ati mobility 9600 pro vs mobility 9700 bench!

Interesting, but why is it in the Dell General Section?

More than that, why didn't they test it with the 256 MB or is that not really an option? Then again, I never put much stock in anything on a german website.

I guess if it doesn't have the large VRAM, you are right, its just an overclocked 9600 pro. Then again, its as I have been ranting, all the new component development now is going into PCI Express chips and cards, not into upgrading old tech. These are just bones to keep the dogs distracted for a few months until the new tech can be released. Also, just in case those release dates slip a bit, rare as that is.

Umm. Bad logic. One suspects that the 9700 can be overclocked much higher than the 9600.

And as to the test--it is yet, another crappy test.
No details about what the 9700 or 9600 were clocked at. Different mobo chipsets. Different pentiums. Different memory. Etc. Etc.

I still don't see how this applies. PCI Express is a bus. We are talking about GPUs. Yes, by this time next year everything will be PCI Express. So what, GPU development is independent of PCI Express. GPUs will get better, but they were always going to get better. The upcoming M12 is not a better chip because it is running on the PCI-E bus, it is a better chip because it is the desktop 9800 (or whatever) redone to be a mobile part. The same chip would run just as well on an AGP 8x bus.

Now--if you're talking 18 months down the line--maybe there will be desktop GPUs out that couldn't have run on AGP 8X. But it would still take another 6-12months before such a GPU could get put into a mobile part.

I grant you this--this is not the time to buy a Desktop (for all the reasons you've stated in other posts). But I don't think you've made the case that the same thing applies to laptops.

Chees,
T

P.S. As to the 256MB--remember that is manufacturer's option and so far only Clevo has announced a 256MB offering.

those performance improvements look bad i'll pass for the 9800

That is the annouced clock for the 9700 and the clock for the 9600. Not necessarily the clock on the machine. And nothing about the memory clocks.

Translated via google
"the 0,13µ-Prozess permits clock rates of up to 450 MHz. To the comparison: With the M10 is with 350 MHz conclusion."

As we all know, the 9600 is often downclocked from 350 [need I say more than the word "hp" to send shivers down all of your spine--downclocked to 275Mhz IIRC] and one could expect tha the 9700 may be downclocked as well.

The problem is (and this is for you too Dell-Machina) and pardon me for shouting THERE HAS NOT BEEN A GOOD REVIEW OF THE 9700 YET. All of the reviews have serious flaws. I think it is too soon to comment on the 9700 until:

We can compare two equivalent Dell Centrino or Sager P4 laptops. Where
1) We know the Core/Mem clock. And can compare "stock" 9600 to stock 9700 (default manufacturer clock) and;
2) We compare overclocking.

The big question with the 9700 is how far can you overclock it?

If you can overclock a 9700 to (for example) 500/300 with no artifacts--that is huge.
If you can overclock it only to 475/275 or less, than order me up a 9600 Pro Turbo. Because the 9700 isn't worth the extra $200.

The deal is, of course, marketing. ATI has introduced the 9700 into an, as yet, 5700 free world. Should the 5700 come out in a notebook and be competitive w/ the 9700, ATI may suddenly "discover" tha the 9700 can be shipped at a much higher clock rate--and voila we have the Mobility Radeon 9700 XT.

Both ATI and NVIDIA have learned from the feet of the master, Intel, how to maximize their initial investment in R&D. (Look at the 5900/5950 fiasco)

i wouldnt say its huge the 9600 and the 9700 is pretty much the same core now if this were say an ACTUALY 9700 then the benefits would be huge id rather see the 5700 bloom or the 9800

You got me there. I was one of the people who was sure that MR 9700 = (or close to) Desktop 9700. 8 pipes and all. As far as I can see, it is only named the 9700 because NVIDIA named their chip the 5700.

They are not the same core AFAIK. The 9600 is the R-350 and the 9700 is the RV-360 ?? Or am I all muddled up?

I think you're right...but isnt the 360 core the 9600XT? So calling it the 9700 is still not completely kosher, IMHO.

its essentially the same core its just a redone 350. Im dissapointed i really thought ATI had something great up there sleaves. ANd im dissapointed in Dell for not including an nvidia card in there lineup

DELL-Machina - you cant redo a core to run at 450Mhz when it is designed for 350Mhz. You cannot redo a core with Low-K dielectrics - it is an entirely new design. So far the core has been in 0.15 micron technology now it is 0.13 technology.

Do you have proof that this is a rehashed RV350 core?? Please give me the supporting documentation.

Thank you

Not going into it technically They gave it a slightly moded core name which usually gives way on a redone product, performance is typically 5-15% of its original product, pricing is another story. I read enough reviews and in depth coverage to know this isnt a completely new core its a core that was redone to accomodate more transistor, faster ram and ram types. Its liek Looking at the Original Pentium3 Coppermine then seeing it jump to the Tualitin core. Same product which runs "cooler" faster, and of course a bit more pricey then its previous model. On a technical way of describing it i knwo ive seen a couple articles so i'll dig those up until then its exactly what i say it is since i am the law here

No - I am the law here so you better give me those articles

Anything to keep me going until the 8790 see's light!!

Where did you get that info? The numbers I've seen are 20-30%

Where are you DELL-M ??

Need thos figures...nothing better to do here...im looking but cant seem to find any!!