Quick Video Card Question

Hey guys, just a bit of a quick question, my desktop is about 3 - 4 years old at this point and has been using a Radeon 9000. I've practically been fine with this over all these years and I've been comfortable with how games both old and new are running. In terms of laptops, what would be the equivalent of a desktop Radeon 9000 and how big is the difference between the dekstop Radeon 9000 and a Mobility Radeon x700? Thanks for your help guys.

 

This really belongs in the gaming hardware forum, so I'll port it over to there.

As for the question - the lowest end PCI-express dedicated card today would be the Radeon X300 (excluding the X200M integrated card). That is approximately equal in performance to the 9600 according to many people around here.

The Radeon 9600 is much improved over the Radeon 9000, in that it fully supports DirectX 9.0, whereas the 9000 only supports DX8.1. It wasn't until after the Radeon 9200 (which was essentially a Radeon 9000) that ATI had DX9.0 support.

Here's an article which basically goes throught the history of ATI's cards. It's not that modern, but at least includes DX9.0 GPU's from ATI:
http://www.mrsci.com/Graphics-Cards/Radeon.php

As for the comparison between the 9000 and the X700 - the X700 would run rings around the 9000 any way you put it.

The Radeon 9000 gets about ~1000-1150 marks in 3DMark03 from what I read, even though the results were old. . .
Compare that to the Mobility X700, which gets around 5000+ (my card, X700 256MB GDDR2 OC'ed gets over 6100), and that should explain some stuff right off the bat.

 

Thanks for moving it, I wasn't quite sure where to put it and I just realized that under the gaming section it says hardware and software. The thing is that I read somewhere about how too much gameplay might shorten the lifespan of a notebook and I was wondering if that was true. If it's really the case then I guess I would try to get a notebook with a less powerful gaming card though I don't know how much of a difference that would make.

BTW: Yikes my video card is seriously outdated but I've seemed to have no problem with it, I guess I'm don't care as much about the graphics as I thought, or maybe it's just that I haven't seen what a good video card can do. I'm afraid that I'll never want to go back .

 

I haven't heard anything about a laptop having a dedicated video card and it reducing the lifespan of the notebook, although I won't deny that it is possible.

Either way, even if it is true [which I cannot prove/disprove], the laptop would probably be obsolete by the time it goes bad.

I still have my old Dell Inspiron 5000 [Pentium III, 8MB Rage ] - it has a dedicated card, and it still works flawlessly nearly five years later.

I would go for the most powerful card you can get. Going with a mid range card such as the Go6600 or X700 is probably your best bet. Desktop cards in a notebook such as the Go6800 and the Radeon X800 [extremely rare] run much hotter.

 

Well that's good to hear, I just hope that when I buy my notebook it will be as reliable as my desktop has been.

One other quick question: The native resolution of the Asus Z70Va is 1600x1050. Now if I set it down to 1280x800, will it look odd? I have nothing really against the larger native resolution but it's just that I've been using a 1024x768 for years now and 1600x1050 sounds like everything will look very small.

 

Well, you'll keep the aspect ratio, but it wil be somewhat blurry. I have a WSXGA+ display on my Sager NP-5320, and when I set it down to 1280x800 for some games, it doesn't look that bad, only a bit blurry.

Hm . . if you are on an XGA now, I'd REALLY suggest seeing a WSXGA+ or higher resolution display like that before you buy, it can be quite a change. When I transitioned from WXGA 1280x800 to WSXGA+, I adapted pretty quickly.

Don't forget that you can always set up the DPI to make the fonts more visible, it works quite well, I have done it before.

If you are looking at the Z70VA but the display is a bit too high of resolution, I might suggest taking a look at the MSI-1029. It has very good quality and an X700 128MB, but at a lower cost. www.RawPowerPC.com has it for sale, reasonably priced too. They are reputable from what I have seen and heard. Be sure to check one of the two reviews of it on this site.

 

That was exactly what I was planning to do, you practically read my mind . I was going to go see this resolution first hand and if I didn't like it, I would stick with the WXGA which I know I like because I've seen it first hand. If I prefer the WXGA then I will go with the MSI-1029 but if the WSXGA+ looks like something I can eventually get to like then I'll definitely buy the Z70VA. Hopefully one of the notebooks at Best Buy or CompUSA will have a WSXGA+ screen I can take a look at.

 

More than likely, the physical screen size is going to be larger, so the higher resolution may not matter as much as you think.

Like, if you are used to 1280 on a 17 inch, 4:3 desktop monitor, then 1440 or 1600 on a 17 inch 12:9 LCD widescreen may not be that much of a difference, since the LCD monitor itself is physically larger.

Like Chaz says, go somewhere and check out some new laptops with these screens and check before you limit yourself unnecessarily.

 

I'm definitely going to go check out the resolutions first before buying but right now I've been used to 1024x768 on a 15" LCD. I've went to look at notebooks before and I know that I really do like the WXGA but I don't think the WSXGA+ should be a problem. But better safe then sorry right?

 

That's right.

I'm not sure if you are going to be able to find a notebook on display with a 15.4" display and a WSXGA+ resolution . . . there are a few Acer notebooks that have them, and I know that CompUSA sells them, perhaps look there. Also, Dell's Inspiron 6000 has a WSXGA+ display option, so if you know of a kiosk they have near you, drop by and see if they have one.