Go6800@1920x1200 or X700@1280x800

Hi, I'm facing a little dilema right now.
I'd like to buy a laptop and I'd like it to have the best gaming experience possible (most FPS), now I can choose between two laptops: Dell Inspirion 9300 and Acer Aspire 5024 Wlmi.

The Acer Aspire 5024 Wlmi has a X700 and it runs on 1280x800.
Now, my question is, will the acer with it's X700@1280x800 give me a higher FPS than the Dell Inspirion 9300 with it's Go6800@1920x1200?

A higher resolution always needs a better GPU and I know that running the Dell Inspirion 9300 at another resolution than 1920x1200 will look terrible, as it does on all LCD's...

I hope someone can help me here,
Kuba.

 

The x700 will give you more fps @ 1280x800 than the 6800 @1920x1200. Sometimes games can scale..

 

Actually, games are the one thing that scale nicely on notebook LCD displays.

 

although the x700 will give you a better at that resolution, i think you should go for the 6800
its a much more powerful card and its got better horsepower(pixel pipeline) than the x700

 

I am someone who likes to have quality, I have never seen a good looking game on a LCD which was set to a lower resolution than it should have.

But don't you buy a GPU to have good FPS? The amout of piplelines and etc. don't matter when the thing that makes you enjoy games is the FPS!

Kuba.

 

running the Dell Inspirion 9300 at another resolution than 1920x1200 will look terrible, as it does on all LCD's...
--------------------------------------------------------------------

What the heck are you talking about? If you are using the 6800go and turn the resolution down to 1280x800 in whatever game you are playing, it's going to look the same as the x700 at 1280x80 and will also have better FPS. The 6800 is an all around better card, and for any one to suggest that the x700 will out perform 6800 in any area is just flat wrong. FLAT WRONG.

 

Lcds have a default resolution. Not running at that resolution makes them look blurry.

 

The two notebooks you are looking at are difficult to compare. Yes, the Go6800 handily out paces the X700, but the cards are in different classes. Secondly, the i9300 is a 17" notebook, and the 5024WLMi a 15.4". There is a big difference between the two when it comes to portability.

There's no way you are going to be able to handle a lot of games, especially newer ones, at a WUXGA resolution on the Go6800. So, you're going to be forced to scale the resolution down to something lower than the native in order to get playable framerates.

 

Can't you get the go 6800 at another resolution?

 

The Inspiron 9300 isn't sold anymore (it was replaced by the i9400/E1705), so it can't be configured. When it was on sale, the i9300 had options for a WXGA+ matte screen and a WUXGA glossy. The former screen is quite poor as far as LCDs go, so going with the WUXGA is really the best choice, even if you can't handle games at that resolution.

 

And can't the 6800Go in the i9300 be upgraded to the 7800Go?

 

You could probably upgrade to a Go 7800, but whats the point. Even that card, with all the power it has, might not be able to run games at playable FPS at WUXGA resolution. Also, its expensive to upgrade and its a hastle to upgrade a graphics card.

 

Thank you for your replys everyone.

Well you see, somebody invented pixels. And he simply caused all of my problems
If a screen can display a certain amount of pixels, and you try to make it display less, then either you will not cover the whole screen, or the pixels will have to be made bigger, and when you enlarge pixels the graphics get very blurry.
I hope you understand

Yeah I know I'm comparing two totally different notebooks, but I'm just looking for a good seccond hand gaming laptop and thease are the best two ones I found.
I don't really mind about the portability or the screen size (as long as it's atleast 15") but I do mind about the FPS as that's exacly what matters in games.
But as I will not be able to handle good games in neither of thouse two (according to you) maybe you could suggest something else? A lower-res with a good GPU and also not killing my wallet...

Not with this laptop unfourtunetly, maybe you can suggest something else?

Yeah changing GPUs doens't seem a good option for me either...


Now I really don't know what I should do

Kuba.

 

It's time to make a choise for me, which of those two laptops should I buy??

 

Is this jsut for the 9300 cuz i got the wxga+ matte screen on my new dell 9400. I got it so id get to run at antive and not having to run at a non native res and have good fps. Plysa i was not sure if id like a glosy screen. Will the screen i got be bad for gaming? Is it bad because of responce time, brightness, ect. Well if you want to run at native and have good fps then i think your only chocie is the x700. But the 6800 is much better but you cant run it at such a high res. This is a tough decision.

 

You would be best off checking the Dell forum for that information, I'm not an expert on Dell notebooks. I haven't heard any complaints about the i9400's screen though. I think you'll be fine with it. Dell might have updated their screens on the i9400.

As far as the Acer vs. Dell decision goes - since you are not all that concerned with weight/size/portability, I would be more inclined to recommend the Dell. It is more suited to gaming, and will run cooler. Acer notebooks have never been know for having good cooling systems. Even if you can't run games at 1920x1200, scaling it down isn't so bad as long as you keep the aspect ratio (16:10; other resolutions include 1680x1050, 1440x900, 1280x800). The Go6800 is still a beast of a GPU, much more so than the X700.

 

Well, as long as the aspect ratio is the same, personally I think the game images will scale down perfectly well. Sure, you will lose a little accuracy, such as differences in cross-hair sizes, but it does not make much of a diffference.

I ran Counter-Strike:Source at a 1600 x 1200 resolution on my Inspiron 8200, and also ran it at 800 x 600 pixels, and saw little difference in image quality and the overall gaming quality.

A previous generation console such as the original Microsoft Xbox used the Composite video interface, at only 640 x 480. But if you set a PC resolution to 640 x 480 pixels and use the composite interface, the image would be
image would be serverly distorted.
Images require far less quality than text, and, in my opinion, the same applies to downscales images on a notebook LCD.

I would go for the Dell Inspiron with the nVidia GeForce 6800Go. The screen is far higher resolution, and the GPU is decent. The game resolution can be scaled down and good Frame rates can be enjoyed.

I totally agree with what Chaz said...the Dell will generally be more heat efficient.

Well you are partly wrong by assuming this. A GPU with more pixel pipelines is generally better as there are more Texture Mapping Units (TMUs) in the graphics card, therefore allowing the GPU to "paint" textures on to 3D Images, at a faster rate. New GPUs such as 6800Go no longer have a pixel processor attached to each TMU however, as fewer units in a GPU are being used to make it to save excess material during manafacture.

For This reason, go for the nVidia GPU, and go for the Dell.

 

The bluring whenever you run games lower than native resolution on an LCD isnt that bad as long as you dont go too far. I run a lot of games at 1200x800 on my monitor thats 1680x1050. The blurring is only noticeable on text that low, not the games graphics. Putting the resolution into the 1400x900 range eliminates the text blurring almost completly. This whole blur thing is no where near as bad as everyone makes it out to be in games. It only has large affects on text.

 

Well you see, somebody invented pixels. And he simply caused all of my problems
If a screen can display a certain amount of pixels, and you try to make it display less, then either you will not cover the whole screen, or the pixels will have to be made bigger, and when you enlarge pixels the graphics get very blurry.
I hope you understand

I have a 6800 go in a machine with 1600x1050 display and for the games (FEAR) that I have tone the resolution down to 1280x700 (something around there) it really doesn't look bad, at least not bad enough to warrant using a significantly less powerful GPU

 

I think you can't go wrong with an E1705 and 7900GS.