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

I was wondering if there's a HUGE difference between the nvidia 230m GT and the ati 5730, like enough to exchange laptops and wait a month? I know the ati 5730 supports direct x 11. Other than that...iono. Both have overclocking potential though. Video card gurus feel free to chime in?

P.S. Maybe it'd be helpful if I gave the laptop models as well:

Asus N61JQ-A1 (w/ ati 5730)

HP dv6t Quad Edition (w/ 230m GT)

Both have same specs pretty much besides the video card. (Core i7 720qm etc.)

 

5730 is about 40% better then 230m in 3dmark, depending on the game you run on it difference can be lower or higher.

 

I haven't seen any benchmarks of the 5730, the 4650 is better than the 230M GT and the 5730 even better, but how much is hard to tell at the moment...

 

When comparing GPUs, you need to consider a number of factors aside from the specs and memory type. Every game will have different requirements and might prefer a certain brand, also there is resolution and quality settings. Most benchmarks aren't comparable due to different resolution used and other components skewing the score, so to state a "higher" number without the how that number was achieved, makes it useless.

That being said, overall in most situations, the HD 4650 GDDR3 isn't much better than the GT 230M GDDR3, but the HD 5730 GDDR3 should see significant performance benefits at the same lower resolutions as the previous two cards. Still at higher resolutions, the 128-bit buswidth will limit its potential.

 

Hi ,I would like to know the diference from performance, gaming ...
( basically sony fw vs f )

Thanks

 

I'm very interested in this as well... the notebookcheck graph just doesn't really tell me real world results.

 

Which one performs better ?

 

Doesn't the M11x use the GT 330M? The res from what I've heard is 1366x768 on that one which is the same as my 16" and it can play MW2 at 30 fps. My 4670 can play MW2 at 50 fps until smoke kicks in. The 4650 shouldn't be too far behind considering that the 4670 is just a higher clocked version of it.

 

The problem is that the Sony Vaio FW has an under-clocked GPU, making it difficult to compare without seeing benchmarks from the FW directly, not just any laptop using the Radeon Mobility HD 4650.

 

The 220M should be a fair bit faster, mostly because it has a 128bit memory bus as compared to the 64bit mem bus of the 4570. Notebookcheck.net has all the specs and such on almost all mobile cards and CPUs.

 

M11X= 335M

 

Is GT 220M equal to 9600M GT ?

 

Pretty much!

 

Let's hope the GT330M won't be underclocked too in the new F's !

 

I have the F which is set at: 575/790/1265. According to notebookcheck the card is 575/1066/1265.

I have mine oc'd to 675/900/1500 and my temps are still cool - high of 68.

 

9600 lose for 4570....

 

It also depends on if the 4570 is using DDR2 or DDR3 or GDDR3 memory.

 

Performance / gaming wise, which one would be better?

the 8400M GT is a DDR3

 

Probably about the same, but an overclocked 8400M GT would edge out. That's pretty amazing how you pulled over 4000 on an 8400.

 

The only difference is that the ATI will not set on fire .

 

Yeah, that's crazy, even better than my 3650, which is better than an 8600M GT.

 

that 4570 with ddr2 vram is good too, can play gta 4 with medium settings about 16-22 fps (with modded 9.12 catalyst) but better to buy with gddr3

 

all we need now are the 5xxx series cards, gts 360m etc

 

I am a bit confused as to which would be better in performance. Here are the specs from notebookcheck.net

5470
Manufacturer ATI
Series Mobility Radeon HD 5400
Codename Park XT
Pipelines 80 - unified
Core Speed * 750 MHz
Shader Speed * 750 MHz
Memory Speed * 1800 MHz
Memory Bus Width 64 Bit
Memory Type DDR2, GDDR2, DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5
Max. Amount of Memory
Shared Memory no
DirectX DirectX 11, Shader 5.0
Current Consumption 13-15 Watt
Transistors 242 Million
technology 40 nm

5730
Manufacturer ATI
Series Mobility Radeon HD 5000
Codename Madison
Pipelines 400 - unified
Core Speed * 650 MHz
Shader Speed * 650 MHz
Memory Speed * 800 MHz
Memory Bus Width 128 Bit
Memory Type DDR3, GDDR3
Max. Amount of Memory
Shared Memory no
DirectX DirectX 11, Shader 5.0
Current Consumption 26 Watt
technology 40 nm

The 5470 has better clock speed, shader speed, and twice the memory speed.
The 5730 has better Memory Bus Width and more pipelines.

So I am trying to figure out which would have better benchmarks in performance.

 

5730 is faster and I mean a lot faster- twice the memory bus width and five times the number of pipelines.

EDIT:
5730
Processing power (single precision): 520 GigaFLOPS
Memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/sec
5470
Processing power (single precision): 120 GigaFLOPS
Memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/sec (GDDR5) or 12.8 GB/sec (DDR3)

And belive me there is gonna be no GDDR5 version if HD5470.
Source: amd.com

 

Speed has very little effect in performance overall. The biggest determinants are memory bus width, memory type, and shader count (pipelines). In this light, you can see that clearly the 5730 would be the winner by far (even if the 5470 has GDDR5).

 

I have a Ati Mobillity Radeon 4670 that has 320 pipelines, 128 Memory Bandwidth, Shader speed 675 MHz, and Core with 675 MHz. So the 5730 would only be better by 80 more pipelines?

 

It's a bit faster in games than it would look like from shader number only but if I had HD4670 I wouldn't think of buying a new notebook with 5730.

 

Okay... So the 5730 is only a bit better than the 4670.

 

anyone know how the nVidia GLM DG 1GB, AMT performs?.. comes with the Thinkpad W510

http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...002920:&smid=EF937EBEC5524945B8BCE1DD35E116F6

how does it compare with the 5870 that comes with the asus g73 or the gtx 260? or any other reviews..

 

A quick Google search says that that's the Quadro FX 880M. That should help narrow down your search.

 

i'm not quite sure but are quadro fx cards workstation cards? if so, how are they different from gaming cards (gtx260 etc..)

 

Yep, the Quadro cards are workstation graphics. Hardware-wise, they don't really differ from the GeForce gaming-oriented cards much (in fact, some cards are physically identical). Most of the differences lie in the drivers. I read somewhere that you can install GeForce drivers for a Quadro FX card and it will run just like an equivalent GeForce gaming graphics card. I'm not at all sure which Quadro cards are equivalent to which GeForce cards, though.

 

IIRC, workstation cards have certain OpenGL features enabled on the hardware as well as hardware AA automatically enabled on some cards. This makes them a bit less efficient as their consumer counterparts for gaming(but still capable nonetheless).

 

indeed as forever_melody says, professional GPU's tend to give a slightly worse performance than consumer counterparts when gaming, but on professional environments, the difference is huge.

 

I've asked this in a different thread but just found this one.

Which wins and by how much: The 330 found in the Vaio F or the 9600 found in the Macbook Pro?

Thanks.

 

It should be roughly the level of the previous HD4650 the FW series had(judging by the specs) so it should maybe 15-25% better, but this will depend on the game in question.

 

maybe a silly question but does anyone know if the in game graphical settings(of any game) could affect the gpus temperature?

 

Oh yea, for sure, the higher demanding graphics you want, the more the GPU has to work, the higher the temperatures

 

But wouldn't the GPU be working at it's maximum possible load all the time, because it's trying to deliver the most frames?

 

It would, yes.
It would only go over the max temp/load if the gpu clocks are manually set to higher levels/frequencies.

 

From 1 to 5, how much would you give each one in terms of performance (giving 5 to the best). I'm getting a new notebook and I want to do some gaming on it. I currently have a notebook with a 9700m gts which I think is better than the rest but I'm not sure because sometimes newer card outperform supposedly better, older cards. Also consider that the 9700 is coupled with a low end C2D CPU (P7350), while the other 3 with a core i7 quad (720). Will I notice a big difference by "downgrading" to any of the last 3 newer cards?

 

1. GT 330M
2. HD 4670
3. 9700M GTS
4. GT 230M

The GT 230M is pretty much just a 9600M GT, which uses less power and puts out less heat. The 9700M is basically an overclocked 9600M GT. The 4670 is roughly on par with the 9800M GS, and I'm really not sure about the 330M, but I'm guessing it's a tad better than the 4670, I may be wrong though.

Also, this topic probably would have been better suited in the Gaming subforum.

 

I wouldn't put the 4670 as close to a 9800M GS, considering the 5730 doesn't get there and it outperforms the 5650, which in turn outperforms the 4670.

 

Well, I've heard that it's fairly close to the 9800M GS. Maybe it's on par with the 9700M GTS then...

 

This outta be good, seeing as how I still don't understand the NVIDIA naming scheme..lol

 

The 330M is basically a higher clocked 240M, which in turn is a higher clocked 230M.

The 9700M GTS is higher clocked than the 240M and 230M, but is built on the 60nm process and should run warmer compared tothe other 3 40nm cards.

I think I'm right. Could be wrong though, Nvidia's naming scheme has me a little confused too.

 

230M < 330M = 4670 < 9700m GTS

9700M GTS is 256-bit... 330M performs the same as 4670, but it's 40nm!

 

Now, how much difference will it make in cpu demanding games like GTA IV between 9700m GTS + C2D P7350 and 330m + i7-720QM?

 

You will want the 330M + i7-720QM setup to play GTA 4 as the duo will seriously limit your framerate and level of detail.

The 9700M GTS might just edge ahead of both the 330M and 4670 thanks to the 256 bit bus but not that far ahead at all. However in GTA you really want a quad and the i7 setup gives you that. With a small OC on your 330M you can easily match the 9700M GTS anyway.