128MB or 256MB graphics card?

I'm getting a new laptop and I'm curious if i should stick to a 128mb graphics card or if I would benefit from the 256mb card. I'm mainly deciding between the HP dv9500t and the dell 1720. I won't be gaming at all on it. I'm a photographer and use photoshop cs3 quite a bit, and I do some dvd ripping and video encoding in general (not sure if that uses the graphics card or not...). Also, I will probably be watching HD content on it now and then. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

For what you are doing the 256MB version will suit you very well. Remember there is nothing bad in just having more. HD content is very graphic demanding.

 

That's pretty much what I was thinking but I wanted to hear it from someone who knows what they're talking about Thanks.

 

cant go wrong with dell simply b/c of the performance for the money ratio.

 

128 is fine. if you HAVE the extra 100 bucks to spare and don't mind dropping it to make sure you're okay in the future, do it.

otherwise stick with the 128; if you aren't gaming, it's PLENTY.

I do CAD for mechanical engineering in Solidworks and it's plenty.

 

^I think you mean 256 is fine

 

People STOP POSTING MISINFORMATION! When you guys have NO idea what you are talking about!

You people dont even know how video memory is used by video cards yet you post your incorrect and "made up" opinons.

If you're not running any 3D then your video card NEVER uses more than 8mb to display 32bit 2D resolution. Example : 1,440x900 resoltuion x 32bit color = 5.18mbs of memory + around an additionly (less than 1mb) of misc. video chip runtime = around 6mb to display 1440 x 900 in 32 color.

I dont care if you're running photoshop and watching DVDs at the same time the video memory will NEVER go beyond ~6mb to display that resolution.

All that extra video memory comes to play then you you play stupid 3D games as 3D games require alot of memory to hold 3D textures.

Vista require alittle more to run Areo 3D but its still WAY below the even 32mb mark.

HD DVD can be processed by ATI and Nvidia card but again the GPUs DONT use much memory as its still a simple 1400x900 2D image HD or not.

Point is 128mb is OVER KILL. Video, DVD, Photo editting has NOTHING to do with the video card. All that is processed by the CPU.

Gulliver, My knowledge is 100 times more than others in these forums. Dont waste your money on the 256mb option as it will offer ZERO benefit.

 

Go for 128 MB for your requirements......, 256 MB is a waste of money for you...

 

As onion says, video encoding and PS are much more reliant on the cpu. For your usage the more powerful graphics card would be a waste. You could probably get an X3100 and be fine with that too!

 

Anything with 2D only and you'll never need more than even the most basic of GPUs now REGARDLESS of how much memory it comes with. There is no impact.

 

Exactly.

FYI, Autocad rendering in 3D does not support most GeForce GPUs, so you're not using your graphics card at all.

Certain types of graphics cards has a feature that takes the load off of your processor when playing HD movies, but I don't think the laptops you're looking at includes them.

 

Oh wow, you've been a great help. Thank you so much. I'm on a budget and if I can save the extra $75 the 256mb would've costed me, then that's great. Thanks again, and to everyone else, I really appreciate it.

Gulliver

 

Update: I went to customize the dv9500t and NOW it's only $26 more to go from the 128MB to the 256MB graphics card. for that much, i'm just gonna go ahead and get it just in case i plan on playing some games later.

Now I still have to decide between the hp dv9500t and the dell 1720. they come out to about the same price with the hp at 256mb and 2 x 120mb @ 7200 hdd, and the dell with 128mb video card and 1 160gb @ 7200.

which one do you guys think would be better? with the hp i also get the finger scanner thing, which seems pretty neat to me and it has a nicer finish.

Oh, and they both would have the core 2 duo T7500 with 2 gigs of ram.

and if I should post this in a different section of the forum now, let me know.

Thanks,
Gulliver

 

For $26, yeah that's worth it!

I'd take the HP.

What are the two cards graphics cards by the way? The 128 and 256, same card or is one an 8400 and one an 8600 etc?

 

yeah, with the dell i would be getting the 8400 gs and with the hp i would be getting the 8600 gs

 

I should also add, with the prices being so close, i'll now be able to haggle them about giving me xp over vista. i don't wanna deal with vista right now and i'll lose a lot of programs i use if i go with it. so if hp gets ****ty with me about giving me xp installed, then i'll just tell them i'll go with dell instead, haha, see if that changes their mind

 

Aren't ALL opinions "made up"?

 

HP sounds good. Nice graphics card.

 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I'm going with the hp. I'm gonna get a great deal. I just have to wait till tomorrow to talk to someone there so I can find out if they'll set me up with xp instead of vista. Thanks everyone.

Gulliver

 

Thats why I ordered the Hp as well. Check my sig for my configurations. A friend of mine has the same exact set up and it runs really good, and looks good as well. For the money I don't think it can be beat, at least as far as 17'' notebooks go. The Dells can be configured with a faster graphics card in the 8600GT but, if your only going to casually game then the 8600gs is more then sufficient from what I understand.