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

I don't trust notebookcheck on benchmarks,but i think that 4659 would be a better choice!

 

The 4650 has twice as many shaders. I'd take it over the 9600.

 

How does the HD4570 fare in the chart? I haven't really seen any benchmarks for it, but from the specs it looks really weak(64bit bus and not lots of shaders) so how does it actually perform?

Also, is the HD4670 available in any notebooks? I haven't really heard much yet since I haven't been keeping up to date lol

 

I have a DV5 with a 9600m GT. According to GPU-Z, i have a stock clock 500mhz, memory of 400mhz and shader 1250mhz. 8 ROPS, 512mb DDR2 and 128 bit.

How would this fare against the 9500gs on the HP media center desktops?

 

About equal performance, assuming the 9500GS is also DDR2. Maybe slightly lower.

 

The 9500GS is about 15% slower overall, that is, if both cards are DDR2.

 

4570: 3200 3DMark06.

 

Are you referring to the 9500M GS? Because the OP is refering to the desktop 9500 GS.

 

i think the 9600m GT are equal to 9500GT

 

Ah my bad, I thought it was 9500M GS.

Howerver I think my answer is the same. The 9600M GT is about the same as a 9500GT so I would assume the 9600M GT to be faster.

 

9500 gs should be a bit faster

9500 gs: 550/1375/500
9600m gt ddr2 : 500/1250/400.

 

A lot more than speeds are important, but I agree that the desktop card would probably be slightly faster.

 

I was only curious which of these chipsets has better benchmark ratings, for performances on gaming, video editing, etc. Basically, anything that utilizes each chipset.

I would like to compare the same dedicated video memory at 512 MB. Thanks for the help.

 

The 4570 is vastly superior to the 9400M in performance. THe 9400M is one of the weakest discrete graphics chipsets available, while the 4570 is, I believe, a medium-high range card.

 

It would be a medium level card for ATI, and as stated, vastly superior to the 9400M.

 

Actually the the 4570 would be considered a low-medium range card. But still much better than the 9400m.

 

The 9400m is actually the strongest INTEGRATED graphics chipset, but the comment still holds true as the dedicated 4570 is better in performance.

 

My bad, I was mistaken. Thanks for the corrections.

 

I have the 9400M in my Macbook, and it's a pretty decent chip. It's held up well to my standards in COD: WaW, but ok, it's not as great as a 9800GTX. It's perfect for the occasional gaming with me. Also, I have Nvidia's 179.48 drivers..

 

Hi people! I'm about to buy a new laptop for everyday use and some gaming, and I've got mainly two options right now (newegg):

Asus G50v x5

or

MSI GT627

Both are priced very closely, but one has an 9700GT and the other a 9800GS.

How much faster is the 9800GS? Because if there's hardly any difference I will get the Asus, but if the difference is a ton... well, the MSI will do.

I don't play Crysis nor any very intensive game but will like to play Mass Effect, Dead Space and so o just fine.

Are there any benchmarks showing these two?

Thank you so much in advance!!

 

get the 9800m gs

 

Go with the MSI that is a SOLID machine and it is actually one of the lightest gaming notebooks you can buy, Its also really thin for what the notebooks is packing, good luck.

 

In my personal experience, for nvidia cards, the X600 or X700's of whatever series are usually pretty good, especially for their prices, but theyre never quite as good as some of the X800's.

If I were given the choice id go with the 9800GS, but for you I think it also comes down to the qualities of each individual notebook, such as dragon was saying the MSI one is a quality machine, and ASUS is as well. Just my two cents there.

 

+1 for the MSI, I was actually considering getting that one for myself. Get the model on xoticpc.com for around $1500, it's loaded with goodies like a Blu-ray drive and 9 cell battery.

 

The 9700M GT stand no chance, the performance gap is pretty big thus I'll go with the 9800M GS without doubt.

 

Agreed, the 9800M GS destroys the 9700M GT. Totally different class (high end vs. mainstream GPU). Specs in my sig link.

 

The 9800M GS kicks the crap out of a 9700M GT. I would know seeing as I have a 9700M GT.

It underperforms heaps and consistently gets lower scores and results than 9600M GTs.

 

Will I get DOUBLE the frame rate by going from Mobility Radeon HD 3470 to Mobility Radeon HD 3650, all else are equal? In a game like Dream Fall or Unreal 2? The CPU is C2D T9800 2.93 GHz.

BTW: other GPU is not possible since the only notebook that fits my requirements is Sony FW which doesn't offer better GPU than 3650.

 

Not that dramatic an increase, perhaps 15-20% from an optimistic standpoint.

This is assuming you're not starting from an FPS of 5 going up to 10 with the GPU upgrade due to unrealistic graphical settings and resolution.

 

Most likely not double but there will definitely be a significant increase in framerate. I would go for it if the upgrade is less than 100 bucks.

 

Ok thank you very much! didn't know the difference was so big (9700GT vs 9800GS), I will definetively get the MSI then! thank you very much!

 

My Studio 15 has Intel 4500MHD. I was just wondering is it any good for playing games like COD4, Unreal Tournament, GTA4 and the likes ..

 

Not at all.
You might be able to get away with COD4 on lowest settings.
Unreal Tournament? Yeah, the original.
GTA4? Zero chance.

 

Even less

 

I LOLed

sorry mate, your graphics chip is a very low-end solution and will not be able to handle any newer games.

 

Yea I just went through the reviews and found out that it's not good enough for new games. Gaming on notebook is not on my list, but you gaming guys got me thinking about giving it a try.

Nah! Zero chances for it as well

 

The 4500MHD is about 75% the performance of an 8400M GS/9300M GS. Since I was able to play COD4 on an 8400M GS at 1280x800, everything else on the lowest settings at about 100FPS on Wetwork multiplayer, you can definitely squeeze out COD4 at 800x600 with everything else low. Would not be surprised to even see about 50+FPS.
If you already have COD4 just install it and give it a shot, you might be surprised.
GTA4 seriously won't happen though

 

Cool, I'm loving the forum. Thanks for the info.

There ya go, I don't have it right now and that's why I asked 4500MHD is good enough or not. No point for me in taking the pain just to see whether it can run it not (as I don't use notebook for gaming)

Thanks guys for the info =]

 

Just download the demo then and give it a shot
http://files.filefront.com/Call+of+Duty+4+Modern+Warfare+Demo/;8774322;/fileinfo.html

Good luck.

 

Do recommend if you try COD4, set it to use shader model 2. By default it uses Shader model 3, which is more demanding. I got a nice bump in performance, almost twice the performance actually, by doing this. It's a console command, not an option on the graphics menu, but once you set it, it stays that way. I bet with that you'd be able to run it fine, as my Tablet with the ATI HD3200 (integrated) runs it nicely with that one change.

 

http://pcgamingcorner.com/wordpress/?p=820

from that review 4500MHD is not capable of playing COD4 even at lowest settings.

 

With tweaking it is surely doable. I am the master of playing games on hardware too crappy to actually natively support it.

 

haha, i remember myself sqeezing every single fps out of x3100... just gave up in the end. =)

 

Chaz did use Shader Model 3.0 in that test, so I still think it might be very possible to get it playable and enjoyable using Shader Model 2.0... it gave me a nice boost on my Tablet. Curious

 

does anyone have benchmarks of the new ati mobility 4570? i'm also wondering when the official "release" is for it, as in, when do manufacturers start shipping it in laptops?

i'm just wondering how long before i can get a decent (preferably 13") laptop with this card.

 

It should be around the level of the 9600M GT GDDR3 which is in the LG P310 currently.

 

The HD4 570 already exists within a 13.3" laptop. It's the Asus f6v-B1(or something like that) I think. Judging from its specs, it should perform somewhere between the old generation's HD3470 and the HD3650.

If you meant the HD4 670, which is far more powerful, it is said that it will king the mid-range 128bit bus GPU field.

 

I think the new HD 4860 takes the king of the 128-bit GPU field Don't think it's quite mid range anymore...

 

Yeah, if you use SM 2.0 it should definitely be playable. Note that the 4500MHD in my notebook is slightly lower clocked since it is paired with the budget GL40 chipset; if you have a non-budget notebook with a GM45 chipset, then it will have a faster-clocked 4500MHD.

Expect a lot of fluctuation with framerates with the 4500MHD though. It's basically unavoidable with integrated graphics.

 

well whichever fits a 13" with room for everything else as well (unlike the lg310). if the 4670 fits, all the better. i'd like to see benchmarks, size, temperature and wattage for both if someone has a link.

also, the asus f6v isn't available in europe yet it seems.