Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

7300 turbo cache or x1400 hyper mem?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 1, 2006 3:12:50 PM

i was debating between a 7300 turbo cache or a x1400 hyper mem, i'm not sure which 1 would provide the better proformance (only two options on the dell laptop i was looking at) thanks
September 1, 2006 3:19:07 PM

NEITHER. I have personally seen these two half-assed shit cards work and they are horrible in gaming. They use system memory! BOO. My friend got a Dell with a x1400 and it runs so bad it's laughable. The 7300 is just as bad. You should put a few more bucks into a laptop and get a dedicated video card, not some hybrid crap.

!!! :roll:
September 1, 2006 3:24:13 PM

heh alright thanks for warning me! i figured they wouldn't be THAT bad but i guess they would be. thanks
September 1, 2006 3:41:42 PM

Holy crap dude you wouldn't believe how bad. My friend has the Intel Core Duo 2ghz and the ATI x1400. We loaded Quake 4 and it recommended LOW quality 640x480! Guess what? IT WAS STILL CHOPPY!

He can't even play AOE III on medium detail. Tomb Raider Legend... nope runs bad unless on low detail. Evil Genius, a good game btw, runs like ass too and it's old. We won't even talk about how bad NFS: Most Wanted ran... it was a nightmare. He is SO ticked off he bought it too. The "hyper" or "turbo" crap cache memory is terrible. Apparently the card has 32MB of ram itself and it uses system memory for the rest. It's terrible!

I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH HOW BAD x1400 and 7300 SUCK!

You know you can get a laptop with a 7800+ for not much more anyway.
September 1, 2006 3:47:49 PM

If you're buying a laptop for gaming, the lowest you should be considering is a mobile X700 or 6600.

I will say though, I have a Turion X2 with a Geforce 61100 (shared graphics).. I didn't buy it for gaming but I can sure as hell play games on it at lower detail settings and 1024x768... Battlefront 2 and Star Wars: Empire at War run fine on it.

The X1400 and 7300 should both be much better than my 6100...
September 1, 2006 3:50:52 PM

yeah i can but its not a core 2, but i get your point :-p sounds like a pretty good waste of money. i was lookin at dell and a core 2 + x1400 is about 1100 (but its a 15.4 inch screen) while i'd ahve to get the 17 to get core2 plus x7900gs for 1650 w/ tax n shipping so its a big diff in price, on alien ware i can get a silmular comp with a 7600 go but i mean its only about 100 dollars cheaper and the 7900 is a hellova lot better card
September 1, 2006 3:52:31 PM

You're nuts!
One of tomshardware's articles on the 7 series nvidia cards did not list the 7300 card. Why? Because Tom said that the 7300 is junk and should not be considered.

They SUCK. You will pluck your eyeballs out when you see how bad they perform. Save your dough and buy a laptop with a 7800. They are getting cheap now.

CHEAP!

x1400/7300 = crap, poo, shit, doodie
September 1, 2006 3:56:34 PM

Quote:
You're nuts!
One of tomshardware's articles on the 7 series nvidia cards did not list the 7300 card. Why? Because Tom said that the 7300 is junk and should not be considered.

They SUCK. You will pluck your eyeballs out when you see how bad they perform. Save your dough and buy a laptop with a 7800. They are getting cheap now.

CHEAP!

x1400/7300 = crap, poo, ****, doodie


Well come on, its a laptop graphics card, cant expect much out of it. This site offers custom Laptops and the parts are very good at the price they offer.

www.ibuypower.com
September 1, 2006 3:56:50 PM

1. I work for Tom's Hardware. I don't think the 7300 is junk...

2. I am telling you, Gaming runs pretty passably in my mobile 6100 at 1024x768. I have done this, I do it alot actually, so I know it to be true. I have no reason to make that up.

3. and the specs say that the 7300/X1400 should be better than my shared 6100.


Like I said, if you're buying a laptop strictly for gaming you'd probably want at least an X700 or 6600. But an X1400/7300 should do the job at lower resolutions if gaming is a secondary consideration.

Take from that what you like.
September 1, 2006 4:01:59 PM

I don't care if you're Tom himself! 7300/x1400 is trash! You are right though, if he is going for gaming then he should get a better solution but if he doesn't care about frame rates or quality or speed and prefers junk over a 7800 option which doesn't cost that much more than go for it!

:twisted:
September 1, 2006 4:03:12 PM

well gaming is a secondary thing with this laptop, i have my destop for the heavy games. but that being said i still will game quite a bit on it so i tihnk i'm gonna save my money for the better laptop. thanks for all the input!
September 1, 2006 4:06:57 PM

If you don't care if I'm Tom himself, why did you say "Because Tom said"...?

I don't know why you seem so emotionally invested in hating low end mobile graphics, but whatever.

Here's a bench of a 7300 on a Pentium M single core.
Does really well in HL2 and Battlefield 2 at 1024x768... gets over 45 fps in either. Even gets over 25 fps in Doom3, which is pretty impressive for a mobile part @ 1024x768:

http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/g72m-4.htm

That's definitely pklayable, dude. And the X1400 is supposed to be even a bit better than the 7300.

Like I said, take from it what you will; not a great choice if gaming is your main concern, but if you're buying a laptop where gaming is secondary, the 7300/X1400 is excellent.


KEEP IN MIND when you're buying a laptop, the PLATFORM IS INTEGRAL. I found this out when I bought my first laptop... I got a 3000+ Sempron with integrated Mobility 200M. Sucked the bag, and I mean HARD.

I traded it in for the Turion X2 with a 6100... the 6100 should have performed on par with the 200M in games, but the platform made a HUGE difference, especially when gaming. Odd because dual cores doesn't matter all that much when it comes to gaming on desktops. Maybe it was the DDR2 memory speed. Anyway, something to keep in mind...
September 1, 2006 4:07:29 PM

You're a smart lad. I won't even tell you how bad Oblivion runs. I know three people with x1400 cards in their laptops. They are all unhappy but they didn't listen to my advise when they purchased them.

I work with morons, much like everyone else. :x
September 1, 2006 4:20:07 PM

They both SUCK.
So, if you don't need performance, just get which one is cheaper.
Try to get at least 128megs of ON BOARD (not shared) RAM if you want to run Vista Aero.

I've seen worse cards, like the ATI 7000...or GeForce 420 (Ouch)
September 1, 2006 4:23:03 PM

I don’t think the 7300 as a GS/GT would be a BAD video card, but the "Turbo Cache" idea is CRAP. It didn’t work in the 6XXX cards and I’m guess’n it’s not going to work in the 7XXX cards. And ATI's Hyper Memory is just as bad. If you could get it with 128MB of dedicated video memory (DDR2/3 preferably) that would make a world of difference.

Link to Anandtech article on 6200TC, last years 7300TC, gives game spec’s to compare.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2300
September 1, 2006 6:32:37 PM

Quote:
They both SUCK.


Guys, we're not talking desktops here... we're talking LAPTOPS.

For laptops, these are probably the midrange for graphics. Most laptops come with intel GMA, which truly is crap.

200M's/X1000/X1100 and 6100/6200s are the bottom rung of passable, but ANYTHING with ANY dedicated memory is relatively rare and will do the job, albeit at lower settings and resolutions.

I think you guys are thinking desktop, where hypermemory and turbocache should be avoided at all costs... in Laptops, it's pretty much par for the course unless you have alot of $$ to spend.

I got my Turion X2 & Geforce 6100 laptop for $850... you won't find a video adapter with dedicated memory anywhere near that price methinks. But if you're not buying the machine spacifically for gaming, itll do the job for sure.
September 1, 2006 7:09:47 PM

Why are you defending crap?

My friend got a Dell E1705 with a 7800 Geforce for $1400.00

It was refurbed but it comes with a full warranty. $1400 is not much more, if any, than a crappy laptop with a 7300 or x1400.

"mid-range" is crap if not much more can get you a laptop far superior and will be a better investment. Your Turion with a 6100 is a good deal, but if you're going to spend $1200+ on a crap laptop with a 7300/x1400 then get a freakin one with a real video card for a couple bucks more.

THATS THE POINT
September 1, 2006 7:25:15 PM

The only thing I buy now are Dell Laptop Refurbs.
Keep looking for specials and you can get great deals.

I also get the extended worry-free warranty for about 3-4 years.
This puts the laptop as the same price as a new one w/o a decent warranty.

I can fix PCs, but when laptops start to go, its too tough to fix the proprietary stuff.
September 1, 2006 7:55:21 PM

Quote:
Why are you defending crap?


Well, because it's not. You're kind of wrong.

+40 fps in BF2 and HL2 at 1024x768 isn't crap. I don't know what you & your buddies were smoking, but if they got choppy framerates in Q4 at 640x480 with a 7300, you guys were doing something wrong... did they have 256mb of onboard memory or something? Were you running the game at super-high detail?

The X1400 and 7300 simply aren't that bad.

And I'm not saying it's not worth it to go high end on the laptops if you can afford it. All I'm saying is that the X1400 and 7300 do a much better job than you're describing.
September 1, 2006 9:08:21 PM

dont listen to elpollodiablo, he's the guy who blew up his x850xt once he got it. to the op, any dedicated 3d chip is better than integrated, if you want <6lbs. accept the fact that gaming wasn't made for laptops of that size.
September 2, 2006 12:36:50 PM

I didn't blow it up, it fried. There's a difference! I blew up my Geforce 3 literally, trust me.

It was a x850pro too foo and ATI gave me my $ back.

I don't like j00.
!