Why is the 7400 > 8400M G?

The 8400M G has more VRAM, it's newer, faster, scores higher in 3DMark06 ... so why does it suck compared to the 7400? I made the mistake of checking out the XPS M1210 before I sent it back to Dell, and the 7400 stomps the 8400M G. ArmA, a FPS, is much smoother on the same settings than the 8400M G; I have to turn everything down to super low to get smoothness on the 8400. Is my notebook screwed up somewhere?

 

It might be drivers. I don't even know where to get 8 series mobile drivers though.

 

the 8400 is better hands down, dont be confused on that.

it was just released, and has brand new drivers. it has to be a driver issue with that game. as the drivers mature, you will see the performance increase to somewhere beyond the 7400.

 

I'm not sure of all the specs of each card, but the 8400M GT is definately a better card than the 7400. It is also DX10 compatible making it more future proof.

 

Probably, but this is about the 8400M G. I'm not completely sure it's a driver issue. I'm trying to post a video I made comparing the two in actual gameplay. I think that's the key, nobody has ever compared these cards in gameplay, it's always 3DMark.

 

I wouldn't worry about it too much man! As with any new hardware (GPUS specifically) drives make a world of difference. Nvidia hasn't been great about Vista drivers so I assume their 8 series mobile drivers aren't very optimized yet at all.

 

3dmark is bogus- i agree with you on that much. but still- no worries. the 8400m g just has to suffer through a hopefully short-lived wonky driver phase. once the drivers mature- it will perform much better. i know you aren't sure- but i am positive. the drivers that are out now are likely tuned for compatibility, where as future drivers will attempt to increase performance.

 

Any possibility that it's this Vista Business? I don't know how it's different from Premium. It makes since that the 8400 should perform better (it's 400/600 compared to 450/450) but I'm wondering if the Turbocache on the 7400 makes a huge difference.

Oh well, I shouldn't be playing games much anyway

 

I can tell you from first hand experience the Turbo Cache does not make much difference for games. You neeed to check the Onboard video memory, that pretty much the big factor here. Using shared memory across the PC bus is SLOW.

In vista use the display settings (right click on the desk top and select personalise) then - advanced settings button to see this.

I have a Sony VAIO VGC-LA38G panel PC (laptop) the 7400 is great as a GPU but the idiots just put in 64MB RAM (with shared memory 319MB) - NWN2 only runs at low resolution and most options (that the GPU can actually handle and is built to do so) turned off -insanity for just 256MB (even 128MB would help) cheap as chips memory!

 

The 8400M G is more of a replacement for the go7300 and not the go7400.
The 8400M GS replaced the go7400.

So when you get the 8400M G you should expect an upgrade over go7300 performance and not go7400 performance.

 

I think the drivers also play a part in this issue, an important part.

 

Does you XPS have 2GB ram because I know the W7 only has 1GB which would really hurt Turbocache.

 

Na, the XPS only had 1GB. I don't think the 8 series even has turbocache.

 

This is what I thought. The new naming scheme is really annoying.

 

no. no. no. no. no.

trust me.

in due time- that 8400 will surpass the performance of the 7400. stop thinking differently. stop. it.

 

sorry, im not here to help/argue, i just wanted to say this guy is probably right.
and laugh cuz this guy said no like 5 times.lol

 

I do believe that all 8 series cards out right now have the ability to turbocache

 

Yeah, I just checked ... it has TC.

I really don't know. I like both systems. The 1210 is a tad smaller and "more" portable, the GPU is currently more powerful. The ASUS is better designed, not too small not too big, but the GPU kind of blows. I guess it doesn't matter, I shouldn't be playing games much anyways what with a baby and second year starting soon.

I think the fact you're using a smaller notebook is more noticeable with the 1210; the huge border around the screen can get a bit annoying. It really should have been a 13.3". The ASUS is also, for some reason, lighter than the 1210.

 

I think I may be on to something.

On the dell, the WEI, however irrelevant, rated its 3D performance a 3.4; the 8400M G was rated a 3.0.

After I added a 1GB stick to the W7S (it has 512 on the main board and one SODIMM slot), the new WEI was 4.1 for 3D graphics. I had already ordered a 2GB stick from new egg.

I am wondering if the 8400 was only using the 512 available for turbocache? I'm reinstalling the game to test it out with the new RAM and about to redo the WEI in case it was a fluke.

 

So you use just one game to determine which card is superior?
Golly I wish it was this easy!

 

WEI will change with future drivers.
My 7900GS got a 5.6 with early Vista driver and a 5.9 with later Vista driver.
The highest WEI is 5.9 so I have no idea that does it changed above 5.9 or not.

 

Well, if one game runs well on a crappier card, it should run better on a better card.