New Sony SZ4XX Release

So what is it? 64 dedicated or 128 dedicated?

I am from Australia, and was quite shook to find out that the SZ3 has only 64 dedicated - I went to SonyStyle, installed ATI Tools to check for the amount of dedicated memory. Was quite shocked to see 64 instead of 128.

Had it been 128 dedicated, I would have gone with the SZ. Still, I am happily running Vista on my W3J.

So I say the SZ has 64MB Dedicated Video Memory.

Perhaps those that did the reviews got mixed up with the total memory of the card - 128MB Turbocache.

 

Fingers crossed that the SZ5 will have something like Go 8400, with atleast 128MB Dedicated.

 

Reviewers were definitely mixed up or foolishly digested the Sony spin with no homework. It is absol;utely 64MB dedicated and always has been. That said, it runs great including games. I have read of benchmarks that actually show the 64MB parts outperforming the 128MB parts in some benchmarks, so in the real world, I don't think it makes a difference. The TUrboCache implementation is quite good and with only a 64-bit memory bus accessing the shared RAM is apparently nearly as fast as accessing dedicated RAM. I'll see if I can find those benchmarks. I definitely would not let the amount of dedicated be a deciding factor. Now if you are a hard core gamer, waiting for a much better GPU like an 8xxx, would be a different story. That said, there is no indication that is going to happen...

 

SZ450 is on sale at www.Amazon.com for $2,099 after $150 mail in rebate.

 

Guys, between the SZ491N which costs $2,729.99 and SZ470N which costs less at $2,499.99, which one do you recommend ? is the premium carbon fiber worth the extra $230 ?

 

i suggest you go with the premium carbon fiber. but it is still your decision. but of course, the stronger the better. there are other benifits with the premium ones like backlighting, etc...

 

Both 470, and 491 have the led back lighting. Their only difference is their lids. I would say go with the 470, or even 450. The 200GB 4200RPM HD on the 491/470 is a bit slow.

 

Then i say go wth the SZ480.

 

Ok, it looks like I am going for the SZ480 with the T7600 CPU. Should I get the 200GB 4200 HD or should I go fo the faster 160GB 5400HD. Is pefromance affected that much by the 4200 HD ?

 

Performance wise, go for the 160Gb SATA. I have gone through 4200rpm HDs and 5200 really outpeforms 4200 on performance. Now that Vista offers much of the indexing, a 5200rpm hd will do the trick.

Of course, you may not utilize all the space. I merely use half the space of my HD including some ISO files i need everytime. If you have large amount of data to store, then what's the use of dual layer DVDs?