NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Toshiba Forums › Toshiba Notebooks › Tosh P25S477M vs. 4760
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tosh P25S477M vs. 4760 - Page 2

post #21 of 36
8/4/03 at 4:32pm
Quote:
Originally posted by neurowave
Anyway, in Photoshop there will be no gains from extra graphics card memory. Technically, your screen in windows is one big texture that the graphics card is constantly rendering... but it isn't significant enough to drastically effect performance. It would be an issue if you were running at 8000x6000 resolution (don't see that happening anytime soon!) with only 4 MB of ram.

Actually, right now I'm working in 4000x3000 with 8MB of RAM.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 36
8/4/03 at 4:49pm
Quote:
Originally posted by infiltrateib
Actually, right now I'm working in 4000x3000 with 8MB of RAM.
Nice! Is that a cumulative resolution from multiple monitors, or is that only one video card? If it's only one card, that's really impressive.

Either way, that proves my point: your video card isn't going to change your performance in Photoshop. What you're seeing on screen, however, is stored as a texture... I don't think 8000x6000 could run with only 4 MB, but I haven't actually verified that. I just shot a high number...
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 36
8/4/03 at 4:51pm
Quote:
Originally posted by neurowave
Nice! Is that a cumulative resolution from multiple monitors, or is that only one video card? If it's only one card, that's really impressive.

Either way, that proves my point: your video card isn't going to change your performance in Photoshop. What you're seeing on screen, however, is stored as a texture... I don't think 8000x6000 could run with only 4 MB, but I haven't actually verified that. I just shot a high number...
LOL, I was only kidding, hehe.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 36
8/4/03 at 4:54pm
Quote:
Originally posted by infiltrateib
LOL, I was only kidding, hehe.
... and there I was, picturing you typing on a wall-sized display
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:02pm
Something kind of like this:



Reply
Reply
post #26 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:16pm
that would be cool if they could make the monitors flush with one another and get rid of the grid heh.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:18pm
what about 3d rendering? formz or 3dstudio? would having more video ram help that at all? I would think so, but when you make a movie its just a bunch of sequential frames and not an on the fly 3d rendering.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:26pm
Quote:
Originally posted by outsider
what about 3d rendering? formz or 3dstudio? would having more video ram help that at all? I would think so, but when you make a movie its just a bunch of sequential frames and not an on the fly 3d rendering.
Yep, I posted this above:

Quote:
That depends on your settings. In a 3D app, if you enable texture viewing, the extra graphics memory will help a lot. It's just like a game, actually even more intensive than rendering a game, because the textures and models you'll be using will be a lot higher quality (higher polygons count for models and much higher resolution of the textures). In most games, a 512x512 texture resolution texture would be fairly large. In a 3D rendering, it wouldn't look good enough, especially if you need to do close-ups of your textures (that's why mip-mapping is really important in games, it lets you use different textures based on your distance from an object. there's no point in using that in 3D apps though because you always want your object to look the best. You don't have to sacrifice quality for speed because you'll be rendering everything anyway). You can also code shaders to be hardware accelerated by your video card in your 3D app, more ram will help (although the key point to video card ram is textures). Anyway, I'm not much of a programmer, I could ask the lead programmer who works with me to come talk about this stuff if you're particularly interested... he's got quite a bit of experience with 3d engine and shader programming.
Basically, where video card ram is really needed is for textures. If you're recreating an entire city in a 3d application and want to work in realtime, you'll definitely be needing the ram
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:30pm
Quote:
Originally posted by outsider
that would be cool if they could make the monitors flush with one another and get rid of the grid heh.
This looks better, still not perfect.

Reply
Reply
post #30 of 36
8/4/03 at 5:50pm
Quote:
4790 - 2.99 GHz P4 32MB NVDIA GeForce FX Go5200 512 MB DDR
There it is, undeniable proof that the m9 smokes the 5200 in dx8 apps, the m9 gets around 7k in that test.

Either way, if you are into gaming, get the 5600fx or the m10pro (radeon 9600 pro).

Good luck!
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 36
8/4/03 at 7:09pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Zachquiel
There it is, undeniable proof that the m9 smokes the 5200 in dx8 apps, the m9 gets around 7k in that test.

Either way, if you are into gaming, get the 5600fx or the m10pro (radeon 9600 pro).

Good luck!
Hmm... That's very low for GeForceFX 5200Go. I saw they make it around 6700 mark in 3DMark2001. Did you turn on the AA or what resolution did you run? That's a very low score.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 36
8/5/03 at 12:17am
I bought the Toshiba P25-S487 from Costco and am returning it. I ran 3dmark 2001, and it scored barely under 5000. I ran 3dmark 2003, and it barely scored over 1000. It's not a bad laptop but fugly. It's disappointing that they would put such a crappy video card and slow hard drive in the thing. You would be better off getting the 4760. It looks much better. I also ran the other benchmarks similar to the ones posted on the 4760 review. All of them either came in slightly lower than the 4760 and a lot lower on one of them (I believe it was the Sandra CPU and multimedia test that it scored much lower).

I'm going to wait and see what the 5680 ends up looking like.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 36
8/5/03 at 1:54am
Quote:
Originally posted by Kasteo
Hmm... That's very low for GeForceFX 5200Go. I saw they make it around 6700 mark in 3DMark2001. Did you turn on the AA or what resolution did you run? That's a very low score.
4927- NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 1024x768x16 NoAA Z24 DXTC DB D3D Pure HW

4776 - NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 1024x768x32 NoAA Z24 DXTC DB D3D Pure HW

6714 - NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 800x600x16 NoAA Z24 DXTC DB D3D Pure HW

6640 - NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5200 800x600x32 NoAA Z24 DXTC DB D3D Pure HW

GlenBA
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 36
8/5/03 at 5:07am
Not a surprise.....
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 36
8/5/03 at 5:38am
Quote:
Originally posted by ftlaptop
I bought the Toshiba P25-S487 from Costco and am returning it. I ran 3dmark 2001, and it scored barely under 5000. I ran 3dmark 2003, and it barely scored over 1000. It's not a bad laptop but fugly. It's disappointing that they would put such a crappy video card and slow hard drive in the thing. You would be better off getting the 4760. It looks much better. I also ran the other benchmarks similar to the ones posted on the 4760 review. All of them either came in slightly lower than the 4760 and a lot lower on one of them (I believe it was the Sandra CPU and multimedia test that it scored much lower).

I'm going to wait and see what the 5680 ends up looking like.
Sandra results from Costco 3.0 P25

Sandra Version 2002.6.8.97

CPU
6779
2411/5875

Multimedia
13971
20864

Memory
3729
3725

Sandra Version 2003.7.9.73

CPU
9197
2591/5778

Multimedia
13801
21222

Memory
3725
3721

From PCTorque Review Don't know which version

CPU
9462
2639/5856

Multimedia
14325
22663

Memory
2387
2386

GlenBA
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 36
8/6/03 at 2:45pm

Added PC Mark 2002 Results

PC Mark 2002

CPU 7299
Memory 6712

GlenBA
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Toshiba Notebooks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Toshiba Forums › Toshiba Notebooks › Tosh P25S477M vs. 4760