x1600 vs gf go8400m G

Which is better for gaming?

 

If you want me to run a specific benchmark and give you results, PM me. I've got an X1600 and XP, and an 8400M G with Vista on a review laptop I'm working on.

 

I believe that the X1600 falls somewhere between the 8400M GS and 8400GT, so it would be faster than the 8400M G which is probably around the Go 7400 but slower than the X1400. You'll probably want to wait for Greg's final word though since he has both.

 

The 8400M G scores about a 1,100 in 3DMark06, while the X1600 and 8400M GT score around a 2,000.

The X1600 will almost certainly be better in games than the 8400M G. I believe the 8400M G only has a 64-bit memory bus, which cripples its performance compared to its older brother, the 8400M GT.

 

I'm working on a review laptop right now, so when I get the benches I'll post 'em.

 

Great, looking forward to it.

And about the memory bus, the 8400M G and 8400M GS both have 64-bit memory buses compared to 128-bit for the 8400M GT. The 8400M G also only has 8 stream processors compared to 16 in the 8400M GS so it's bottom bin and double crippled.

 

Nvidia could have also called the 8400M GT the 8600M G Really one of the only reasons the 8600M GS is faster than the 8400M GT is the clocks.

 

a quick question though, is the go8400M gs a much better card than the 7400go? benchmark wise the 8400m gs is about 200 pts > 7400 go in 3dmark 06 which really isn't much

 

The 8400M GS and the go7400 are similar performance. The 8400M GS is faster and the differance will be bigger for new games. I dont think the 8400M GS is strong enough to play any games in directx10 mode. It is not woth upgrading if you already have a go7400.

 

Well really i think it is that the x1600 outperforms the 8400GS and GT and is compared more to the 8600 hence why is notebooks now they have replaced the x1600 with the 8600.

 

Have a minor Vista problem with the review unit right now...can't figure out how to make sure this thing is running at full 3d performance clocks...so hang on and I'll figure it out/post benches.

EDIT: The review model has only 1GB RAM, so I've got to upgrade it to 2GB tonight before running benches.

 

Hokai, great!
Do you think I can play newer games with the S1 without too much lag?

 

FYI...

I just finished running 3dMark05 (got it running at normal 3d performance clocks...AKA NO overclocking)...

8410 (8400M G) '05 Score: 1920
nc8430 (X1600) '05 Score: 3991

Yes, the X1600 was twice as fast. And my X1600 'performance' mode is underclocked compared to AMD/ATI's recommended 470/470 clocks. Looking into it, here is why the 8400 isn't performing:
1) Lowest end DX10 card available
2) Only 64bit memory bus
3) Only 8 Stream processors

X1600?
1) Midrange/Performance DX9 card
2) 128bit bus
3) I forget how many of stuffs it has, but it was king of the 15" machines alongside the 7600 until the 7700 came out. Yup, leader of the pack for almost two years I think (X1600 came out Dec. 2005).

 

I'm pretty sure the X1600 had 12 pixel pipelines.

 

Yes, the X1600 and X1700 have 12 PS, 5 VS, 4 TMUs (sigh), and 4 ROPs. It has a 128-bit memory bus coupled to a 256-bit internal ring bus memory controller.

Wow, twice as fast as the 8400M G. I guess I wasn't expecting the X1600 to be that fast or the 8400M G to be that slow.

 

That sounds right...thanks for refreshing my memory. But it still trumps the 8400's 64bit pipelines...

3dMark06 score in!
8410 (8400M G): 1030
nc8430 (X1600): 1745

 

It's obviously still better than the 8400M G, which has stream processors. Since stream processors end up doing the job of all the pixels pipelines, vertex shaders, etc. combined, it's a pretty underpowered dedicated card. The 8400M G performs like a Go 7400, though, so it's not that weak.

EDIT!

1030 is a few hundred points higher than the Go 7400. So at least the 8400M G performs on the "better" side of performing "like a Go 7400"

 

...I know...I won't give it a bad review...I'm just used to performance cards.

 

I'm still not a fan of 3DMark for comparing DX9 and DX10 cards. There's something about these new DX10 cards, maybe the unified architecture, that make them appear very strong in synthetics compared to older GPUs, but the same advantage doesn't fully translate in actual games.

 

I know what you mean, the laptop 8600M GT/desktop 8600GTS stacked up against the laptop Go 7900GS/desktop 7900GS performed similarly in 3DMark06, but when actual gaming benchmarks came out, the 8600M GT and 8600GTS got butchered by the Go 7900GS and 7900GS.

I still think 3DMark06 is a relevant way of calculating the raw power of a video card, however. Obviously a card that scores a 2,000 will perform better than one that scores 500.

 

Well, that is why I have a few games to try out...two of which I even did for my nc8430 review! I'm also looking at some demos (Lost Planet), but I do not expect those to shine...

 

Tell us if you get more than 10 FPS

 

I'll keep you in suspense until the review is posted