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

That is correct!

 

1 important thing... The 8600M GS IS NOT A GREAT GRAPHICS CARD... It's really mediocre... You should aim at least to a 8600M GT GDDR3 if you wan't to play in a confort fps zone...

 

Thanks. I assume the GDDR3 is just a description and that a notebook with 8600M GT (without mention of GDDR3) is what you are referring to

 

GDDR3 is a specification for memory, it has faster clocks than ddr2 memory and consumes less power.

 

Actually, GDDR3 is a memory type used on graphic cards. There are two versions of the 8600m GT, one with DDR2 and one with GDDR3. Performance of the two memory types are equal at the same clockspeed, but GDDR3 can be clocked higher, and is typically clocked at 600-700 MHz on the 8600m GT, vs 400-500 MHz on the DDR2 version.

 

Would this Acer Aspire 6920G be GDDR3,
http://www.johnlewis.com/Shopping/Product.aspx?Type=SKU&Id=230479194

Seems like a great deal, £699 ($1400), 2 yr warrenty, 4gb ram, 2Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 (although seems like 677Mhz front-side bus whatever that means), NVIDIA® GeForce® 9500M GS.

Thanks

 

No thats DDR2...the 8600GT GDDR3 is faster than the 9500GS. And don't buy ACER. Crap customer service.

 

not a good deal at all, a very crapy proc.:<

 

No, there's no GDDR3 version of the 9500M GS yet... That card performs like a 8600M GT GDDR2... There's a post somewhere the forum that have a list of the Laptops with a 8600M GT GDDR3 card... Can't find it right now... But there is...

I remember the ACER 5920 had a 8600M GT GDDR3 but i think they replaced that with a 9500M GS now...

I don't know if this one is within your price range, but it has a 9650M GS, which should perform like a 8700M GT (and IMHO is one sexy laptop!)

http://www.johnlewis.com/230479193/Product.aspx

 

Thanks.

It is out of my price range and too big.
How about this one http://www.rizeon.com/laptops/rizeon_ifl92.php. It has 8600M GT 512mb

 

To be honest, i THINK that 8600 is GDDR2 as well... Again, i THINK, not to sure, that the GDRR3 versions are with 256MB only... But not too sure... If you can, search to see if it's GDDR3 or GDDR2...

Now... Can't you get a Dell XPS M1530 in UK?? It has a 8600M GT GDDR3... Or, i don't know if you can, the Gateway P-172Fx is one Sexy laptop for 1400$ with a 8800M GTS, but i don't know if you can get that in UK...

 

No...

8600GT comes in DDR2 (not GDDR2) and G DDR3. The m1530 will cost too much and he doesnt need it, and the gateway isnt available...

 

I dont think the m1530 cost too much for him... He was checking an Acer at 699£... Now, how much is the DELL ? He can get one with a T8100, 3GB of ram, 8600M GT GDDR3, 320 GB HDD for 729£ at DELL UK...

In the first place he was checking a 8600M GS thinking it was a good card, he is looking a gaming capable card... So i think he would be better with a 8600M GT GDDR3... Anyway is his decision...

BTW kadhumia, here is the link to the post i told you before, the one with the list of laptops with the 8600M GT GDDR3

And srry about the GDDR2 thing, it is DDR2, my bad

 

Thanks guys for your advice

I think I will go for the XPS but im going to postpone my decision til after my exams

thanks again

 

Im buying a Laptop. I want to spend the least amount of money possible, yet be able to play wow on minimal settings, In Battle Grounds (AV) without choppy comp lag . . .

What kind of GPU/Processor should I look for?

Also, Where would rate the following cards, and would they meet the demands of WoW?

ATI MOBILITY RADEON 7500 32mb dedicated
ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 32mb dedicated

I apologize in advance if these questions have already been answered

 

ouch...those 2 cards are pretty ancient...heh You should probably aim for a 8400GS.

 

Its too expensive for me

ATI Mobility Radeon X300 64mb dedicated ?

 

Thats might be ok...but you might be better off looking for something in the Geforce7xxx and the Ati X1??? range.

 

Will this run WoW?

 

I've looked up the p-6860fx on best buy and must say it completely destroys a m15x without the 8800M (only with the 8700M). I hate to say this but i already ordered a m15x for the perks and the fact that is a 15.4, is in phase 4 and i think im better off with the gateway. Also i cant afford buying the 8800 on the m15x.

Anyone know if i cancel my order this monday can i get my money back? i payed with my credit card full payment and i live in southamerica

 

Is the Is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600 a good graphics card? a can it play high demanding games?

 

I think it's presented like this:

8600M GT DDR3 >>>> HD 2600 which is slightly > 8600M GT DDR2.

 

8600M GT DDR3 > HD 2600 OC'd a lot>>>> 8600M GT DDR2

 

Can it play demanding games? Absolutely!

 

yes its a pretty good card, i have the mobility radeon hd3650 whcih is a revised 2600 i believe but with 1gb ddr2 and it works great in games but not so well in 3dmark but who cares right, if you overclock it will help alot but be careful. it can play crysis on medium-high well in 1280 resolution and age of conan great.

 

It plays everything I want it to play so far. Not at the greatest settings, but it gets the job done.

 

It's a midrange card that will play everything released today, only question is what settings it can support for playable framerates.

 

Erm, you don't need the HD 2600 GDDR3 to be heavily OC'd to beat the 8600M GT DDR2. I think you don't even need it OC'd.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=174584

 

Like the title says. How much of a differnce does the 256 mb make if at all. Will it run games beetter than the 128mb?

 

I doubt you would notice too much of a difference. The 8400M GS would probably perform a little better with the 256 MB, but not by much though.

 

The 8400M GS is a weak graphics chip; if you have no other option, I guess getting more memory is better, but the chip probably cannot process enough textures, etc. to fill the 256 MB anyway, so it is up to you.

 

yhea its the video chip i'm getting and other have said it will run halo , halo 2 and WOW and medium settings so i'm happy with it.

 

Yup, it'll run with it.

 

Wont be much of a difference but just get it anyway

you can run wow on max settings and still get above 60fps

CS:S youll run max settings 4x AA and 2xAA with over 60fps aswell

 

Depends greatly on the resolution.

My card can chew source up on 1280x800, but on 1680x1050 it can't be turned up ALL the way. ;]

 

Halo has a dv6500 which has a max res of 1280x800 but yeah any higher res, youll have turn down the settings

 

Its ok. It will run anything from last year and overclocks well with good temperatures. I barely get over 50 degrees even with my overclock from 500/400 to 600/500 (using a cooling pad).

These are the settings I play my games at. I don't know exactly what the framerates are but I doubt they go below 20 fps very often, I guess mostly 30fps average or more.

Oblivion, the mouse lags at 1280x800 when outside with lots of grass, but at 1024x768 I can pretty much max it out with my overclock.

Bioshock (with OC), 1024x768 in DirectX9 with high detail shaders, high textures, distortion, real time relections and shadow maps, but with force global lighting. No high detail post processing.

Crysis, 1024x768, DX9, all on low apart from medium sound, shaders, physics, water and volumetric effects. Without overclock I have to put shaders onto low for the ice levels or go to 800x600. OC gets around 4fps boost.

The Witcher (with OC), 1024x768, medium textures, grass and lighting, 2x Anisotropic Filtering, high shadows and far visibility range. It's stuttery in the Trade Quarter but fine everywhere else. Low shadows helps a bit in the Trade Quarter as there are lots of people, its still stuttery though, and high shadows otherwise fine, so I put up with it.

Command and Conquer 3, 1280x800 with high preset settings. Doesn't need overclock to run smoothly at these settings.

FEAR and Company of Heroes, pretty much max settings at 1280x800 even without overclock. In-game benchmarks get around 35-40 fps average.

Half Life 2 Episode 2 and Portal; 1280x800 with 2xAA, trilinear filtering and with all other settings on their highest. No AA without overclock and shadows to medium in Episode 2.

 

Sweet, I was going to ask the exact same question. Since I'm eyeing two HP notebooks, one with a 128mb (but more powerful CPU) and one with a 256mb 8400M GS (but weaker CPU) at similar prices. So, the 128mb version will barely make any difference, right?

PS. Going for the Pavilion 2839tx Verve SE. And it's June, so the prices are going to drop a bit.

 

Go for 128mb and the faster CPU

 

Yes, go for the faster CPU, extra 128mb of vram will have minimal impact.

 

I have a HD 2600 and it runs good but it is not a good overclocker only 60 Core and 40 MEM increase before by computer crashed and/or artifacts.

 

I'd guess it's a driver issue. Have you got the latest drivers and set the power management to Maximum Performance (in ATi Catalyst Control Center)?

It could be ATi Tools, but other people have been using it for overclocking the HD 2600 (v0.27 beta 4) so I doubt it.

Still, it may be worth trying AMDGPUClockTool 0.7, which is what I use. It can cause the screen to go blank for a minute. It's usually fine though, as long as you don't keep messing around with the clock speeds in one session. If you set the overclock at startup it's fine, but if you try after playing a game, it will often hang.

This thread may be useful; someone claims to have got the HD 2600 overclocked upto 750/600 and in the second post there are links to download ATITool 0.27 beta 4 and AMDGPUClockTool 0.7.

 

Thats fairly poor performance in crysis. I have an 8400m gt and can run shaders high , physics medium with everything else low at that res with oc.
I even turn anti-aliasing to 2x for some levels:O
Of course i turn shaders to medium for ice\no gravity levels.

Maybe crysis was released just to sell nvidia cards:\

 

the performance in crysis is way better than what steven describes here.

i have the 8510p ( HD 2600 / 256 MB Gddr3) and i have most settings at high, just 2 or 3 at med.
my native res is 1680 x 1050, but i´m running the game at ( *thinking *) hmm, 1280x960 and tried 1200×768 ( 16:9.6) and the game is running smooth when i oc the card a little from 500 / 600 to like 540/ 660.

so the hd 2600 ain´t that bad at all.

 

I hadn't really tried High Shaders before, I prefered to try and increase other settings like shadows or objects to medium, but High Shaders run suprisingly well for the first few levels that I've tried, better than increasing shadows or objects to medium and it makes a big visual difference. I'd definately have to put shaders back to medium for the ice levels though.

Well, I have the DDR2 version (not DDR3) and that's what I play the game at. It does run very smooth though, especially early on. Perhaps your faster CPU and 4gb RAM help somewhat. Have you played through to the end with those settings?

I find the ice levels drop the framerate a lot and I prefer to have settings that I can just forget about and have smooth gameplay all the way through the game; it runs smoothly with medium shadows upto the ice levels, but I don't want to keep changing the settings so I just get a very smooth framerate instead. Settings like motion blur, textures, particles and post processing don't bother me, I'd rather have the framerate increase eventhough they don't have much of a performance hit from low to medium.

Running at low settings doesn't bother me, it still looks good, but framerate dips are much more noticeable and I'm playing for the gameplay not the eye-candy.

 

You probably have a 2600XT, not just a regular 2600. The XT is about as good as an 8700gt. The regular 2600 can't touch it.

 

The HD2600XT is only available in HP's HDX...

 

Intel is releasing the X4500. When is the expected street date? Are Nvidia and AMD releasing something at about the same time that can compete with it?

I'm in the market for a budget laptop that I can use for light gaming (older games).

 

in those icelevels and the last level on the ship, it was a tad slower, but just clocked the card a little higher.
the limit i can go up to is 640 /780mhz for core and memory. most likely it´s a voltage limit, since people with the same config and a penryn processor can go about 20-30 mhz higher when ocing the core.

nope. it is the regular hd 2600. the hd 2600xt is basicly the same card as the hd 2600. only the clocks are higher.

 

Early august.