XPS M1530...8600m GT Good Enough? - Page 2

For XP defo 2GB is ideal. For Vista the more Ram the better. However, Dual channel does make a difference so 2x1GB sticks dual channel is better than 1x2GB and 1X1GB. Not sure if they do 2x1.5GB - if they do then I'd say get the 3GB. Not really worth going for the 4GB option as Vista won't see it unless you go for the 64bit version which has heaps of problems with drivers and apps - it also runs non-64bit apps in emulation mode so you are not getting the performance you would get in 32-bit apps that you would in a native 32bit OS.

The 3GB option consists of 1x2GB & 1x1GB sticks. BTW, according to the benchmarks I've seen, dual-channel does not make a notable difference.

Another thing to consider is getting the minimum option from Dell and buy the memory sticks aftermarket and install yourself. Put in 2x2GB of 800MHz; it will show less if running a 32-bit OS and the comp will down-clock the memory to 667MHz but increase timing, which is a good thing

Thanks, guys! Sounds like it's best to just stuff 3GB in there and be done with it. I'll check newegg.com for memory pricing. The upgrade cost from 1 to 3 GB on dell.com is $250.

I wouldnt doubt that they are wrong, I can only go by what they state though, and there is no text anywhere confirming this, and whats worse is they have a different part# for each machine. No solid standard at all.

And FYI my Vostro scores over 4K In 3Dmark???

If you can get it with XP instead of Vista I would try, you will not be happy with the gaming performance with the Vista drivers or OS. I installed Vista on my Vostro, then promptly removed it as all my games were choppy, under XP it was smooth as silk.

I dont know if XP is still an option on that but....

I run Vista on a home desktop and unfortunately I'm not a good enough gamer to feel the effects of a slightly lower frame rate in Vista - I die just as much in XP as I do in Vista...

I'm also assuming (or maybe hoping) that having a 2.2GHz 4MB cache CPU, 3GB RAM and a dedicated 256MB 8600M GT will actually be better than I expect in Vista....

I am not entirely sure those results tell us anything other than your machine is slower than Keypad's machine you are running a 2.0 cpu and I dont know if its the 1MB cache but he is running a 2.2 and most likely 4MB cache and there is a performance difference. between those machine that could very well drop you 600+ points......

This is not just a slight difference in FPS, its an actual skippy choppy feeling when it does dip and its pretty noticable for me. (I mostly play Wow) and thats not as fast paced as most First person shooters as its an mmo.... =)

who knows though it may be just fine, just definately not in my system...

-D

Thanks for the heads-up. The machine will ship with Vista Business but I can revert it to XP if need be.

I am sure in time Vista will develope just fine into a great OS for gaming, its just not there yet, XP however is mature, has decent driver support and it too when it first was released was slow than 98SE was for games, now its great.

Maybe another 6 months to a year and we will see if Vista and developers work out the driver and performance kinks. =)

You will be happier now though with XP Pro over Vista Business atm even with 3GB ram =)

-D

Well its extremely difficult to get a real answer from the Dell reps over the phone and online regarding what part they are using for thier 8600M GT in their Inspiron, Vostro, and XPS.

While it makes sense they would use a faster part in the XPS. After talking on the the phone with them, and making them run around like monkeys I was informed after making sure they checked it, what part they are using for the above machines. It was stated 3 times they are using the same GDDR3 part for all three. I am somewhat skeptical of these statements because there is nothing in writing online, anywhere. As well there are three different part numbers for these.

I have seen postings from multiple machines here, some stating they are getting over 4K with 3Dmark with the XPS, and some with the Inspiron getting 3.+K, I myself get over 4K with my Vostro 1500.

Our machine though are all different specs for the most part. I am using the 1mb cache 2.0 CD2 with 3.56GB usable 667Mhz ram and other just one or two gigs, and the xps guys with 2.+Ghz 4MB cache rigs so it stands to reason we would not get the same results anyway.

I am very very curious though to what I have in my machine and if it jives with what Dell has been telling me because prior to the other days calls and chats that I have had, they all said GDDR2 memory is used. But then I was told they changed them to all GDDR3 to reduce power consumption for the laptops.

So tonight I am going to do some more research and run some utils I got that will tell me whats what... =)

I will post back...

If dell would follow suit like they do with thier desktops and just disclose full specs this would be a lot easier....

I can understand Keypad is running a 2.2 C2D with 4MB of cache. I'm running the T7300 2.0 with 4MB of cache. I'm sure it's possible, but it's hard for me to believe that .2 GHz would give me a drop of 600 points from his machine. I'm going to add another GB of RAM to see if that helps out. Then I'd have 3 GB total. If that doesn't satisfy me, I guess at some point I'll be selling my 1520 to get a 1530. I might end up buying an Alienware M15X with the 8800M video.

I was running XP MCE on my XPS 410 until last month. I finally installed Vista Home Premium back on it. So far I really haven't felt any difference or lack of performance in gaming. I primarily play CoD 4 right now.

I would think that with enough memory Vista could be tolerable on my 1520 for casual gaming. XP Home was on my 1520 for a period time to compare the performance differences. To be honest, there was no significant difference in performance. My games have pretty much performed the same whether it was Vista or XP. Some applications may have started a tad slower. Overall, it wasn't as bad as was expected. I do believe Vista requires more memory to compete with XP. I also tweaked some settings for Vista to make it behave better.

To me, my opinion only, it boils down to the graphics card. I feel that any CPU running at least 2.0 GHz and 2 GB of RAM should be sufficient to run most of todays games. The real difference is your video card. The 8600M GT in my particular 1520 is not performing to my satisfaction. I don't expect a lot, just a little more than what it's giving me. I bought this 1520 early on and it could have the GDDR2 memory.

I just wish that I had a 1530 to compare performance with. I'd hate to waste money on a 1530 and still be disappointed in the performance. The 8600M GT just might not be very well suited for the latest shooters out there.

Sorry for the long post.

Yeah thats another thing I wonder what OS key is running also because Vista's 3D performance is also an issue, I am running XP and I know the performance is so much better, which may also explain my 3Dmark scores.

I scored 4083 under XP and in Vista I only scored 2997.

I however really do not lend much weight in synthetic benchmarking, and 3Dmark has somewhat strayed off the path a bit and its really only good for comparing cards against each other but not real world benchmarks. I mean my system gets almost 400FPS in Quake 3 (I know its dated but) with all options set to high at my native resolution. I ran one of the truly first cards to play Quake 3 Arena smoothly which was the Matrox G400 Max (in 32bit color mode) I know there were better cards out just after this one but you have to look at the times too. Back then that card could barely push the game over 32FPS but it could do it with all the goodies on and with hardware bump mapping. Looking at my laptop now and see how rediculous it makes that card look but also realizing its running at 397FPS!!!! I mean wtf thats just crazy fast. Yes the game is on an old engine but the newer 3DMark06 paints the 8600M GT to be a pos. When in reality I can run Q3A nearly 400FPS, Q4 at 139FPS with most options on, and even WOW completely maxed out with full foliage and density and get with vsync solid 60FPS even in most cities (119-175 with vsync off). So its hard to go by a benchmark that is not very realistic in its scoring and tests. I would love an 8800 part to be available! =) but the Vista performance is pretty dismal.




-D

I appreciate the differences you've shown between XP and Vista. I'd hate to do it, but I might throw XP back on my 1520 and give another shot to see how CoD 4 works. I've installed it before. This time I'll use Acronis to image my Vista first.

Thats a good idea to do the image. If you just do a clean XP install, drivers then COD4 imediately and check it out =)

Does anyone know if you install XP if the biometric fingerprint scanner will work? I don't know if XP has ever been an option on the 1330 or the 1530?