NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Forums › Dell Notebooks - General › 7900go GTX = 7400go @ native resolution.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

7900go GTX = 7400go @ native resolution.

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
I did a little research yesterday, but found nothing that directly confirmed my suspicion (but my research did tell me that my suspicion was possible). My thinking was that @ 1200x800 (xps 1210) the 7400go performs at least as well as the xps 1710 @ 1920x1200. Can any1 find results that either confirm or deny this?

(I found some stuff on extreme tech that compared the 7600go and the 7900go gtx, and it suggested that @ higher resolutions the 7900gtx performed @ the same level as the 7600 (what is cool is that the 7900gtx was only using a 1600x xxxx resolution (not the native rez), andt the 7600 was using a rez beyond that of 1200x800 (i believe)).

the 7600 is only about 50% better than a 7400 (3dmark), so i m thinking with a greater resolution difference (playing both systems @ native rez(xps 1210 vs xps 1710)), will cause them to have the same performance (fps).

what do you think?
post #2 of 18
depends on the setting. Although higher resolution is taxing if your not using fillrate or samplerate stressing features like FSAA 8x+ then the 7900 wont be GPU bound.
post #3 of 18
OK, so the FPS performance may be closer to each other when at native resolution (1920x1200 vs 1280x800)... but that doesn't negate the fact that the higher resolution is gonna look a **** load better. It also doesn't negate the fact that you could lower the 7900GTX to another lower WS resolution (eg: 1680x1050 or 1280x800) and it would absolutely blow the 7400go out of the water in both FPS and looks.

7400go =/= 7900go GTX

Stu
post #4 of 18
post #5 of 18
Thread Starter 
ya IQ goes to crap when not playing @ 1920x1200 (native rez on 1710), so i wouldnt play on anything else neway (like on my current notebook). and even if u could stick a 7900gtx in a 1210, u d still only get 1200x800 resolution, so its not like you could turn the rez up to uxga even if you wanted too (1200x800 may not sound like much, but on a 12 inch screen that's still pretty sharp).

i think if ure considering only native verus native resolution, its pretty much gonna come down to which size/battery life/weight you like more. (i tried playing wow windowed @ 1280x800, and i was fine with it (played it on my LCD notebook moniter, with the same size pixels, to get a feel for size)). BTW price isnt an issue, i work @ dell, and even right now i get 40% off both the 1710 and the 1210 (i get 15% off + what ever customer coupon i get (epp stacks with all coupon and deals, except dell days deals (but those deals suck neway lol))) (btw if i got the 75% off customer coupon and stacked it with the 15% customer coupon that would be 90% off LOL?!?). so after the coupons and how i d like each one configured (1710 vs 1210) the price difference is so small it really isnt the deciding factor @ all (besides i get 21 days to try out the 1210, and if i dont like it i ll return it for the 1710 lol (but i dont think that's gonna happen, the 1210 is too awesome))
post #6 of 18
If you ever consider pluging your notebook to a monitor...the extra horsepower of the 7900 will shine.
post #7 of 18
I say run a know benchmark on the same systems, and see what the scores are. Make sure each system is running the exact same thing, with the only differenc being the resolution the benchmark is set at. Another option is to run some games at each systems native resolutions, and see what the frame rates are. Should give you a fairly decent idea.
post #8 of 18
My roommates Sony Vaio SZ series notebook which is the spec for spec equiv of the M1210 prefers to raid on WoW on my e1705. For those of you who have been living under a rock WoW is World of Warcraft a massively multiplayer online game and the term raiding implies that the user is strong enough to join a 10,15,20,40 player party and "raid" a dungeon. Performance in this game can come to a crawl if your system cannot animate 40players and th creatures there fighting. Id say WoW is hands down one of the most system taxing games to date when it comes overall system performance. Even at 1920x1200 my e1705 delivers smoother framerate than his SZ260 at 1200x800 resolutions.

My e1705 Specs are in my sig and the Sony is T2400, 1GB Ram, 100GB Harddrive 5400rpm, Geforce 7400 go.
post #9 of 18
When you said WoW and Raid my eyes glittered.
post #10 of 18
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DELL-Machina
My roommates Sony Vaio SZ series notebook which is the spec for spec equiv of the M1210 prefers to raid on WoW on my e1705. For those of you who have been living under a rock WoW is World of Warcraft a massively multiplayer online game and the term raiding implies that the user is strong enough to join a 10,15,20,40 player party and "raid" a dungeon. Performance in this game can come to a crawl if your system cannot animate 40players and th creatures there fighting. Id say WoW is hands down one of the most system taxing games to date when it comes overall system performance. Even at 1920x1200 my e1705 delivers smoother framerate than his SZ260 at 1200x800 resolutions.

My e1705 Specs are in my sig and the Sony is T2400, 1GB Ram, 100GB Harddrive 5400rpm, Geforce 7400 go.

Well I don't really see how your sony would out perform the xps1210, at best it would be equivalent.

but the xps 1210, i ll be getting will outspec your sony notebook, with these specs:

cpu = T7600 (2.33Ghz)/667Mhz/4mb, ram = 2BG ram 2 dimm (667mhz), HDD = 100GB 7200RPM, and a 7400go.

my brother has a viao, the case looks nice, but performance wise its the same as any other notebook, so I'll be getting the dell. o ya the whole thing of me working @ dell also helps as my 15% epp discount stacks with other coupons, making this purchase probably less than half of what your sony cost (i just had a 25% off customer coupon + 15% epp =40% off).

EDIT: i think i may have miss read what you where trying to say, but in any case 7400go>1400 (unless you got the 7900gs in it, still isnt good enough to be an analogy since 7900gs<7900gtx). also the whole point of this topic was to avoid a 17 inch notebook, if i were to get a 17inch notebook, i d go with the xps 1710 anyway.
post #11 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrackatiCz
When you said WoW and Raid my eyes glittered.




I think I will leave that statement alone, lol...
post #12 of 18
I have 2 laptops, a Dell XPS M1710 and a Asus A8JM.... The M1710 has a 7900GTX with the 17'' screen native res 1920x1200 and the A8JM has a 7600 Go (which is way faster than a 7400 Go) and a 14'' screen with a native res of 1280x800. I find that even with the way lower res, the 7900GTX still outperforms my 7600 Go.

Both laptops have 2GB of RAM and a core duo 1.86. Anyways if my 7600 Go with 512MB dedicated memory can't perform as well as my 7900 Go GTX when they are both running at their respective native resolutions, there is no way a 7400 can.

Also you are wrong about a 7400Go>X1400 the performance of the 2 cards is very similar, with the X1400 usually coming out narrowly ahead. Check out notebookcheck's chart of 3Dmark scores of various notebook GPUs

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html
post #13 of 18
Ahaha.
post #14 of 18
7900GTX is limited by graphic power up to 1600x1200 res with full detail 3d games including FSAA+Anisotropy maxed out. In some ways this resolution isn't enough either. You must cut off some specialities in games(4xfsaa+8xAF)

Question asked here is not a question.

I m walking at least 5 kilometers a day with my notebook. If I buy a high end laptop, it will weigh as 8 kilograms and with extra units and cases I will have to carry about 15 kg 5 kilometers by walking.

It isn't a money problem but why will I have to cut my finger by carrying that shit.

I am currently using BenQ Joybook R55 and it is about 3 kg weigh. My case is about 5-6 kg. I would buy a thinner laptop but 15.4 inch is the lowest limit using Autocad and watching DVD.

Spending extra money for desktop computer is a more rationalist idea for me.
post #15 of 18
Holy dead thread batman! Why did you revive this?

Stu
post #16 of 18
Well than by your standards the best notebook for price vs performance would be a MacBookPro with C2D on it. Since the x1600 is comparable if not better than the 7600 in a better package.
post #17 of 18
*edit*oops dead thread... im a dumbass.

WoW! (pun intended) this has become quite the sword fight (pun intended again!).

What it basically boils down to is architecture and design. The 7400, though a nice card for it's genre, is not meant to be a pixel pusher in a hardcore sense. Even at a lower rez. I wish they could make a high end card for the small form factor laptops. That would really capture the market, but say if you put even a 7900gs in a m1210, you would still need high rez to make that card shine (plug in external monitor here...) which is not feasible on a screen of that size. Just imagine 1920x1200 on a 12"... microscope please! But you would have some sharp images....
post #18 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by DELL-Machina
Well than by your standards the best notebook for price vs performance would be a MacBookPro with C2D on it. Since the x1600 is comparable if not better than the 7600 in a better package.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dell Notebooks - General
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Dell Forums › Dell Notebooks - General › 7900go GTX = 7400go @ native resolution.