Vista and XP: 128mb dedicated GPU is ok?

Hi!
Do you think that a Quadro 135M with 128mb of dedicated memory more other 128 in xp or 756 in vista is a videocard which can give a more than sufficient power to the OS needs?
My personal ones are just normal task, more some coreldraw, photoshop, and video editing some times.

 

That'll be more than enough. Windows doesn't need much power from the video card, even Vista, the main reason Vista is so much faster with a dedicated card is that you have more available memory bandwidth for the rest of the system.

 

yeah, that'll be fine

 

Ditto.you'll be styling for some time, unless you load up battlefield or quake or some crazy 3d first person shooter game. 128 dedicated used to ROCK and will do everything, especially if it's ddr2 or ddr3 ...that's like the old Radeon 9800 pros -and they were monsters just about 16 months ago!!!

 

I've got a GeForce 6600 GT with 128 MB powering my desktop, which dual boots XP and Vista. I have no problem whatsoever, though I have a lot of graphical tearing when gaming in Vista (no problem in XP)

 

Well, I do not play games. I use it for normal things. WEx. Word. Excel, Coreldraw, photoshop, some hove video editing. Maybe, maximum, I could draw something in 3d, for fun, nothing hard.
But, I do not understand, you mean that 128mb dedicated is obsolete as it is the 16months ago standard?

Ok... Good...
I also thought this: i was worried about the life expectance of the notebook, and I wanted something more than what I need now, just to stay more time "updated". But, if I do not add alway new software (or games) with higher standards and graphic needs, it shouldn't matter how many years i use the notebook, it will always be good for me, or not?

 

??? can you be more especific?
Your card SHOULD be superior to mine, SHOULD, if it is true that fx360M comes from 8400m GS and the 140M comes from 8400M GT. I am not sure as a guy told me, but I have no direct infos...
Anyway, maybe the NVS and FX series, as they are for prof, and they have got more stable drivers, sometimes can be a little less powerfull but avoid problems...

 

The GeForce 6600 GT should be more powerful than the 140M? It's two generations old, so I'm not so sure about that. Either way you cut it, my card is more than enough to handle Vista . . . it just doesn't stand up all that well to gaming in the increased system load of Vista (and I still get decent framerates, just horrible graphical tears).

To be more specific, I have no issues within Vista's UI. If I load up a 3D game, though, a lot of the textures are "torn," for lack of a better word (for example, while playing Lord of the Rings Online, I would frequently come across areas where the ground texture just shot off into the sky like a triangular mountain, and my character's armor always had pieces of the character clipping through it). This is only in 3D gaming, not in actual use of the OS.

 

Ops... I had read "8600", not 6600...
Which amount of dedicated memory?
Anyway thanks, I fell more tranquill.
A friend suggested me the intel 3100, to save more money and power consumption, but as I have no problem with battery life (i use it all the time with ac), and anyway quadro nvs are very low watts, I think i will at least go for the 135M. Even if I still fear about matte screen vertical angles...
(the only choice in the latitude with that card is a matte. For the glossy I must spend 140 euro more, to get a precision with the FX360M card with 256 dedicated...)

 

@Sir Joe:

Like I said in my original comment, it's a 128 MB card

 

;D
yes...., right...
So with a 135M I should not have any problem in anything, considering that it has got the same dedicated memory and it is newer. Well, it is an NVS, so it has got slower but more stable drivers. And it is integrated...