NVidia GeForce 7300 vs Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950

Is this NVidia thing worth it or not?

I'm seeing all these laptops where you can "upgrade" the integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950 choice to an NVidia GeForce 7300 video card.

Ok, so NVidia will probably be "better" for 3D games. But what does it really mean:

- certain 3D games will not work at all? (I'm seeing games that "require" geforce - do games actually DEMAND a given manufacturers' video card - what about ATI for instance - you can't play that game with even a high end ATI? what the heck ?)

- opengl? much better 3d polygon rates?

 

Intel GMA 950 SUCKS. It just sucks. Period. It can't run games very well (or at all). Intel GMA 950 is about as powerful as a nVidia 2 series.

Here's some threads that might help you figure out what's better.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=65548
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=25449

 

Let's just say on a scale of 1 - 10, the Intel GMA 950 = 0. Then nVidia GeForce 7300 would probably be a 2.5. Now if you do the math correctly, the nVidia is infinitely times better.

Depending on the games you wish to play, the 7300 might just be your ticket. Older 3d games (warcraft 3, lets say) will run pretty good on the 7300. They would struggle a lot with the GMA 950. What computer are you looking at anyways? And what will you be using it for? Fill out this FAQ to help us get a better understanding of this.

Oooh and another thing, if you are looking at customizing a computer online, from lets say Dell, they sometimes charge more for a worse graphics card. Dell on the Inpsirion E1505 they charge 30 dollars more for a 256 mb 7300 versus a 256 mb X1400 (an ATI video card), though the X1400 is better. Always do your research on little things like that before purchasing!

 

Lets put it like this. The GMA900/950 is a decent general use GPU. Its biggest advantages are low cost and lower power requirements. If you game at all, the GMA900/950 will simply not cut it. It may run some older games, but its not a gaming card.

The nVidia 7300 is capable of running most current games at playable settings. That being said, it cost more than the GMA900/950 and uses more power.

If you want to play currenty high-end or next generation games, the 7300 will probably not suffice.

So there you go. You choose. The GMA900/950 has its places, as does the 7300, as do the higher end cards. There is no better or worse. Just the best fit for you as user.

 

Thanks for the feedback. I get it: the Intel one probably just provides the cpu a way to efficiently place pixels onto the screen, but other than that, it isn't going to draw 3d polygons efficiently by its hardware, and it's probably just up to the cpu to do all the work.

One last thing: so the ati 1400 is supposedly better than the geforce 7300, both offered by Dell (right?). But I'm seeing games that state in the requirements that it needs a geforce-something-something. That is telling me that that particular game only runs on the NVidia brand of hardware, correct?

Isn't it a little rediculous that even highish end ATI cards, for which people shell out a good buck, would *still* not be good for certain particular games? And I right on this?

And what about the other way around? Can I go to the store and buy a box with a game in it that only runs on ATI hardware?

Is it the war of the graphics cards now?

AMD and Intel works together - programmers *have* to, and *do* cope with things by detecting the hardware that's used, and invoke the appropriate optimized subroutines.

Can't this be the same for the graphics card flavours?

peace... or not?

 

I don't know quite where you heard this a1mint,but theres no such thing like a game can only run on Nvidia only.

 

Here's more information on graphics cards:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=39568

 

I dont know what you're talking about but on my Fujitsu S6210 I was able to play WC3 JUST fine. No stutters at all.

 

No? A quick looking for Command & Conquerer requirements led to:

http://www.cncden.com/renegade_sysreq.shtml
"GE-Force 64MB Video Card"

http://www.gameblitz.com/generals.htm
"Geforce 4 and at least 1.3GHz"

ps. is the "GeForce Go 7300" as good as a "Geforce 4 with 1.3GHz" ?
Boy I'm out of date...

 

Anything is better than intergrated graphics. Unless you are going to use it for basic use such as word processing and maybe basic internet surfing then stay away from the intel card. Practically any card is better than the intel.

ucb9999

 

And I play Command & Conquer: Generals Zero Hour on an ATI X300. Works pretty well, and the GeForce 7300 should be faster than the X300, and the X1400 should be faster than either of them. So go with it. Like was said before, there isn't a game that requires only an NVIDIA or ATI card. A game developer would be stupid to do that, they'd be cutting out half of their target market, which is already crowded to begin with.

 

For every Nvidia card there is an ATI equivilent. Some games are optimised for Nvidia Cards, some for Ati - for example Nvidia cards are better at OpenGL games like Doom 3 and Quake IV but Ati cards work better with Half Life 2 and other Source games. But they still look perfectly good on the other brand cards too. All games work on both make of cards, provided the cards actual specs meet the requirements of the game.

As said the GMA is not good for gaming. It does run some games but its hit and miss, it lacks alot of features that were standard even in 3 and 4 year old cards.

The 7300 is weak but sufficent for older games, RTS games etc, but it won't really be good for first person shooters. It really all depends on what you want to play really.

A 7300 is technically better then a Geforce 4, yes, but not by an awful lot to be honest. The 1.3Ghz is nothing to do with the Geforce 4 - that simply means you need a Geforce 4 card and a 1.3Ghz cpu to accompany it in order to play that game.

 

Thanks everyone for the feedback. I was a little out of touch with this gaming stuff.

I feel the Lenovo 3000 N100 with the GeForce 7300 is good enough, and the price is ok.
I actually feel good about not getting a Dell this time - I just can't stand them this time around.

 

I just want to know one thing, can this GMA 950 play generals and zero hour fine??? I've been looking at many forums but none of them told me if the GMA can run Generals

 

Yeah, it can. My friend plays Generals on his GMA 900 and it runs ok.

 

The official Intel compatibility site is here:

http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/intel945gm/sb/CS-021400.htm

They say that C&C First Decade, which is the compilation of almost all C&C games, runs fine. I haven't played Generals on GMA950 personally, but if the requirements are for a Radeon 7500/GeForce2 which is DX7 generation than the GMA950 should have no problem. I have played San Andreas (DX8 generation) on the GMA900 and a Pentium M and it ran fine. It was only 800x600 though. (Funny though that Intel said that San Andreas doesn't run on the GMA950 although it runs on the GMA900. Probably a driver issue.) I've also played UT2004 (DX7/DX8 generation) on a desktop GMA950 and a Pentium D 820 and it ran fine at 1024x768 also.

The GMA950 may not have a hardware T&L engine, but between the sheer clock speed (compared to DX7 GPUs) and faster dual core processors (compared to PIIIs or Willamette P4s) it should be able to play any DX7 game using pure brute force. I would think quite a few DX8 generation games can run okay as well at reasonable settings and 800x600 of course. However, as others have said, for modern DX9 games and higher resolutions the GMA950 definitely isn't a gaming card by any stretch.

 

I recently purchased a Dell Inspiron 6400 w/ a nVidia 256MB Ge Force 7300 Graphics card and am looking at returning the computer and getting the Inspiron 640m which comes with the Intel Media Accelerator 950. The 640m is too small to upgrade to a low or mid-range card. I am not a big gamer(actually I don't play on my comp.) at all and mostly use the system for normal internet functions. I do travel and like to watch a movie here and there. I am running Vista Home Premium and was told the better card will help my OS run better.

So my question is, will a simple guy like myself really notice the difference between the nVidia 7300 and the 950? I do some photo editing and presentation type operations but I don't do many things that involve much graphics. But I don't want Vista to perform any less. Are there any other features that may be affected? Is gaming the only main difference?

Thanks in advance for any help!