Help with ATI 200m, GMA900 and 6200

1 - What is the "best looking" game that ATI 200m can run at decent settings and good FPS?

2 - What about GMA900? Is it too much worse than ATI 200m??

3 - And 6200, is it better than X300 or X600?

4 - Can I play Doom 3 with a 6200? I don't care about playing 640x480 low 0AA 0AF. What about Wolfenstein Enemy Territory? Or Quake 4, Civ 4, AGE3, CS:S, BW2, BF2 etc?

5 - Any of those cards are better than an GeForce 4MX 440-SE (64mb, 64bits)? (please don't laugh, ok, but not THAT loud)

TIA:

btw, I'm consider those card with those lappys: MSI 1013, MSI 1012 and MSI 1022.

 

Can we also add to number 2: GMA950 vs ATI 200m

 

dont count the gma 900 just errase it from the list i have one at it sucks

 

The ATI 200m isn't a very good card. It will be able to crank out HL2, and some of the other newer games, however it will be at the lowest settings. The Intel GMA 900 is worse then the ATI 200m, and can play quite a few games, but HL2 and other high end games are hardly playable (very low fps's even on lower settings). The intel GMA 900 can't play Bf2, and I wouldn't be surprised if the 200m couldn't either. The 6200 is better then the X300 but I'm not sure about the X600.

I would say that If you want to play those games that you mentioned don't settle for anything less then an X300. X300 will be able to pull off I believe all of the games you listed, but again at low settings. The X600 and 6200 would be better, but still not that great.

 

In my review, there is a 3DMark05 comparison of a Dell XPS M140 (GMA900) versus my V2000Z (200M). Here is the results:

Futuremark 3DMark05 Scores:
Test --- Dell M140 (GMA900) - Compaq Presario V2000Z (200M)

3DMark Score --- 274 3DMarks - 504 3D Marks
CPU Score --- 2281 CPUMarks - 3019 CPUMarks

Gaming Tests
GT1 Return To Proxycon --- 1.1 FPS - 2.2 FPS
GT2 Firefly Forest --- 0.9 FPS - 1.7 FPS
GT3 Canyon Flight --- 1.4 FPS - 2.2 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU Test 1 --- 1.3 FPS - 1.8 FPS
CPU Test 2 --- 1.8 FPS - 2.2 FPS

 

If 200M isn't good, the GMA900 is useless. I have played HL2 at 1280x768 med-high settings, triple-buffering, and all other special settings/filtering/buffering turned off. The 200M will play virtually all new games. The GMA900 needs a compatibilty page.

 

wow, thanks for the info!

What about the FPS in Half Life 2?? You get stuttering?? What about those #%*23#*%@ loading times in the middle of the game?

Ow, and you think if I lower the settings to low I will be able to ativate anisotropic or even 2aa??

TIA

 

Why don't u spend a bit more cash for a x700 graphics card? Acer and HP Compaq do great deals on laptops with x700s

 

I run a 200M and I get pretty good performance on the games I've played so far (HL2 and Guild Wars), and I play above the minimum graphic settings. With some fiddling I was able to get decent 3DMark05 scores from it (with a mild overclock) up to 822.

If it's just for gaming though, I'd definitely go for a higher end card.

 

because I'm a linux user, and ATI drivers for linux sux. So, if they will suck anyway I prefer use the extra 250 and get a PSP or save to get a PS3.

And, actually I'm thinking about getting a gaming notebook (z71v, 1250us) or a very tiny, portable notebook (1013 or 1012 about 1000us).

Afterall, if I could play enemy territory with a 200m with good settings in linux I'll be happy.

 

Here are my default and playable Half-Life 2 settings:
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/3517/hl28mv.jpg

If this is going to be a mainly game machine, I suggest making the move to a dedicated graphics card.

 

what about GMA950 comparied to the ATI 200m??

 

Check out this article:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/09/15/are_intel/

 

I don't have a link right now, but on the intel site it does say what the Intel 900 GMA can play. It tells you some of the probems a game has. And yes, the Intel 900 GMA is practacally useless if your a hardcore gammer. It was never intended to run demanding games, and anyone who buys it for games is a fool. I purchased the XPS M140 and it has the GMA 900. I never purcahsed it to play games, although I will play some older games on it. I have a desktop that can run all new games at top settings.

 

As posted earlier:
http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/intel915g/sb/CS-011967.htm

 

Thanks for the info guys

I think I'll have to go with the MS-1022 , too bad it looks ugly (ok, but no as good as 1013) and it's 14''

:decision:

oh: not a hardcore gamer, but I'd like to play Civ4, ET and CS:S.