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

I noticed you were selling one card, didnt know if you still had a notebook with that card in it.

 

no i'm looking to buy a card so i can have sli lol. i'll change it to want to buy instead wtb

 

The one Soviet Sunrise has wont work or is it you would be missing the rest of the cooling equipment the sager needs?

 

yeah i was going to buy his card but it didn't have the cooling for the np9262 and no where else had it where i could get it separately

 

Hmm unfortunately my knowledge on ATI shaders vs Nvidia ones isn't all too extensive so I can't answer that question really >.< Was my plan to learn more about that some time but yeah I'll try.

IMO, the difference in memory clocks is most likely due to the protocol in how each units function in terms of allocating tasks and data transfers. Since ATI shaders work in units of 5, the way they allocate and distribute the tasks(between each of the 5 subunit of shaders) may influence the way memory is used and how clocks can be used in accordance.

Sorry for this half vague answer, I'll try reading up more to get back to you >.>

 

ok when you get everything pm me if you remember cause this thread moves fast if your not on alot.

 

Tsk tsk, sometimes I'm a bit disappointed in notebook manufacturers and their specs >.> They never seem to get it totally concrete.

Dell lists both their HD4570 as 128bit GPUs >.< ( click me)

 

Depends on how technical you want your answer to be.

Nvidia's shader cores are scalar in nature. That means that they only perform one floating-point op at a time. Nvidia's scalar processors are more efficient - ie. they'll spend less time sitting idle. AMD's vector units can process 5 floats in parallel - but it's notoriously difficult to write shader code that can actually utilise all that processing power. Although if you can find a way to use that processing power, there's a heck of a lot of potential.

In terms of performance, it doesn't really matter. The best way to compare performance of cards is to, well, compare the actual performance of the cards. Performance is affected by a lot more than just shader architecture - so you should use benchmarks to determine which is best for you.

Overclockability is also affected by a lot more than just shader architecture. Different process nodes (eg. 55nm vs. 65nm), heat characteristics, luck, and a whole host of other issues can affect overclockability. It's difficult to accurately determine these things just by looking at the specifications of the GPUs.

 

thats good. many thanks for your help. now i have made up my mind about which lap i would buy.. and thats depending on what you said about the ATI 4530....
hope it would run the fifa 2009 with good graphic cause this's the only game i play when i have time..

i will get Hp pavalion dv6 1115
thanks again

 

well i will be doing a comparions on both when i get my second 9800m gtx to my 3870 crossfire.

 

Glad that the information helped you

 

I'm looking at the Dell Latitude E6400 (NVS160) and the HP Elitebook 6930p (Radeon). Can someone give me a brief comparison of these two graphics cards and reasons why I should choose one or the other? Both feature 256MB of VRAM.

 

I plan to buy Dell Studio 15 after my HP Pavilion down.

But I wonder why is that Studio 17 is using 3650 and Studio 15 is using 4570 and Studio 17 is expensive than Studio 15.

So I would like to ask, what is the different between these two graphic card?

ATI Mobility HD 3650 and ATI Mobility HD 4570

 

Well for a side by side comparison:
- the HD3650 has 120 shaders while the HD4570 has 80
- the HD3650 and HD4570 have similar clocks
- the HD3650 has 128bit bus while the HD4570 in the Dell has a 64bit bus

So really they're not that far apart. The HD4570 performs quite well for a 64bit bus GPU thanks to the GDDR3 memory in it. However, it'll be gimped at higher resolutions due to the bus size.

 

Where's GeForce G 105M stand in this chart?

 

It's little better than an integrated so to be safe I'd put it a bit above the 9400M G from Nvidia or the HD3450 from ATI.

 

which one is better the 3200 ati vs the 9400 nvidia?

 

The 9400M is faster, but the HD3200 comes not too far behind. Both are among the best IGPs available currently.

 

So what's exactly the best GPU for notebooks ? Some people is saying the GTX 280M in SLI, but now others are saying that he 4870 X2 with the GDDR5 will be extreme ownage ? and what is the fastest single GPU ? and does PhysX create a difference ?

 

The HD4870 in GDDR5 isn't out yet so we can't say for certain what benchmarks will be. So far, the GTX280M in SLI is the best GPU available for notebooks. However, the difference between it, the SLI GTX260M and the HD4870x2 isn't groundbreaking either.

As for singular, same story, the GTX280M has proven itself to be the best contender for the single GPUs. However once again, the difference isn't exactly that much(it's around 10% more than the GTX260M and the HD4850).

I'd say either pick from both categories(single and dual) is mostly based on price/performance or other factors as pure performance, while noticeable, isn't exactly the hugest of differences.

 

The most informative thing I've ever heard(or read )
Thanks

 

I`m not an expert in this area, can anyone tell me if their are any major differences between the following Nvidia graphics cards, is their a big difference in performance, is one worth the extra money ?

Nvidia GeForce 9800M GT

Nvidia GeForce 9800M GTX

 

What are the rest of your components?

 

I would say that the difference is not worth more than +$100. You will get better performance with GTX but it's not going to be miles ahead of the GT.

 

The difference is 16 shaders. (112 in the GTX, 96 in the GT)
Note, this IS better, but not usually worth the price difference.
I think I agree with the $100-ish difference being reasonable.

 

I personally think it's worth it, no matter what the price, to be able to answer "GTX" when someone asks you what type of card you have in your laptop. It sounds way more than "GT" LOL. Ok just kidding.

The GTX has marginally better performance than the GT. We're talking like 4-10 FPS on the highest settings on some current games. The shaders will help, and the 1GB will help a little, but for the price point, you;d be hard pressed to justify over $100 for that marginal increase.

 

Its a Dell XPS M1730 that i`m thinking of buying with the following

Intel® Core2 Duo EXTREME X9000 Processor 2.80GHz
6 GB RAM DDR 2 (667mhz)
Blu-ray Disc DVD+/-RW Optical (Read & Write)
17 inch WUXGA display (1920x1200)
Dual 512MB NVIDIA® GeForce® Go 9800M GT SLi
400GB @ 7200Rpm etc etc

I mainly need to know if the 9800 GT is a decent graphics card compared to the GTX which ive seen in some M1730 laptops.

 

I was going to say to get a GTX 280M.... but then I saw the system that you are interested in does not support MXM modules.

the 9800M GT is still plenty fast.

 

Its a good card. It is the same card as the 8800M GTX, which is a little old now at this stage (as with the M1730 itself).

But here we are, 18months later and laptop GPUs have not really moved on much, the 8800M GTX is still a force to be reckoned with, especially in SLI.

 

I'm surprised Gophn didn't mention it... but at that level of computer you might be better off looking at a Sager/Clevo custom laptop than a Dell.
(unless you have an inside contact or business relationship with Dell)

Dell has a decent middle-range, but really doesn't compete on the high-end well.

 

I agree with kernal. For the price of a dell you could get a decent m980, or a really well spec'd sager 5797 with a 280m.

 

Ive been deciding between buying a brand new Alienware M17x which has the new platform and an M1730 which is less money but it has a great spec if you get the right model, i was trying to justify whether it was worth spending a further £600 (approx $1,000) on the M17x or to get a fully specced up M1730 with a 3 year on site warranty for quite a bit less than the M17x costs.

 

Budget Conscious= Get 98m GT/88m GTX
Not and 5-6 additional frame rates = Get 98m GTX

 

Did you miss the posts suggesting you look a Sager instead?

 

seconded

EDIT

If your looking at the M17x your thinking of the

280m GTX not the 9800m GTX

 

Hello all,

I purchased an HP HDX18 yesterday with a 1GB Nvidia GT 130m but am having some second thoughts due to the 1GB ATI HD 4650 in the dv7t. According to 3dmark benchmarks, the ATI crushes the 130m. HP reports that the nvidia card runs on ddr3 memory, but I have seen this refuted on every forum that I have been to; everyone is saying that it can only run on ddr2. Does anyone have any suggestions about which card to go with or if the HD 4650 provides a significant upgrade over the 130m?

 

4650 is certainly better bet than the GT 130m. ATI one is having 20-25% performance improvement from the later one.

 

4650 is faster

 

Thanks for the quick response. Does anyone know why HP advertises the 130m using ddr3 memory when previous buyers of the HDX18 have run gpu-z and reported ddr2 memory on the card?

 

I think the DDR3 memory is to be used in conjunction with the 130M. Shouldn't the card use a GDDR type of memory?

 

Its basically an upgraded 9600m gt isnt it? In that case it is often ddr3.

 

Yup. Just a higher clocked card with lower energy consumption. As with all in the 100M series...rebadged

 

All mobile cards use GDDR. Even if the specs are labeled DDR, the G is assumed.

 

I know the Radeon 4570 can use DDR type memory. Much cheaper than GDDR.

 

Hey! does anybody knows if there is some difference between the GeForce 9800M GS and the GeForce 9600M GT??
Where is the difference?
Thanks for your answer!

 

The 9800M card will have more stream processors and higher memory clocks. In short, it will be more powerful than the 9600M GT.

 

About a 50% increase on the 9800 GS... that's a lot.

 

Card would only be used for HD streaming of video from the internet (i.e. television shows on internet, movies maybe in the future). No gaming.

Is the GeForce an integrated card? Since it is 512, does it make a lot better than the Radeon?

I went to http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php and the GeForce scored higher on the Passmark G3D Mark compared to the 3650 (288 G3D mark versus 250). Can I assume that it will stream video better than the 3650?

What exactly is the Passmark G3D mark. Is that rating just for 3D graphics. I did a google search and didn't come up with much.

 

Hi, i was wondering which of the two graphics cards would do better in video games. i have a 9600m gt in my dv5t and my friend is going to get a dv6t with a 4550. which one would do better and how much?

 

I'd go for the 9600m GT. The 4550 would be severely bottlenecked with its 64 bit interface vs the 9600m's 128 bit.