Not a Gamer - Should I Bother Getting a Dedicated Graphics Card?

Hello everyone,

I'm about to buy a Dell Vostro 1500 and am wondering if I should upgrade to a NVIDIA 8400M GS (128MB) or 8600M GT (256MB) dedicated video card. I am not a gamer, and it's unlikely I'll ever play 3D games on it.

I do plan to watch DVD movies and streaming video, as well as use Photoshop to edit high-res images (sometimes quite large ones). I'm going with a WSXGA+ display at 1680 x 1050 resolution. Will the X3100 integrated option be enough for my purposes?

My budget is a little limited, so foregoing the NVIDIA cards and cutting another corner or two should give me room to get a T9300 processor (2.5 GHz, 6MB L2) rather than the T7250 (2.0 GHz, 2MB L2).

Any input would be very much appreciated. Thanks!

 

dedicated cards make you notebook future-proof,and its good to have one,by the way you can buy one for much less from dell outlet!

 

Thanks Xirurg, I like the idea of not having integrated graphics but if I don't need a dedicated card, I'd rather save the money. But from the Upgrading Mobile Graphics Cards thread it doesn't sound like swapping cards is easy or always possible anyway.

Dell's running $500 off Vostro 1500's configured at $1249 or more, so at the moment getting a new one may be cheaper than the outlet.

 

I'd go with the 8400 at least even if it's just for watching dvd's. It helps future proof your laptop, is better for movies, and who knows when you might need to use 3D applications even if it's not a game.

 

With all the new integrated GPU chips coming out and the upgraded drivers for the Intel X3100 I'd think not.

However it couldn't hurt. Most entry level discrete GPUs will add on at least $100.

 

yeah i'd go for at least the 8400 - especially if you're running Vista.


or also, Cover Flow in iTunes.
yeah that's right, Cover Flow.
Cover Flow is one demanding piece of eye-candy.

mmm... candy...

 

Since an integrated GPU uses some system RAM for display purposes, even non-gaming tasks like encoding can be slower with a bandwidth sucking IGP

It's not just 3D games that benefit from a separate, dedicated GPU/RAM---anything that wants system RAM bandwidth would benefit.

That said, the tasks you listed would should still probably be better with the T9300 processor and an IGP than the T7250 one and a dedicated card.

 

I'm also in a similar situation. I am going to purchase a new laptop this year and I rarely do any gaming. My wifes plays some games like the Myst series, but thats about it. We will however be watching movies via download from Netfilx, etc. (through HDMI out to our plasma) and I want to make sure that the laptop has enough umph! in the video to handle it.

I have been looking at the upcomming AMD/ATI 780 integrated chipset video and was wondering if this would be enough for what we are going ot use it for, or should I be looking at something like the Nvidia 8600 or other discreet graphics.

thanks

 

With notebooks, its a good practice to get "more" than what you need, as it tends to be very difficult if not impossible(which graphics usually are) to upgrade.

 

That's a good point - I'm going with XP, but at some point I may choose (or be forced) to go to Vista. Thanks, jeopardy2k8

 

Yes, thanks, the T9300 is 25% more speed with 3 times the cache, I'd think I'd benefit more from that. Still, from what I've read it'd probably be good to at least go for the 8400 GS. I'll make it work

 

Yeah, go with at least the 8400GS. They extra HD decoding will offload from the CPU, making H.264 and other HD content actually watchable at higher resolutions (720P or 1080P). This is one thing that irks me about the GMA950 that I was forced to go with--it even lags in flash applications!

 

Yes, the AMD 780G will easily play movies and be able to do some light gaming, too. The graphics core is ~3X faster than an Intel X3100. The 780G basically has an entire Radeon HD2400 (a budget dedicated card) embedded in the chipset, so it is almost like having a dedicated card. I am not sure when the mobile chipset is coming out, but i'm guessing the 2nd half of 2008.

-J.B.

 

I agree with most of the ppl here. Get at least a basic dedicated card, like a Geforce 8400m... Cause the Windows Vista can be quite GPU demanding and you won't be able to run it properly with only an X3100 (I know you don't plan to use Vista now, but in the future you might be "forced" to), so by adding $100 bucks or less to the price of your note, you'd be extending its life substantially.

 

A million thanks to all who responded!

I'd decided to get the 8400M GS and the T9300 over the T7250. But after reading some posts in other threads about CPU's, I'm not really sure the T9300 is worth the $300 extra over the T7250, or if I'd notice that much difference. And given that the CPU is upgradeable, but the graphics card is not, it's looking like a better use of my money to just get the 8600 GT and the T7250. I could always put a faster P-class processor in it down the road, and their prices are likely to drop substantially once Intel's Montevina platform becomes available later this year. Seems going for the best graphics card and compromising a bit on the CPU will do the most to extend the laptop's life as much as possible.

I'm excited! This is going to be a near infinite upgrade to what I currently have. If I told you guys how old my current laptop is, you'd all s*** bricks, LOL.

Hint: The graphics card has a whopping 32MB!

 

Get a Lenovo ThinkPad R61 model 7742. It uses a nVIDIA Quadro NVS 140M dedicated GPU. Just as good or better than a 8400m GS.

You can find this model for around -+$800 with the T9300 and the dedicated GPU.

It's a great value on some of the best technology available before the big Centrino 2 and integrated ATI Puma platforms hits the market. Good time to buy for savings and should meet your needs very well.

 

Imo, for your purposes intended, you DO NOT need dedicated graphics.

Photoshop, Vista, HD video content all can be done on an IGP, especially the X3100. Having an dedicated card does not give a huge increase in performance for these three tasks. Rather, spend the extra money and invest in nicer LCD screen option to get the biggest bang for the buck.

p.s. Vista is silky smooth on a X3100

 

The X3100 is garbage. End of story.

You should either go with a 8400m/8600m or wait for the new AMD's Puma [low budget] plataform, which is gonna come with an integrated but real gpu (a.k.a. the Radeon HD3400 w/up to 512MB of dedicated video memory) and some descent CPU (on pair with the mainstream C2Ds).

 

When you compare it to dedicated video cards, it's obviously no brainer. Integrated cards have always been at the bottom of the barrel in gaming performance. BUT you're missing the point. The OP doesn't play games, therefore having a dedicated card is pointless when an IGP can do the same at a lower price, with less heat, and better battery life.

We all get that the X3100 is not good for PC gaming. For everything else however, it is a great integrated solution.

 

IMO you should get the x3100 because its enough to do the job from what mentioned above

but if it was me, personally id go for the best gpu possible. Why? because gpu's are un-upgradable and id probably regret getting the x3100 down the road. Id kinda put the same logic to CPU's aswell

Battery life between the two isnt significant. The price might be though

Having over the power you need on tap is damn good, even if you dont use it. Its just good to know that your laptop can handle anything you throw at it

 

My current graphics card has 64MB, and the laptop is fairly recent. It is by no means a super gamer, but everything seems smoother than on my shared x200m and gma950.....

 

Tell that to the majority of laptop users who are using Vista on an X3100. Do remember that dedicated graphics only consist of the minority of laptop users. You know how vocal people are when it comes to pain associated with Vista. But how come I haven't seen any complaints regarding Vista and X3100?

So yeah, X3100 is actually powerful enough even for Aero. End of story.

Anyway, the X3100 should be enough for your needs because, as you mentioned, you don't game and you'll just be doing Photoshop, which is actually CPU- and RAM-intensive. It is NOT GPU-intensive -- that's a common misconception.

But flipfire makes a good point. Since laptops are not upgradeable [at least the GPU isn't], might as well get something more powerful, in case your needs change as time goes by. I'd recommend at least the 8400M GS because it might help you when, say, you want to view HD content [not just Blu-ray, can be downloaded. Basically videos with 720 or 1080 height]. And, personally, if you're purchasing that big and chunky monster of a laptop, might as well throw in dedicated graphics.

 

Bottomline: You may not need a powerful dedicated graphics card. But you could still use the lowest-end dedicated GPU for making your laptop more future-proof. Ofcourse, your needs/wants may expand at a later stage, even though you aren't gaming now. Taking all those things into account and the fact that a basic 8400M would cost just a tad bit more than an IGP, and if that shouldn't be TOO hard to get (money wise), then I'd suggest you just go ahead and get it!

 

is faster , but not much and is hugely overpriced ,especially at Dell , not much at HP.

how come it is so extreme either T9300 or T7250?

can you choose in between ? like say, the T7500 or T8300 with discrete card?

 

thanks for the info on the AMD , that sounds like what exactly I need.

 

hope not too late , DONOT Waste your money ,300USD is a amount big money so please , don't get the T9300 , is not that much faster and is not compatible with Montevina.

Get a Montevina if you need a much better CPU than the T7xxx, the T8100, T8300 and T9300 have the same 800FSB and they are basically Santarosa , so why do you need to pay 300US more than the T7250 , which is already quite fast.

Save your money and get a montevina when it comes out.

Yeah maybe you are right , get the T7250 with the NV8600GT, it is much better combo than the Wasting Penryn + NV8400GS, if I can change my order and I will do that, but too late for me, dont press the order yet , just carefully think about it the GPU is not upgradable but the RAM , CPU and HDD are all UPGRADABLE.

 

The T9300 is a proven performer.

If he wants performance he should get it.

 

Your question is quite confusing lol. If you want to be happy with your notebook..get atleast the 8400M GS. If u arent gunna play games AT ALL, still get a dedicated card to view movies with beter detail

 

for 300US over T7250?

I dont think so , it is not a good buy.

T7500 or T8100 is much cheaper and not much slower.

And as the T9300 is a Santa Rosa Penryn , it is not a good buy since Montevina will be out very soon.

So for just a few months until new plat form comes , he should not waste too much money for the T9300 or T9500, they will be outdated like Santa Rosa Meroms very soon.

 

I also think for his use , he does not need any discrete graphics. he should get X3100 it uses a lot less energy and runs very quiet and cool.

 

Sums it up pretty well

 

but the point is he should not waste his 300US on the T9300 ,which will soon be outdated.

as all current CPUs will be outdated very soon , why do you need to spend that much more for the Penryn?

there are many cheaper and more reasonable options, especially when he is buying it from Dell directly.

the T9300 is not much faster than the T8300 , T8100 or T7500 and is much more expensive than the other 3 similar processors.

and Penryn does not affect on battery life much, maybe on paper but not in real life use , I dont even see it is runing cooler when compared to the T7300 , T7500 or Pentium DC.

so I think the T7500 or theT8100 are the current sweet spot considering their price /performance ratio.

 

I would say get the discrete or dedicated GPU. When your video is using shared memory with the system it can cause bottlenecks even when not playing games.It can still somewhat hamper the overall performance of your PC.

 

Unfortunately the T7500 seems to be no longer an option for the Vostro 1500. The next upgrade from the T7250 for the least amount of money is the T9300 for another $300. I've decided it's not worth that and am sticking with the T7250.

I'm also getting the 8600M GT for the future, since as so many have pointed out, the GPU is not upgradeable. And I do want to watch movies at 1080p.

 

I'd say get the X3100, there's no need for an 8400M GS, it'll just use more battery life and run hotter and cost more needlessly.

 

The X3100 is terrible for HD playback, especially for anything high bitrate, the GF8400GS gives him some additional features. The only annoying thing is that the PureVideoHD support under XP is a little medicore, and the additonal features like noise reduction and AA aren't useable on the GF8400GS, however they aren't even available on the X3100, and it's video and gaming drivers are mostly promises with little on delivery.

For you tasks the GF8400GS is a good balance, it'll be overkill in some things and not up to the task in a very small number of situations, and really the times that that's the case are more livable than missing out on all the features you lose going with something like the X3100.

I agree the T9300 maybe be overkill, and depending on the video content you're watching maybe the GF8600 would come in more handy, but for photoshop the T9300 will help with filters, effects, layer changes, and previews. But really we're talking about minor differences here, you'd see more difference in HD playback of the GF8600 over the GF8400 than greater utility in the T9300 over the T7250 IMO. It'd be a different story if you were editing video and playing games, but for Photoshop the difference won't be as pronounced in my experience basically single digit percentages in time to tasks. Personally I'd rather spend the $300 on software, or camera hardware, and a few extra beers. $300, to me equates to 3 days of skiing so I'd need more return on my investment personally.

 

Take a look at the current deals at Lenovo.

You will find a great deal on the T9300.

Don't look at Dell.

http://www.lenovo.com

 

PVHD and AvivoHD improves DVD video but utterly fail in HD content. Seriously though, at that HD resolutions, even if there was some sort of improvement in video quality, it would not be noticeable in human vision.

The X3100 plays HD content perfectly fine. last I checked, Toshiba notebooks fitted with the X3100 had HD-DVD drives in it. I myself constant play 720/1080 h264 content without a problem, and with custom settings in CCCP, watching DVDs look much better than my desktop with a 8800gts.

 

With a dedicated GPU, expect more heat and ~20% less battery life.

 

20% is a bit high, epecially across the board, I could possibly see that with an 8800, but an 8400 wouldnt take near as severe a hit, especially with the software and hardware level power saving measures of todays mobile GPU's.

 

Is the OP still here? You're going to want to go dedicated if you plan to watch any HD video.

 

then what about HP? do not need to stick with a brand , you can choose any brand , and I am sure HP offers T8100 or T8300 and they are much cheaper than the T9300.

 

And if he does not get the NVIDIA , he 'll save 75US and energy.

 

Oh I see, I did not know that, thanks and I think HP also offer a good deal on the T8300 or T8100 but not the T9300.

 

I've noticed people recommending the Vostro with an 8100 over the 9300, as a way to save money. Fyi, Dell is charging $170 more for the 8100 over the 9300.

Let's not get carried away here.

 

Anyone have any opinions or ideas on how the DVD/HD-DVD/Blu-ray performance will be on the upcoming AMD/ATI 780 compared to the current 8400 or 8600's that are available right now?

 

Thanks for the link, I've seen it before and know the author personally, perhaps you should read his more recent review while waiting for his next one;

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/26/avivo_hd_vs_purevideo/page8.html

And that was before the recent AMD and nV driver updates adding better support, and more features.

Sure bud.
Same as the 'no one can see above 16/24/30/60 fps', right?
It's more noticeable on a larger monitor, than a smaller one. YOU may not notice the difference, but to say it's not noticeable to human vision is a pretty naive statement, especially since people (with good vision) notice noise very easily since anomalies are more noticeable than more subtle differences.

Depends on your definition of HD and 'perfectly fine', even intel acknowledges the limitation themselves " 8 HD-DVD or Blu-ray disc media playback requires the use of a third-party decoder card and appropriate software drivers.";
http://download.intel.com/products/graphics/intel_graphics_guide.pdf

It relies very heavily on the CPU and for high bit-rate BR titles it's been known to stutter especially when doing HD audio decode on too (see Anand review I added), the X4500 is supposed to offer true hardware acceleration including decryption without as much outside help as their older solutions, similar to that found in the AMD, nV, and S3 solutions.

Based on your 'human vision' comment, I don't really put much stake in that comment or it's application to other humans' vision.

 

Not off the top of my head (about to go to sleep), but Anand did an OK job looking at it versus the GF8200 & G35, this should help, and also answer cloud9's questions about where the intel solutions fall short (check the HD tests);

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3258&p=4

The only other review I committed to memory at all had the HD3450 in the mix, but no nV card, and the HD3450 far outpaced the 780G for efficient decoding.

 

Cost was a concern, as I mentioned in my original post, and with Dell's special of $500 off $1249 or more, there was no way I could get a comparable system from HP or Lenovo for the same price at this time.

I forgot to mention in my original post that battery life is not at all a concern for me. I'll travel with the laptop infrequently. Several posters pointed out a dedicated card would consume more power.

So, anyway, to finish the thread, the Vostro 1500 has been ordered, $819.77 with tax and free shipping got me: XP, T7250, 2GB RAM, 8600M GT, WSXGA+, 80 GB HDD, Intel 4965AGN wireless, CD/DVD with double-layer DVD write, 6-cell battery & 2 year warranty with NBD on-site service. Not bad at all for the price... I'm happy.

Thanks again for all the responses!

 

The Vostro really tends to be an unbeatable deal. Welcome to the club.