The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Sony FW Ati 3650m, is it that bad?

    Discussion in 'VAIO / Sony' started by ajdude101, Feb 8, 2009.

  1. ajdude101

    ajdude101 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Hey guys, I am looking at the Sony FW series of notebooks and I am liking it so far. One thing that I don't like is the Ati 3650.

    I plan on getting the 1080p screen, and I might be playing some games. Nothing to extreme. Stuff like Counter Strike Source to Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress. What settings would I need to lower in order to play these games at an acceptable FPS? (Acceptable meaning NEVER below 30) I will be playing these games at native res. Can anyone here that actually has the Notebook confirm this? Thanks.
     
  2. Hep!

    Hep! sees beauty in everything

    Reputations:
    1,806
    Messages:
    5,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    I'm pretty sure you won't be playing Left 4 Dead at native res (1920x1080) with a Radeon 3650 never dropping below 30 FPS period. Doesn't really matter how much you lower the other settings.
    1920x1080 would be so taxing on the GPU.
     
  3. panzer06

    panzer06 His Imperial Majesty

    Reputations:
    358
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    66
    I play AOEIII, Company of Heroes (DX9 settings), Titan's Quest Immortal Throne, CIV IV, Sins of a Solar Empire and Red Alert 3 at 1920x1200 (external LCD) at med-high (some settings on med, a few on high). It works fine and very playable. Of course none of these (except Company of Heroes) really taxes the GPU.

    I looked at the announced but as yet unavailable MSI GT725 before buying the FW. At $1350 and 7lbs without Bluray or $1600 w/Bluray its a bit heavier and a bit more expensive and only has a 1680*1050 17" display.

    I decided I couldn't wait and wanted the Bluray (we have over 50 Bluray movies) and my FW 2.26 was only $999 two weeks b4 Christmas.

    The ATI HD4850 is definitely faster (and more importantly, not nVidia). If you want it now, fullHD and Bluray, the Sony FW is a good compromise.

    Cheers,
     
  4. ajdude101

    ajdude101 Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    To be honest, the only reason I started looking at Sony Vaio's is:

    Screen quality: Sony never lets me down on their screens. Awesome color and contrast.

    Build quality: Doesn't feel like cheap plastic, very solid.

    Keyboard: After seeing and feeling the Vaio's "Chicklet" keyboard, I can not go back.

    Those are the three reasons I like these Vaios. I was looking at the Gateway FX p7805u, but after seeing it at Best Buy, it is just crap compared to Sony. It felt so heavy and bulky, didn't have the build quality that Sony has, and the screen looked worse than my crappy Magnavox CRT.

    After seeing the Vaio, I can't look back at another laptop. But I sure want to play some light games on it, maybe L4D or COD4 being the most gpu intensive. Not going to do some extreme gaming, but you know, something to play on the go. I really wish that Sony would let us choose something like a 3850 or 3870, I would be so happy. I can't stand playing at a non-native resolution. :( Thank you panzer for your response :)
     
  5. the_1

    the_1 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Specs wise, the Gateway is unbeatable. Otherwise I'd still choose the FW any day.
     
  6. lapino

    lapino Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Be happy you get the 3650, I made a mistake when ordering and got the 3470. Good enough for some older games, but not enough for the games I want to play on it :(
     
  7. panzer06

    panzer06 His Imperial Majesty

    Reputations:
    358
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    66
    What!? other than the nVidia 9800 (which is not a plus for me, no mobile nVidia GPUs for me after the problems I've had with the 8600GT in my other laptop) this thing is 9.1 lbs!! That spec alone would make it a no go, even without the nVidia baggage. Add to that, no bluetooth and no Bluray. Gotta say, the Sony is a much better value. If you must have nVidia GPU power, the HP 17" models have Bluray and weigh less than the Gateway. But for style Sony is the Apple of the PC world!

    Cheers,
     
  8. martinmach

    martinmach Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    32
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    i play L4D at 1680*1050 with all high settings on my T500, the frame rates are decent with no stuttering. 3650 is a good card and most of my games work fine.

    only Gaming try sager.
     
  9. the_1

    the_1 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    17inch HPs have the 9600 or 9650GT Nvidias, quite close to the ATI 3650, but far from the stellar 9800.
     
  10. Hep!

    Hep! sees beauty in everything

    Reputations:
    1,806
    Messages:
    5,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    A 9600 or 9650GT will beat out a 3650 in most areas.
     
  11. panzer06

    panzer06 His Imperial Majesty

    Reputations:
    358
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Perhaps... but they are nvidia mobile GPUs. That's enough to keep me away.

    Cheers,
     
  12. Hep!

    Hep! sees beauty in everything

    Reputations:
    1,806
    Messages:
    5,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    206
    Nvidia GPUs are MUCH better options for midrange laptops than ATI, as their power consumption is so much insanely lower, and they put out much less heat.

    Yes, the G82 and G84 cores were all messed up. Yes, it's a big deal, and it's unfortunate - but this issue has been fixed - new GPUs like the 9600 and 9650 (and actually all of the 9 series) don't have the issue! You can stay away if you'd like... but you'll only be hurting yourself in the end. Buying ATI is like buying AMD - yes, it's an excellent product, but what you pay for what you get compared to the competition? No contest, Nvidia.
     
  13. martinmach

    martinmach Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    32
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    9600GT gddr3 > 3650 GDDR3 >3650G GDDR2 > 9600gt GDDR2
     
  14. panzer06

    panzer06 His Imperial Majesty

    Reputations:
    358
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    66
    While the problems nvidia experienced with the G8x series may indeed be fixed in the current 9x product (I won't believe it until laptops with these GPUs are 12 to 18 months old and exhibit no problems), I am not inclined to give them a pass on prior bad behavior. I understand manufacturing-related problems exist in many products, however, I expect the manufacturer and any OEMs using faulty components to fully resolve customer issues. This has not been the case with the nvidia G8x GPU. Many people argue that much of the confusion and frustration has been caused by indifference and obfuscation on the part of the OEMs and in many cases this is true, however, we would not be at the mercy of the OEMs if the manufacturer, nvidia, had produced a good product. There are countless systems that have not experienced the problem, because they are not used in a manner that would cause a failure (or the OEM issued updates to implement extraordinary cooling measures).

    So while the 9x series of nvidia GPUs may be fine (which certainly remains to be seen) and their performance may exceed the current ATI mobile chips, I have no intention of rewarding nvidia while these G8x issues still plague countless users.

    Cheers,
     
  15. Elite Cataphract

    Elite Cataphract Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    9
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Not true. Ati graphics cards tend to run FAR cooler. The difference in power consumption is not that significant either. For example: the Ati HD3650 (30W) and the Nvidia 9600 GT (23W).

    Besides, Ati GPUs have a better reputation and are more reliable. nVidia has been having too many problems lately...that's why its a good idea to avoid them, for now.
     
  16. tovani

    tovani Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Hello budy, according to notebookcheck Ati 3650 is better than gefore 8600gt a bit.
    3650 is enough for laptop, playing games in laptop is a luxuries habbit. If you really want to play games i suggest you should buy a destop with powerful GPU. Also, Graphic card in laptop often weeker than the same model in destop.