NVidia 310M Performance

Hi guys;

I once again need your council, and feedback, lol.

I am going to upgrading to a new laptop here in a couple of days however I have to decide on certain things. I mainly just play Flight Simulator X on my laptop so that's for the record. You can see my current specs in my signature.

So there's to main selections:
Intel Core i7 720QM 2.8Ghz 6MB L3 Cache & NVidia 310M 512MB GPU

or

Intel Core 2 Duo P7450 2.13Ghz 3MB L2 Cache & NVidia GTX 260M 1GB GPU

I know the GTX 260M would give amazing performance, but I've never heard much of the 310M for gaming. Looking at benchmark website I cam across a list on the 310M was under Third Class, while the GTX 260M was under First Class. The one part that worries me is that 8600M GT I currently own is under Second Class.

Is the 8600M superior to the 310M or am I missing something?
How well do you think the card will perform for FSX or any game for that matter along with the i7?

Thank you in advance

 

gtx 260m is the best. are they both at the same price?

 

No, they probably forgot to move it to lower section as it turned old. 310M will most probably have similar performance to a 8600M GT, but using a lot less power (and therefore run a lot cooler).

 

The 310m looks to be a rebadged 210m, which puts it slightly slower than an 8600m GT.

 

The 310M is another build upon what was originally the GPU design for the 8400M GT, 8600M GS, 9400M and 210M. 16 Shaders, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs. It's certainly capable of running older games decently, however, for these days it's low level, but it's still a good 3 to 4x better than Intel's best integrated in real time performance. It'll maybe reach 3/4 of the 8600GT's performance. Is FSX the only game you want to play? If so, I wouldn't go overboard on anything honestly, since one selection gives you alot of CPU performance for mediocre graphics, and the other gives you alright CPU performance for high level graphics (though the CPU is easily powerful enough for most games these days). If gaming is a centric feature for you, then get the one with the GTX 260M. Get the i7 equipped model if you need the CPU performance for high amounts of multitasking (and I'm talking crazy stuff, life video editing). If you really don't need either, get a cheaper computer.

 

Right now I'm leaning towards the P7450 along with the GTX 260M. About the P7450, I know for a fact it is no way even close to an i7, but how well does it perform?

 

Does anyone here have the P7450?

 

I have used the P7350 which is just clocked a little slower. What do you want to know about it?

 

Just pretty much how it performs on games. Idle temperature, max temperature you've seen.

 

No, it's not. It's based on GT21x architecture (loosely based on desktop GT200, the same that 210M uses), not on G80-92 arch. It's a different architecture and even with the same shader/ROP/TMU count You cannot say it's the same board after a die shrink.

 

I'm getting confused by all this. Is the 310m any good then? for hardcore gamers I mean. The i7 seems like a processor that will last for many years to come and still out perform most. However I am mainly concerned about the 310M. I see no point in having a killer processor, if the GPU will just cause graphical glitches on intense games like Crysis, FSX and games of the sort that are extremely demanding.
Which is why I wonder how the 310m performs on gaming. If I already get graphical glitches on my 8600M on games like FSX, and on posts here on this thread people have said the 310M is a little slower than the 8600M, I can only expect to have more problems with that card than I already do with the 8600M. No?

 

From a gamer's perspective, the Geforce 310M is trash, period. The i7 is just wasted on it.

When given the choice, I'd take the 2.13Ghz Core 2 Duo + GTX 260M every time.

 

Perfect. Thanks for the help.

 

I agree. But keep in mind OP, this is an opinion from a GAMER's perspective - is this you? Some users may prefer the i7 and not care for much of a gfx card. The i7 destroys the C2D but yeah the GTX 260 walks over the 310m

 

I am pretty much just wondering if the 310M will at least be able to run games without any graphical glitches?
Maybe it won't be able to handle 16xS AA, but if it will run games with no problem I will go for the i7.

 

probably no AA on any games within the past year or two. What games are you MOST concerned with?

 

It will, it's a normal entry level card. You'll be able to run most of the games, but you can forget about medium-high details in recent games. It's just too slow for that, 260M is easily 3-4x faster.

Seriously, if you want to play any recent games, forget about getting a 310M.

 

Each one has been a steady revision of the previous design, making die shrinks, adding more support for other functions, but it's still related to that original design. I'm not saying it's the same, but to say that it's completely different is quite convoluted as well. The performance is still not far off per clock in comparison to the cards it's made to replace.

I know notebookcheck.com is kind of sketchy, but most of Nvidia's 16/8/4 configured GPUs are relatively in the same range in per clock performance. The clock speed is making the real difference, but of course the variance in systems themselves they get their scores from is I'm sure a contributing matter as well. I also did a 3DMark06 check on the desktop versions of these GPUs, and in a similar fashion they were within a given range around 3000 to 4000. Obviously, VRAM, speed, and system config help further convolute the issue at hand.

Basically I'm getting at this: Nvidia's methodology with their mobile GPUs as far as designing, making, and marketing are barely above stagnant in terms of increasing performance. Now......I'm not saying they are not getting better, they are, with better support for a further list of capabilities, like newer API support, smaller die process to support higher speeds for the same power consumption, etc. However, the performance for a given segment of performance hasn't increased all too much in comparison to their desktop products. While ATi's Radeon 3000s were revisions of the 2000s, the 4000s meant to replace the previous series were all cuts above the specific market graphics they were meant to replace. Not meager 10 or 20% increases. I'm a bit mad at ATi for pulling an Nvidia with the 5000s I must add to. Despite the DX11 and better GPGPU support, I think they'll be more like a revision instead of a new generation in terms of performance. Nvidia also flooded the market with too many products, and many computers are still available with Nvidia graphics from 2 or 3 generations ago. Yes, selection is nice for the OEMs, but when the consumer really doesn't have too much say what specifically goes into a laptop (unless it's customizable) it can make decisions difficult.

 

The problem is that you have a great CPU with a mediocre GPU and vice versa. If you want to be playing FSX well, you really need a decent processor but the GPU has to be just as good.

If you go with the GTX260M, FSX will suffer slightly due to the P7450 2.13Ghz. In FSX, a 2.8 Ghz Core2Duo outperforms a 2.0 Ghz Quad by up to 8 fps and outperforms a 2.5 Ghz QX9300 Quad by about 4-5 fps on the same GPU (GTX260M). Even with the latest update that adds multi core, FSX is still better suited to Dual Cores so likes higher clock rates over number of cores.

However, you should get about a minimum of 35 fps on average at high - medium settings at native resolutions, especially if your native is lower than 1680 X 1050. In conclusion I recommend you go with the laptop that has the GTX260M. All other games will not have any problems on that system aside from very CPU intensive titles.

If I were you, I would fill out the ''What Notebook'' faq and start from scratch because you won't want to be upgrading too soon again after spending, that's what I would do.

 

No they didn't. Once there was a 8000M series, after die shrink it became a 9000M, and after another - 130M. And then they changed the architecture which now for instance: supports double precision in GPGPU, have a new PureVideo HD version and an integrated sound processor for HDMI output. It's not an upgraded G9x, it an entirely different architecture sharing with it's predecessor only the shader/render unit count in some models.

 

The decision is hard because of as one stated. On one end there's a very high end CPU with a mediocre GPU, and on the other there is a very high end GPU with a good CPU. I am also thinking long run but under a budget.
FSX was designed to depend more on the CPU than the GPU, however for example FS9 was not, so if the next version of FS is designed to be more GPU dependant (as most games are) I will be pretty much screwed.

I am not aiming to run FSX at extreme graphic levels, with every possible detail included, I just want the game to run smoothly with medium-high settings. If the P7450 will give me that, then this would be a no brainer.

 

It is a no-brainer. Always take the GPU. Like you said yourself, being comfortable about what's coming tomorrow is most important.

Furthermore, think about this. On one side, if you find yourself unhappy with the Core 2 Duo which is paired with the 260M, you can upgrade at any time, as high as the 3.06Ghz T9900; that's a 75% increase in clock speed, plus a higher L2 cache. On the other, if you become unhappy with the performance of the Geforce 310M which is paired with the Core i7, it doesn't matter, because you're stuck with it. That's a 0% chance for satisfaction.

 

This is terrific thinking. I'd have to say this is the best option then to get the 260m. Plus who knows T or P higher clocked should be cheaper by the time you want to upgrade.

 

Alright guys I'll get the 260m with the P7450. Thanks a million, you've been great help.

 

get the P7450 and GTX260M... u can easily upgrade the CPU later on to a T9000 or P9000 series processor or maybe even a core 2 quad.

 

Well I went with all the advices you guys gave me, and I am extremely pleased. The GTX 260M can max out anything I throw at it! and the processor is very good as well.

 

i would recommed that u upgrade ur processor to T9000 or P9000 series ones... they're great deals available on processors here on notebookreview.com Marketplace and ebay... ur laptop should feel snapier than too... P7350 is a little underpowered...

 

That will come, but months from now.. If I were planning to upgrade right off the bat I might as well have gotten a more powerful processing laptop to begin with you don't you think?

 

still i would do it now... p7450 is quite weak... its only slightly better than the average T6600... I myself find a T9400 slow in tasks... and its 25% faster than P7450..

 

Kinda off topic: anyone know the comparison between an X1600 (roughly a 6800) and a 310M. Would performance be improved much if at all on the 310M?

 

I'm satisfied with what I have for now, I find the processor to be good enough for the things I do. Later in time I will upgrade, but I won't be upgrading a 2.53Ghz, unless there's anything in the 3.0 Ghz range for my socket, I'll just stay with this one.. but thanks for the feedback.

I didn't buy the other system so I would be unable to tell you anything about 310M's performance, I can tell you however that as they mentioned before on this thread, the 310M is not a card for gamers. Upon purchasing this system I asked about it even, and they told me the exact same thing. If that's what you are looking for, however there is this website where you can check a lot of the details for each mobile gpu, it comes in handy

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-310M.22439.0.html

that link is for the 310M benchmarks and details info.

 

I'm glad you went with the power. Now imagine that the 260M is what, four times faster than the 310M? You would've been sorely disappointed.