Graphic cards in order

Do you think that these graphic card performances are truthful? Them are compared in cards like HD3850X2 and 8800MGTX SLI

Hd 2600 Xt...45%
9500m Gs.....40%
HD 3650.......39%
8600m Gt.....37%
Hd 2700.......37%

Then little OT here
How much do you think that processor affects on performance in some fps games? If we take a look for example T9300 - T8300 and T8100 processors with those above-mentioned graphic cards.

 

The GPU numbers are fairly accurate.
If T9300= 100%
8300=88%
8100=75%

 

Does processor really mean that much in games?

 

depending on what games, fps, eye candy type of games, not much as long as your processor isnt a P3 650mhz. but RTS games with loads of units are quite cpu dependent

 

Very confusing way of looking at. And I disagree with numbers regardless of the clarity of how they are laid out. Simply they are incorrect.

Your second question it depends on the game the three you mention? Little to none on almost all.

Sorry now both of you are looking at a situation in the most confusing way and deriving well incorrect numbers.

 

I think fps games requires much from the computer so let's take a look fps games.

powerpack
How would you compare those graphic cards and processors.

 

Most First Person Shooters require a hefty GPU, then look to RAM, then look to the CPU. Only a few will give you problems, as long as you have a C2D. (Crysis likes a nice CPU)

 

Well I don't as a rule like comparing too many things at once as those who need that comparison are more likely to get information overload and risk losing the desired benefits.

That said, the way I see it done is a baseline is created at the bottom and the comparisons go from there. Using my own numbers.

8600m GT is the baseline:0
HD3650:+3%
9500m GS:+12%
HD 2700: +19%
HD 2600 XT:+23%
HD 3850 SLI:+282%

I take no responsibility for the accuracy of these numbers as they are from Notebookcheck 3DMark06 scores but the form is a better way to view IMO.

And once again the three CPU's will make little to no difference in almost all games.

There is a theoretical reason why I prefer this way of doing the opposite of how you did. I has to do with dropping a pebble and measuring the distance. If you keep halving the distance in theory the pebble will never hit the ground. Well we know this to not be true. Kind of esoteric but well a reality.

 

Rainbow Six Vegas for the PC. Poorly coded and had a hard time running with my 1.5 core 2. Upgraded to the 2.0 and it runs better. But saw slight, if any difference in COD 4 with cpu upgrade.

 

Ok, correct me if I'm wrong.
Apparently the graphics card matters when playing a dvd...so I read....
If the dvd is HD, (which I though was going the way of the dinosaur), then the better the card the better the system can play the dvd. No hiccups.
If this is true, is the x3100 intel enough to handle that kind of dvd?

just curious on this...

 

Is it possible to play latest games with graphic cards like 8600M GT and HD 2700? Example Crysis. I've no idea how those cards are compared to te desktop graphic cards. If you would have some tests mobile vs desktop, it would be really nice!

 

you've got to be joking about the numbers.

i disagree, and it may be the most ridiculous thing ever anyway.

 

Hey Dufffish !
The 8600GT is very much like the desktop counterpart and is availble in gddr2 and gdrr3. 400 MHz for GDDR2 memory clocks and 700 Mhz for GDDR3 (which is noticeable faster). The 8600gt will run crysis but with its extensive geometry it will only run well on low settings. However ATI never released a desktop hd2700, they release only the 2400pro 2400xt 2600 pro 2600xt 2900pro and 2900xt in this series I strongly recommend that you get the gddr3 version if you plan on getting a 8600m GT =)

Edit: The 3850x2 scored higher than the 8800GTXSLI which suprised me alot in benchmarks , but i suppose real time gameplay might be different , when is the 3870x2 coming?

 

God damn Ubisoft.. thats true, its games are CPU demanding due to sluggish coding.