps for work and personal stuff
-Autodesk Maya for personal stuff, and maybe work later on
-watching movies

Both Laptops are equal in specs except the gpu and style, one's a big, fat gaming laptop, while the other is one of the new asus ultrabooks.

I do not mind at all carrying the 8 pounder, however, battery life is something that matters.
I'm the kinda guy who'll go to a remote place to do work sometimes, and thus needs good battery life.
So the real conflict is battery life, or performance.
Obviously I won't be rendering videos while I'm charger-less, but definitely photoshop and maybe editing some other stuff.

Just how much better is the gtx than the gt?

(I'm not going to buy both or something to that effect, I'm not rich nor do I want the hassle of using 2 separate computers)

 

This might help you compare the performance specifically on the games you play. Computer Games on Laptop Graphic Cards - Notebookcheck.net Tech

 

As soon as I read that you don't mind the cost, one thing came to mind, "get the GTX 680m."

I won't go into specifics because it would be a waste of time to compare an inferior card to the fastest available on the market. However, you should realize that the 680m is actually quite efficient considering the level of performance it provides. Average battery life is probably between 2 hours and 4 hours depending on what you are doing and how GPU intensive it is.

 

The 680M is the big boss for gaming on ultra for most games.

The 650M can handle any other game the 680M can, just on lower settings.

A choice you have to decide on your own, the battery life here doesn't really change much. Mostly the cost that plays its part.

 

Thanks, but I don't really care about gaming.

I have a gt 550m right now, and on 1080p, I can pull a minimum of 28fps simply with some of the other adjustments turned down (hardly notice most of them).
So I have a pretty good idea for games. Pretty sure both systems will run any game I'd ever throw at them just fine.

PS, that chart kinda sucks. Speaking from personal experience, 1080p with other settings down to 1080p on full setting is completely different, and should definitely have
It is feasible to use 1080p low settings, rather than jumping straight to a lower res. Though great for people with a 1366x768 screen.

So lets put it to more specific terms.

1) If I were to have both of them, fully charged, same screen and brightness level, and I use them the exactly same, how long would each last?
The reported times are 2+ for the gtx laptop, and 6+ for the gt.
Lets say, I'm using chrome for half the time with some extentions, then photoshop for the other half, playing local music the entire time (headphones).

2) I'm rendering a 1080p clip @60fps @16mbps. Difference in time between the two cards (same processor, raid0 ssd)?

 

Then I'd say get the 650m, high end gpus like the 680m will only be useful to play games, as much as Quadro are aimed at pro customers. You will likely make much more use of a higher battery life.

 

you have to pay attention to the quality of the panel, the 680m might be either, clevo, msi or alienware and in all of those the panel is better than the one in the asus

 

By panel, do you mean the screen?

 

exactly, the clevo and msi can be equipped with 95% gamut screens

 

I've been meaning to look this up, but might I bother you instead?
I have no idea what that actually means.

What is matt type/glare type?
And what does the whole % gamut thing mean?

Thanks.

 

If money is no issue, get the machine with the best gpu.
Although you don't need that extra kick now, you may in the future. It will make your machine last longer as a whole.
Remember also that the gpu is one of the hardest things to replace. Regret would be finding out you needed a better gpu and settled for the cheaper one just because.

Sent from a Galaxy far, far away

 

If you need battery life an don't do a lot of gaming, this is a silly question. You'll get a lot of "get the 680m" responses because this is the gaming subforum, but that doesn't change the fact that the Asus is rated for three times the battery life.

If you go to those remote places for work and you want to listen to some tunes, are you going to bring a boombox that gets an hour and a half on eight D batteries or are you going to bring an MP3 player with a 30 hour battery life? Now if you want to get some work done on your lappy, do you want to drag out an eight pound behemoth that runs for two hours or a four pound machine that runs for six?

 

You are exaggerating beyond what is actually true. The alienware m17x can get up to 5 hours of use with the gtx 680m. It's not what card you have, it's what you do with it. I wouldn't recommend getting the 650m because it is weak, it will be obsolete within a year, and cannot handle nearly as much as the 680m can. You can also easily downclock the 680m to save power when you don't need it. As easy as downloading a program and dragging a scroll bar to the left.

I would also like to restate what a user said above which I find to be very important: It would be a shame to buy the 650m and one day realize you need more power. A regret like this may lead to purchasing a whole new system, and will end up wasting money in the long run.

 

Oh right! I forgot to ask about that.
How well does optimus work?

Like if I have identical laptops, one with dedicated gtx, and the other with only hd4000.
Would it really have the same battery life?
No idea how any of these companies rate their battery life.

 

Optimus does help quite a lot. It's hard to say how long the battery will last in all honesty. I can't give you accurate numbers. The reason why xoticpc says it will get 2+ hours on gtx 680m systems is because you will get at least that much during intense gameplay. This does not mean you will only see 2 hours no matter what. As I said above, a laptop like the m17x can get up to 5 hours use browsing the web and chatting on Skype, perhaps even more. You won't know until you get the system because we all use computers for different things. For example, I watch a lot of movies on laptops and many people do not.

I honestly think with Optimus and the 680m you will see at least 4 hours of regular use, if not more. And if you decide to game once or twice, you can with ease! I would say its better to be safe than sorry.

Optimus will help. Get either a 3740QM or 3840QM and you'll be happy. Both are excellent and quite similar. You won't notice a difference between the two in performance. It only differs in numbers.

 

Right. I don't think I'd say with whatever I decide to get for more than 3 years at best.

So my selection right now is xotic pc.

asus (whatever the newest ultrabook is)
gigabyte p2542g (or newer iteration)
msi gt70

Adobe programs frequently, sparsely use cad programs.
LOTS of chrome and movie watching.

Thoughts?

 

xotic puts the np9150 battery life at, because it is around that.

The model is not known for being efficiently designed in terms of power consumed, but the np9150 is good for around 3-3.5h

the m17x is good for around 4.5-5h

the asus ux51/u500 is good for around 4.5-5h

what optimus does is to put the nvidia gpu in a very low power state, while using the HD4000 to do the leg work.

Optimus will give you worse battery life than the same system without a dgpu, but not by much. Its still loads better than just using the dgpu all the time in terms of battery life.

gamut
Gamut - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

color accuracy
Color rendering index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

matte anti glare is a display that will reflect much less than light than a glossy one would. people that work outdoors usually prefer that

also have you actually thought about getting a workstation? those are indeed expensive, however they come with great warranty, build quality way above those machines (specially the clevo and the asus chassis), and are equipped with great panels.

 

Thanks, I get matte now. But those wiki articles gave me a headache. Layman's terms please?



Hahaha I've looked into workstations yes.
2 things bothers me, well really 1 thing.
The whole geforce vs quadro thing.
I use adobe suit a whole lot more than cad stuff so I can't just say quadro all the way.

And the other thing is kinda silly, but rather important to me: aesthetics
I need something I'm going to love staring at for minutes on end.
Maybe there's a great looking one out there, just haven't seen it.
Size aside, the msi gt70 is absolutely gorgeous. And the Gigabyte P series makes me drool just looking at my screen.

I mean 2 years ago, I decided to get this xps17 I'm using over the dell workstations because it just looked so much better (I was younger then haha, but still).

 

have you seen the hp workstations? I like the design.

Although you would be more served with a aw m17x, than with all the lack of blings from the workstation

Well the articles are in layman terms

but here is a good excerpt

color space can be the NTSC (most used right now) or the aRGB (not as widely used, but still), sRGB and so forth

also, have you actually taken a look at the rmbp 15? the screen wont be as good as the 95% gamut or the dream color 2 (the best screen in a notebook), but still is a way above average than most laptops in general and actually is much better than the one in the u500

 

Haha ouch. But so the whole percentage thing is referring to how accurately the colors are represented?

And I hate macs, apple in general.


Here's something that confuses me:
Isn't the gtx supposed to be a whole class above the gt's?
Other than the memory speed, there doesn't seem to be many differences between the 660m and the 650m.
Is there something I'm missing?

 

There's 2 versions of the 650M.

But regardless of all that, this is just how nVIDIA brands their stuff..

 

there is nothing that you are missing, the 650m, the 640m and the 660m are the same thing, what differentiate each other is the clock speed and/or the vram used, it can either be ddr3 or gddr5, the 660m only uses gddr5

well hate is a strong, dont be naive.

And thats why I put the color accuracy article just beneath it, but in general is how given a determined space is covered by the colors in a determined panel or setting. The more the merrier usually. For example a panel can have a great gamut, but their color accuracy can be lower than a panel with less gamut

 

@ house3272,

If you feel satisfied using 550M then 650M will be more than enough for your needs, but make sure you get the GDDR5 version though.

 

Naw, the 550's only okay. Most games my friends had me test works 1080p-30fps-full settings. Then again, never tested any onlinemultiplayer games.
Like FarCry3 runs at 1080p on lowish-mediumish settings just fine.
Similar results in multimedia programs. However, would LOVE to have something better.
If the 660 and the 650 are the same ish, then I guess that wouldn't much of a difference as long as they are a decent step up from the 550.


And to all, thanks for your help. I've learned a lot and will definitely make a more informed decision now.
There's so much I don't know haha. And sorry Kara, Still Totally Lost on gamut.

 

no probs, why dont you post in the what notebook should I buy section? its going to be much more interesting there. Fill out the faq btw

 

The main difference on the mobile series between the GT and GTX series is the ability to SLI them.

 

J.Dre - See the snipped quotes from the OP above. He's saying he values battery life and doesn't value gaming power, and he gives manufacturer-reported runtimes for each of the computer's he's considering. If the discussion has moved since then to open up the possibilities, that's fine, but if you're considering two machines and one fits your needs way better than the other while being significantly lighter and costing significantly less, it's a pretty obvious choice.

 

I use adobe premiere and ae 5.5. They only work with quadro GPUs but there is a hack to make them work with all nvidia GPUs. I don't know if this hack still works in the new 6.0 programs.

What is it exactly you want to do with these adobe programs. In my experience, certain ae and ppro operations require more gpu power than the most demanding games...
Sent from a Galaxy far, far away

 

the thing about the 650 is that it may be fine for now, but it won't be in a year or two. A 680 will still be able to chug through games loooong after the 650 is unable to handle new games on the lowest settings.
Its cheaper and better in the long run to go with the 680 now.