IF i used these notebooks for gaming...

which one would do the job?? id play games like nba live 2005, need for speed underground 2, doom 3, etc..

hp 8230 with
- intel pentium M 730 1.6 533mhz
- 512mb ddr2 400mhz
- 40gb 5400rpm
- ati mobility radeon x600 64mb

or

hp 6230
- intel pentium M 750 1.86 533mhz
- 512mb ddr2 400mhz
- 60gb 5400rpm
- ati mobility radeon x300 64mb

sorry, but i only have a budget of 1350 dollars. kinda low.

thanks!

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by lurpak

 

You won't be able to play Doom 3.

Both those graphic cards are pretty crappy (64 MB is a big thumbs down). If anything, you need a minimum of 128 MB graphic card memory to play recent games and any ones released in the future. Well, to be precise, you could play those games (except Doom 3) on really ridiculously low settings.

You won't be able to handle Battlefield 2 or anything released after today.

 

x600 > x300

whichever you get (if you decide on either notebook), upgrade to 128

doom 3 plays fine on the x300 128 mg card (which i have in my dell 6000). it was the first game i played on my machine and it ran perfectly at the suggested settings (i think medium all around and aa off) at full screen res. this was with the factory dell drivers as well. i have since installed the omega drivers, but haven't really noticed much of a difference; default settings or o/c to 400+/300+. i have not played nba live or nfs on this machine.

i'll go ahead and add what i said in another similar post about this topic... which is, don't believe the naysayers who say that the x300 is a crappy gaming card, i have personally played doom3, HL2, and currenlty playing farcry on my x300 and have no problems at all. i serously doubt any of the posters who downplay the performance of this card have actually used it at all... i'm positive they base their assumptions on abstract 3dmark scores.

take it from someone who has used this card personally to play those games, it works fine.

good luck.

 

I'm not attempting to sound like a dick.

Download the Battlefield 2 Demo and lemme know if your X300 can even play it at low settings.

My 9600 Pro Turbo has everything set to medium with AA at 2x and I average 40+ fps.

Your x300 will pull off low settings (maaaaybe medium) and you'll get 30+ fps.
The x300 was cut at the knees by ATI. Any serious gamer can tell you that too.

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by Ramadoss29

 

anyways, this'll be my last post on the topic...

i just launched HL2 and these are the game's suggested settings...

model detail - med
texture detail - med
water detail - simple reflection
shadow detail - high
aa mode - none
filtering mode - trilinear
shader detail - high
wait for vertical sync - disabled

this is running at 1680x1050 full screen on the omega drivers but not o/c'd. i have run the same settings at 1920x1200 with the same flawless performance.

whether or not a serious gamer thinks the above are good settings, i have no idea, i can only tell you the game is visually astounding and it plays perfectly.

 

That's decent, I suppose, but what do you consider "flawless performance"? Do you have some actual framerates to share? My settings for HL2:

Model detail - High
Texture detail - High
Water detail - Simple reflection
Shadow detail - High
AA mode - None
Filtering mode - 4x Anisotropic
Shader detail - Low
Wait for vertical sync - Disabled

I get between 30 and 50 FPS on average, although really intense portions (*cough*jetboat levels*cough*) can drop to about 19 or 20 FPS (oddly, although it's very noticable, it's still playable).

My Mobility RADEON 9600 64MB (8x AGP) is overclocked to 410/235 and using the Omega Drivers. The x300 is, all things being equal (default clock rates, same amount of VRAM, Omega drivers) slightly inferioir to the MR9600, whereas the x600 is roughly equivalent to the MR9700 (again, all things being equal).

However, for $1350, you can get a decent Dell I9300 (512MB of RAM, 1.73GHz P-M, 80GB 5400RPM HD, and most importantly, GF Go6800 256MB) easily with a good coupon.

I should like it noted, however, that the reports that you "won't be able to play DooM3 on a 64MB card" are grossly exaggerated. I can play DooM3 very smoothly on Medium detail + Specular Lighting & Bump mapping + 2x AF (no shadows or HQSE, though, which kind of ruins the experience) on my Gateway 7422GX with its 64MB MR9600.

--------------------
Before you ask, check the FAQ!
--------------------
Dell Inspiron 9300 (Waiting on a good coupon): Intel Pentium-M 1.86GHz Sonoma, 2GB Dual-Channel DDR533 RAM, GeForce Go6800

Gateway 7422GX: AMD Athlon 64 3400+, 1024MB DDR RAM, 64MB Mobility RADEON 9600 (Going to my parents.)

AVERATEC AV3270-EH1: AMD Mobile Sempron 2800+, 512MB DDR RAM, 64MB (shared) S3G Unichrome

 

Oced X300s have scored over 1800 in 3DMark05 in a Dell I6000 and OCed 9600s score like 1300. Just from looking around at different users benchmarks (and assuming all cards overclocked), the X300 can beat both a 9600 and 9700 in becnhmarks. That's just from looking around at users benchmarks posted at www.notebookforums.com

Also, there's not much of a difference between the X300 and X600. I think an X600 is just an X300 w/o some power saving capabilities. An Oced X300 beats stock X600s in benchmarks.

BTW, I've read reviews of the I6000 with 64meg X300, and apparently that plays Doom 3 fine. You don't need high-ends cards to play todays games, but I doubt the X300 will be able to handle Unreal Engine 3 when it comes out. Whereas, a 6800 Go probably could.

Dell I6000

 

so basically the 64mb graphics cards of ati (x300 or x600) wouldnt do the job? if it really doesnt give me enough power and performance then can i still upgrade it to 128mb in the future??

really having problems choosing the right notebook. not really interested with heavy and big notebooks. 6.2 lbs would be the heaviest for me. and i guess not much of the thin and light's have good 128mb graphics cards that would eventually be able to handle new games. got any suggestions on what notebook to get? other than the two hp notebooks that i chose?

thanks!

 

I just went to HP's shopping site and drummed up a few specs for a zd8000 model. For exactly $3500, here is the configuration I made:

Windows XP Home Edition w/ SP2
P4 540 Processor w/ HT (2.8Ghz)
17" Widescreen Display
1GB DDR2 SDRAM (533Mhz)
80Gb 5400rpm Drive
ati mobility radeon x600 128mb

Of course, the notebook itself is a monster and your aren't really interested with it. It would weigh around 10lb. plus another 2lb. for the adapter it comes with. Good deal though, plus it has a 17" monitor. Read reviews of it if you decide to change your mind.

 

Are you comparing a 64 mb MR9600 with an x300? Because most individuals that game are using a 128 MB Mr9600. And benchmark tests with my card show better scores / fps than an x300.

 

People keep screaming about how miserable gaming is on certain systems.

Look, I have a Gateway 7422GX with a 64MB Mobility Radeon 9600 and I'm continually impressed by its gaming prowess; I wasn't really expecting it to be anything but "bare minimum."

I was expecting a fight just getting Doom 3 to run playably, especially with how much Doom 3 hates ATI hardware.

At stock I can get Doom 3 to run very playably at medium detail at 640x480. Overclocked to 420/230, I get it to 800x600. Only stuff that isn't turned on is Anti-Aliasing and Vsync.

Likewise, Unreal Tournament 2004 runs at native resolution (1280x800) at stock speeds and can even score 8x AF with all the details turned all the way up. Not too shabby.

Don't believe the hype. A dedicated GPU with at least 64MB of RAM is puh-lenty.

 

What did you use to overclock your v-card? Have you ever had any issues with your HDD while gaming? The reason I ask is because I play Call of Duty United Offensive and the graphics are clear and I can play it on high settings, but my HDD light flashes every 10-15 seconds and makes the game do a real quick blink lag. Do you have any suggestions?

 

I use RadLinker to overclock, but lately I've found that I don't really have to.

I personally haven't really had any HD issues (the 1GB of RAM sure does help ) with gaming, but the system is a little sluggish sometimes (and God help you if you run something RAM-hungry and then try to switch to something else and watch the swap file choke and die). The best suggestion for upgrading this system would just be getting a faster HD.

Other than that, it's amazing.