UPDATED - The Mobile Graphics Card Info Page - Most GPU Qs answered

Thanks very much Odin243 and Chaz, you have both been really helpful, so do you think I should get the ATI catalyst drivers or I should get omega drivers?
Thanks

 

If you have vista, I'd stick with the Catalyst drivers. I'm not sure the omega drivers have been tested and or optimized enough under vista to be worth it. If you're running XP, I'd get the omega drivers as the do help your framerates in most games.

 

Help!

I have an Acer Aspire 5583wxmi but i just found out lately that the video was a shared one. Is there a chance that a video card may be inserted?

 

No,
Read the First page before posting.

 

First, thanks to Chaz for providing the info guide.

I have some more questions:
Is a mid-range graphic card with okay processor & sufficient HD & memory produce the better performance than integrated graphic card with good processor & bigger HD & memory ?


Which of these 3 combination produce the best performance?

Intel(R) Pentium(R) dual core T2060(1.6GHz/1MB L2) + 120GB 5400RPM + 256MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(R) Go 7400

Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo T5200(1.60GHz/2MB L2Cache) + 160GB 5400RPM + Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 950 - Core

AMD Turion(TM) 64 X2 Dual-Core TL-50(1.6GHz/512KB) + 120GB 5400RPM + 256MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(R) Go 7200

Thanks in advance

 

The first one with the Geforce 7400. There is really no reason to buy anything with an AMD processor at this point unless it's dirt-cheap.

 

What about new ATI X1200/1250/1270 ? Are they dedicated or integrated? Any benchmark?

 

They're VERY low-end dedicated graphics cards. Don't expect too much of a performance boost from integrated graphics.

 

While I agree with you about the 7400, there are many reasons to buy and AMD processor at this point, many of them related to gaming:
1) Until recently, only AMD models supported SLI graphics
2) AMD integrated graphics are better than Intel GMAs, and some are even the Go6150
3) Lower end AMDs tend to be cheaper and more powerful than the ultra-low end Intel's, such as the Pentium Dual-Core chip
4) When looking at entry level offerings, AMD beats the Intel Pentium M chips, which are still offered under default configs on many business machines

Yes, that's very true, though they're not horrible. Keep in mind that ATI integrated graphics are already better than the GMA, and their low end dedicated graphics can be overclocked to be decent performers, when compared to other low-end cards (Such as Go7200, Go7300, x1300, NVS 110m, etc.) In the end, they're good enough for older 3d games, and with everything turned off, they might be coaxed into producing playable framerates (20-30) in the less intensive modern games (though don't expect to fly through FEAR or Oblivion on anything mid to low end).

 

I agree with you. Although I am a Core2Duo fan, I must admit that the AMD 64x2 is far better than any Intel dual core from the T2xxx class !

 

As long as you are getting a modern dual-core processor, I would generally leave it at that and not worry about the performance differences between models unless that is the only factor you are deciding on. For gaming, your top priority should be a good video card first and foremost, and second, a good amount of RAM. The processor comes in third place in importance.
As stated, the best laptop out of all of them for 3D gaming is the first. The middle one is the worst, even though it has the best CPU. The performance differences between all those CPUs is not great.

 

Some popular questions I've seen around in the graphics forum that might be helpful if added to Chaz's FAQ on Page 1:

9. When are DX10 notebook cards coming out, and what can we expect?

Nvidia has announced that they will supply mobile DX10 cards in time for the release of Intel's new Centrino Platform, named "Santa Rosa," which is scheduled for an early May release date. However, don't expect major availability of DX10 cards until at least the summer, since only a few select notebooks will carry the new technology. ATI is currently behind, and will release DX10 notebook cards at least several months from now.

The technical specifications of Nvidia's new DX10 cards are unknown, but we do know that Nvidia is working on a Geforce Go 8600, 8400, and 8300. Based on previous generations of graphics cards, we can roughly estimate that the Go 8600 will replace the Go 7900GS, the Go 8400 will replace the Go 7600, and the Go 8300 will replace the Go 7400.

Nvidia's ultimate notebook graphics card, the Go 8800, is currently still in the works because of problems fitting such a hot component into a notebook without melting every other component. Sources say the Go 8800 will be released by summer's end, independent of the launch of the other Go's in May.

10. How will Windows Vista impact my gaming performance?

Windows Vista is known to negatively impact gaming performance. However, in the worst case scenario, you will only see a 5-10% drop in frames per second. The main reason for this drop in performance is the immature Vista drivers that ATI and Nvidia have. Given time, ATI and Nvidia will release better drivers that optimize their cards for Vista. It's important to note that a slight drop in gaming performance shouldn't be a major reason to stay away from Vista. When initially launched, Windows XP suffered from the same problem as Vista. As the months went on, and ATI and Nvidia developed more mature drivers, XP became the most stable and efficient operating system in the Microsoft lineup. You can read a more detailed article, including actual in-game benchmark comparisons between XP, Vista, ATI, and Nvidia, here.


Any other major questions that people have been seeing? I'll answer them.

 

Thanks Fren, I added those into the chart and gave you credit. I don't think I could have written them any better.

 

Hi, I just got my laptop with the X1400 built in. I have started FS2004 but I am a little dissapointed. With the rosolution turned down to 1280x800x16 and a frame rate set 30 and graphics down to medium low, the game still jolts..

Are there any particular settings I need to configure in the ATI Control Panel to fix this or any other solutions. I have the latest drivers.

 

Flight Simulator X is extremely demanding, even the highest-end systems have trouble with it. What you are experiencing is normal unfortunately. Flight Simulator X is very poorly coded.

Turn down the resolution for starters. 1280x800 is very high. Try 800x600.

 

thanks chaz but i am using flight sim 2004 not flight sim x because i know that flight sim x is very demanding. do you know what settings i should set my graphics card to "ATI MOBILITY RADEON X1400" to get the best quality gaming.
thanks

 

I don't own the game, but I'd suggest turning off anti-aliasing (AA) if it is on; it's a performance killer. Perhaps someone who owns the game can help you more.

 

thanks for that and also, I have the ATI 8.332.0.0 driver. I know you said to get omega drivers, but i am not sure which ones, as i dont want to get the wrong ones or old ones, and i dont know if they are compatible with vista. thanks

 

Thanks for the advice chaz to take off anti-aliasing it has worked. I took it off and am now running flight sim 2004 on ultra high settings (which i am really surprised about but happy) and it is flying really well without any jolting at all.

 

Yeah, that would do it.

It's surprising how much graphics performance anti-aliasing demands, but it's really true. Anti-aliasing basically just smooths out edges so an image doesn't look like a bunch of rough pixels, but instead, a smooth edge. Now imagine all the edges that would have to be AA'd ... the buildings, the airplane wings, the rubber gaskets surrounding the windows ... the list goes on and on.

 

Thats very true.
there are so many edges that need to be smoothed. It is not the end of the world that it is not on so i dont mind.

 

Hi, all. I have been finding this thread very useful as I try to figure out what laptop to buy. Well, at least the Chaz charts are useful (incredibly so!); the 108 pages of discussion that follows them is a bit much to wade through!

Here's my situation. I'm looking at cheap, mid-weight, 15.4" laptops. One of my friends recently purchased a Toshiba A135-S2276, expecting that he would be able to play some of our older favorite games on it, and he suggested I should look into it also; the price was a good $250 off.

Key specs:
- Pentium Dual-core T2060 1.6 GHz
- 512 MB DDR2 memory (but he immediately upgraded to 2 gig, and is offering me the spare 512 MB chip for free, so mine would be 1 gig)
- ATI RADEON Xpress 200M
- 1 gig L2 cache

From reading this thread and the one on "Will the 200M play my game?", I have learned that this 200M will presumably be the low-end version, with no dedicated memory and thus only 128 meg of shared memory.

Now, I know this is a **** rig for gaming; that's okay, because it can't possibly be worse than my Pentium II 266 MHz desktop with the 8 gig hard drive. It won't be long before I replace my desktop and make it a real gaming machine again. But in the meantime, I'd like to be able to play some games on the laptop. (Ideally, C&C Generals and Middle Earth 1... but if it can't play Age of Kings at the very least, I will be truly irate!)

More importantly, I have not been able to come up with any notebooks that I can afford which do not have an integrated GPU -- so in answering the following questions, please keep in mind that I'm not looking for a "good" gaming rig, I'm looking for a "least bad" one.

1) Chaz, you keep making the blanket statement that the Xpress 200M is better than the IGMA 950. But is that truly taking the wide variety of types of 200M into account? I gather the 950 has 4 pipelines, and for most of the laptops I've looked at, the specs claim it will have access to 256 meg shared. Meanwhile the 200M has 2 pipelines, and the one I'm thinking of buying (with no dedicated RAM) presumably only has access to 128 meg shared. Is that Xpress 200M still going to be better than the IGMA 950?

2) If so, how does it manage it, when by my understanding it will have only 25% of the pixel rendering ability?

3) Again if so, is there any amount of computing power that could ever allow the 950 to outperform the 200M? Or is the ability of the GPU a hard-and-fast limitation that no amount of horsepower can ever improve?

4) Two other machines I am considering:
Toshiba A135-S4467
- Core 2 Duo T5200 1.6 GHz
- 1 gig RAM
- standard IGMA 950 w/256 meg shared
- 2 gig L2 cache

HP DV6325US
- Turion 64 X2 Dual-Core 1.6 GHz
- 1 gig RAM
- Nvidia GeForce GO 6150 which the specs say has "up to 288 meg shared"
- 512 meg L2 cache for each core

And again, the "leading contender" is:
Toshiba A135-S2276
- Dual Core T2060 1.6 GHz
- 1 gig RAM
- ATI RADEON Xpress 200M w/128 meg shared
- 1 gig L2 cache

In terms of gaming performance, between these three far-from-ideal options, which would you recommend I choose? (Any other comments are also welcome.)


Thanks much,
John

 

There is only one model of Xpress 200 that has an integrated GPU.
And it's not 256 Megs shared it's 224 Megs always.
You are taking Chaz to lightly ,you should also look at the clock and the memory bandwidth and some other features and then compare.And also there are more benchmarks than just 3DMark,3DMark designed for Dedicated GPU's not integrated ones.What Chaz is also taking into account is the real-world performance.
And something that is more important than the amount of V-Ram is the fact that how the core makes use of the memory.For some realworld benches see here :
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/mainboard/ati-xpress-200-ie-chipset.html

I don't think it'll make so much of a difference with a different CPU.The GPU area is totally incompatible with the CPU capabilities.

This will have better graphics than the other two.It'll beat the other two, no denying it.

 

As mujtaba said, the real world performance difference is much greater than what the synthetic benchmarks (3DMark) suggest. The real problem with the integrated Intel GPUs is that they lack hardware Transform & Lighting, and it absolutely kills their gaming ability.

The HP machine looks like your best bet; the Go6150 is a great integrated GPU and is a better overall budget gaming chip than the X200M. Take a look at this article:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3591

I'd definitely skip the first machine because it has a GMA950. The AMD 1.6GHz and Intel 1.6GHz CPUs have about the same performance. And the HP has much better quality than the Toshiba, plus a better keyboard and screen in my opinion. You can see them in person at Best Buy.

 

domy123, imo, I'd stay away from graphics cards that use "non-dedicated" memory.

From reviews I've read, Flight Simulator X even kills nVidia's 8800s cards. As a magazine said... the game was made for "future" hardware... literally!

 

Depends on his budget.
Some people really need to save to get even what many call "a cheap laptop".
The guides and benchmarks all show the huge difference, don't they ?

 

I think new integrated ATI X1200/1250 should be added to the first post

 

awesome great help

 

Do you have a link to benchmarks of that card? Usually I refrain from adding items to the chart unless I have data to back it up with.

 

I only have links to the desktop X1250 (chipset 690 intead of M690)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2942&p=8
and are better than GF6150

And in Samsung subforum thread a forum member tested it (in Samsung R20)
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=1888961&highlight=3dmark#post1888961

but it is not a full review

 

Thanks for the links; I'll place the X1250 above the Go6150 for now unless someone is able to prove otherwise.

 

About the X1250; i'm planning to buy a budget notebook within next month, so i wanted to make sure i have the latest technology in Integrated graphics (reason: want decent low-end gaming and can't afford dedicated). But i don't think the X1250 will be widely available, i'm afraid it'll be like always, Intel graphics taking over 90% of the budget laptop market again.
Any news on wether what models will include it, or when the brands are gonna update to AMD 690M platform?

 

When Intel releases Santa Rosa in May, the X3000 integrated graphics unit will be widely available. It's a very impressive little video card that has been shown to run Half-Life 2 Episode I quite well.

 

AFAIK are available now with X1200/1250:
-HP Compaq Bussiness 6515b (14.1", AMD CPU) & 6715b (15.4" AMD CPU)
-Samsung R20 (14.1", Core2Duo)

 

Thanks, too bad the samsung isn't available in America though.

 

I have seen that revirew (in dwsktop integrated X3000)
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2942&p=8
and HL2 does badly, perhaps a drivers issue?

 

Mujtaba (and Chaz),

I'm afraid that, except for the emoticon, your meaning did not survive its passage through the language barrier. But one of the wonderful things about emoticons is that they need no translation...

Since I had no desire to offend anyone, I'm guessing that whatever I said to anger you must have just been phrased badly. But even though I'm not sure exactly what I'm apologizing for, I do apologize for it.

Please understand that I'm not a techie, I'm pretty much clueless about all this stuff, and everything I know about it came from this forum. I'd never even heard of "pipelines" before reading Pulp's excellent discussion of notebook graphics cards. Even if I had known what other features I ought to look at, I would not have known what to make of them. That's why I asked Chaz to help me make sense of it all!

Thanks to both of you for the links you provided and for your feedback. I will most certainly avoid the IGMA 950, and am taking a new look at some other HP models in light of Chaz's comments.

Then again, after reading Fren's post about the X3000, I may just have to put off getting a new laptop for another month or two...


John

 

No problem.
Sorry if I lost my temper a bit
Yes X3000 is extremely impressive.
Also, that Northbridge that has embedded X700 will come out at that time we can see which is better.
(Though X700 is DirectX 9.0b and X3000 is DirectX 9.0c, x700 is a really good GPU)

 

The drivers are to blame for the poor performance illustrated in that review. Check out this article by Pulp:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=109314

Hey John,
If you have any questions about some of the tech terms used just let us know and we'll do our best to explain.
Definitely check out that link I posted; I think the GMA X3000 looks like a very promising chip and it just may be worth waiting for.

 

Other AMD 690 with ATI X1250 review
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7972&page=9
of course again a desktop motherboard
It would be interesting to compare intel X3000 vs ATI X1250
and nvidia should launch something (GF6150 is a bit old, there is a slighty update 6150SE but AFAIK only for desktop)

BTW in SantaRosa (chipset 965) will be available only X300? or also GMA3000? IIRC in i965 desktop are available both of them (GMA3000 and X3000)

 

More about AMD M690/ ATI X1250 chipset: I 've found a web that states that Asus and Fujitsu will launch notebooks with AMD Turion and M690
http://www.electronic-data.com/een/hro/11_1978.asp
(sorry, it's in German)
Babelfish translation

But no information about when. So AFAIK only HP and Samsung as M690 now.
I ´m sure than all notebooks with AMD Turion & ATI X200 or X1100/1150 chipset will be updated to M690+X1200/1250, including not only Asus, Fujitsu and HP, but also Acer Dell, MSI. But I bet that will be very difficult to find Core2Duo with M690 because i965 with GMA-X3000 will be released very soon (because of that Samsung R20 is a very surprising notebook)

 

Since I speak a (very) little German, I'll just clean up Babelfish's translation a bit:

"Prominent computer manufacturers, including Asus, Fujitsu Siemens Computers and HP, will offer notebooks with the AMD 690 chipset and AMD Turion 64 X2 Dual-Core Mobile Technology."

The rest of the link seems to be AMD promotional boilerplate, so I'll assume the same info is available in English elsewhere. It says the combination of these technologies will add up to 30 minutes to battery life, and makes the following statement:
"In addition the new AMD M690 profits from the singularly high reliability of the ATI Catalyst™ Graphics Driver."


John

 

Thanks for the help John. Babelfish only does so much . . .

Fujitsu has two AMD-based notebooks, the A3120 and the S2210. Hopefully they'll be updated with the new M690 soon.

 

But S2210 is very new, was launched only a month ago with Turion64x2 and ATI X1100 it's the successor to S2110 (Turon 64 MT & ATI X200). So I supposse "S2310" (or S2220 or whatever) won't be soon ...

 

A friend has an intel 965, GMA-3000 in the office desktop. I ask him to benchmark it with 3DMark06 (when the boss is not in the office, of course ) and said that 3dMark06=195
Of course is a 3000 (without hardware T&L) not a X3000

 

Judging by the performance of the GMA3000 playing HL2 Episode 1, 3DMark06 would get pretty close to around 1,000, similar to current Geforce Go 7400 speeds...

 

Well I think less than 200 is mucho to low score...I´ll ask my friend
But are you talking about GMA-3000 or X-3000?

 

GMA, the laptop one.

 

In desktop there are two GMA: GMA 3000 and GMA X3000

 

As far as I know there's only one 3000 for the laptop that's coming up, and it's called GMA X3000