nVidia 9300m G vs. quadro NVS 160

I'm basically trying to decide between the Sony Z and the Dell Latitude E6400
So which is the better graphics card?


Edit: the Sony Z has a 9300m GS

 

i would assume the quadro nvs 160 would be better because the quadro nvs 140 had 16 stream processors and the 9300m GS only has 8. But clock rates, and memory shaders need to be taken account for as well

 

Makes sense.
Does anyone know for sure?
(I wasn't able to find any info on the NVS 160 anywhere )

 

the clock rates are available on dell's site, but nothing on the shaders. the nvs on the e6400 (which is different than the one on the e6500) clocks at 580mhz core, 400mhz memory. (e6500 -- 580 mhz core, 700 mhz memory). both have 256MB, but e6400 has DDR2, and e6500 has DDR3

 

What is (if there is one) the Geforce version of the NVS 160m? I wish the latitude had a Geforce card as I prefer the look over the XPS/Studio/Insprion series.

 

Compare NVS 160M to a 8600M GT and 9300M GS.

Code:

[FONT="Courier New"]
			8600M GT		9300M GS		NVS 160M
Chip Core		G84M			G98M			G98M
Memory Type		DDR2/GDDR3		GDDR3			GDDR3
Stream Processor	32			8			8
Core Speed		475 MHz			550 MHz			580 MHz
Memory Speed		400/700 MHz		700 MHz			700 MHz
Shader Speed		950 MHz			1400 MHz		1450 Mhz
Max Bandwidth		12.8/22.4 GB/s		9.6 GB/S		11.2 GB/s
Memory Bus Width	128-bit			64-bit			64-bit
Max Memory		512 MB			256 MB			256 MB
Current Consumption	20 W			13 W			12 W
[/FONT]

With the professional drivers installed for the NVS 160M, you will find the gaming ability of the 9300M GS to exceed that of the NVS 160M, but performance should be comparable once standard drivers are installed with the NVS 160M (visit http://laptopvideo2go.com for drivers). Because the NVS 160M has a slightly higher clock speed than the 9300M GS, it is highly possible it will better it altogether.

 

I don't know why Dell did this, but it almost seems like a downgrade or at least that it didn't improve at all compared with the previous generation Latitude D830, since the D830's NVS 140m (8400m GS) has twice as many stream processors at 16 although clocked slower (but is very easily overclockable to 550mhz, probably could go to 600 but I won't try it). In addition the NVS 160m in the new E series Latitude still is only a 64 bit card and only DDR2 rather than DDR3 memory which will hurt it a lot. It's sorely disappointing!!!

 

This is from my Sony Z590 (in which you referred to the 9300m GS) in this case, and take a look at the stock speeds it comes with:

Core Speed: 580
Memory Speed: 702
Shader Speed: 1450

Certainly faster then the Quadro NVS 160 by "2" memory speed MHz

LOL

 

The real question is why bother with discrete entry level parts when the new 9400m IGP beats the 9300m/nvs160m by 20-25%.

I just reviewed the new MacBook at it played Fallout 3 and Call of Duty nicelly at low seetings and 1280*800. By nicely I mean min fps over 24 (tested in actal gameplay with fraps).

 

I was thinking about this subject too and found this today: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-Quadro-NVS-160M.11908.0.html

So can I play strategy games like starcraft II in near future smoothly with E6400?

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro_nvs_notebook_techspecs.html
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9300m_gs_us.html
so yes, both cards only have 8 SPs.

interestingly, the 9300m g is faster than the 9300m gs, with 16 vs 8 SP count, i think it's only seen on some asus models though.