Why is the my 8400gt slower than my Radeon 1900xtx?

It may be last gen but it is a desktop GPU with better specs I believe. This is why I'm wondering. Anyone else have any input?

 

Better specs? Like what? It doesn´t have any unified shader architecture like the 8800 series has. The new architecture is much better than last gens, and now I am talking 8800´s here.

 

Yes, beats the X1900XTX, and easily beats the budget X1900Gt which isn't much faster then a desktop 8600Gt in most situations to be honest.

The X1900XTX was a good card, but you cannot underestimate how fast video hardware has been progressing. Cards capable of playing most games at max settings at normal resolution (1440x900 downwards) can be gotten for 110 dollars. There was a time when that sort of performance demanded figures triple that - the 8 series was a revolution, the 8800GTX reigned as performance king for 2 years and is still a top end card bettered only by the GX2, which isn't really the same.

As for the question posed, you're comparing a low end laptop part to a high end desktop part.....with just a single generation between them. The X1900XTX is infinitely faster then either the 8400 or 8600 cards.

 

Me thinks you mean STREAM processors or else Unified shaders.

They have been shader processors for a while.

Before more traditional pixel/fragment shaders and vertex/geometry shaders.

The Texture Mapping Units still perform their similar role although with added features.

Also depends on what you were doing with it, for many GPGPU functions the X1900XTX would still beat the GF8800M. And as for your comment about shader power, RAW shader power the X1900 would beat it too, it's how you use that shader power that matters, as shown with the R600 vs G80 too.

 

Well when it comes to practical gaming how do they compare? I think so far the concensus is the 8800M GTX is considerably faster.

 

Yes I meant unified shaders, well the 1950xtx doesn´t stand a chance against 8800´s, whether it is GTS, GT, this is proven in benchmarks. Now the 1950xtx isn´t a bad card at all. But the current gen is of course stronger. Now I am talking specifically gaming which of course the GPU´s are mainly used for, at least high end GPU´s.

Look at some Crysis benchmarks for instance or any gaming benchmark. 8800m GTX is not a real GTX with 128 sp´s like my desktop 8800GTX has and it is not a GT either with 112 sp´s. It´s more like a 320MB 8800GTS 96 sp´s desktop although with 512MB Ram instead of 320MB, the bus is 256 bit wide so the 640MB 8800GTS (i.e old 8800GTS) is slightly faster at higher res and with AA and AF due to it´s higher bandwidth.

Now the 8800m GTX is a crazy overclocker and you easily push 125MHz+ on the Core and 150+ on the Mem without any volt modding and this artifact free in ATI tool.

Although I could have shorten this post by one sentence. Spec wise a 1950xtx looks good but in gaming performance it gets destroyed by the 8800´s.

 

You could've shortened it by more than one sentence, you obviously misunderstood what was written, but equally obviously like to talk about your cards.

 

Yes I could have shortened it a lot actually now when I go back and read it again But sometimes I just type more than is necessery, however this is a great forum and I have got many great experiences reading posts here and sharing experiences myself. Thumbs up

 

lol the OT was 8400 vs. 1900xt, not 1900xt vs. 8800, they are not even same generation, unfair to conpare them.

 

they arent on even on the same planet ^^

 

Not that the 8400 vs the X1900XTX were ...
However, both the 8800M GTX and the X1900XTX are in the high end sector, granted , mobile/desktop and different generations, but comparing yesterday`s best and today`s best helps up see what degree the progress in GPU power is...

 

As for the x1900XTX vs the 8800m GTX...

I don't have a fair comparison for the mobile to desktop conversion for the 8800m as I don't have one.

Someone said the 8800m GTX scores similarly to the desktop 8800GT...
the stats(shaders/speeds) seem to suggest a desktop 8800GTS 320 to be closer...

According to Tom's VGA charts the 8800GTS 320 is roughly 15% better than the x1900XTX and the 8800GT (OC'd) is roughly 30% better overall.
I'd be willing to wager that somewhere in there is a reasonable estimation give or take 10%.

Does someone have a desktop 8800 and a mobile 8800m and can do a few quick comparisons?

 

Well spec wise the GF8800MGTX would be like a GT with 100MHz slower core, 250MHz slower shaders and 100MHz slower memory. Why you would compare an OC'ed GT to it I don't know, it would need an underclocked GT.

Even then you'll find it difficult to get a comparison since the desktops usually have faster CPUs, Memory and HDDs.

With only the rare exception (like some games at high res+4XAA or some games with 8XAA) the GF8800GT beats the X1950/1900XTX, I would think that for the mobile version of the GF8800M GTX you basically only swap a few more situations where the XTX might take the lead, but in general it'd probably be lopsidedly in favour of the 8800M GTX.

 

Tom's guide had an OC'd 8800GT as the only one I saw listed... maybe I missed the non-OC'd one...

Still even using the 8800GT (OC) one... its no more than a 30% advantage.

I bet the x1900XTX and the 8800m GTX are closer in real-world performance than most people here have estimated as the two desktop versions GTS320 and GT only pull ahead by 15-30% or so...

Note this is still a mobile GPU being compared to a top-of-the-line desktop GPU of last generation.

 

I also have a desktop 8800GTX along with my M1730 with 8800m GTX SLI, though the 8800 GTX desktop version has 768MB Ram, 384 Wide Bus and 128 Shader Processors so a mobile 8800m GTX doesn´t stand a chance against a single 8800 GTX performance wise. Though two 8800m GTX SLI should be faster where SLI shines of course, also depends a lot of much AA and AF you use

If we are looking at just 3D Mark scores I get roughly 12000+ on my single 8800 GTX compared to what M1730 owners with the extreme CPU´s get around 13000-14000. Now 3D Mark doesn´t mean much to me anyway, but to get a general idea it´s nice to compare.

 

Toms Hardware VGA Charts use old and outdated games - the difference would be far bigger in the latest games. For example, in a lot of reviews, the X1900XTX is only about 15% faster then the X1800XT in some games, in one instance, only 1fps faster then 7800GTX - but when I used my X1800XT for games like Crysis, the 8800GTS 320mb, let alone G92 GTS, GT or GTX, performed literally twice as good.

Using older games as well something like the 7950GX2 can be faster then the GTS but we all know what's really the faster card for modern gaming.

 

Yes that´s what you need to look at for comparison. Newer games uses more and more shaders and it is here the last gen falls behind badly against the newer gen.

 

the mobile 8800GTX is similar to 8800GTS desktop as far as i know