Hi there, I'm just comparing the two notebook-graphic cards
256MB ATI MOBILITY™ RADEON® X1400 HyperMemory™
256MB NVIDIA(R) GeForce(R) Go 7400 TurboCache
What are the differences between Hypermemory and TurboCache? I have a sort of understanding of Hypermemory that it uses the RAM in order to power itself (thats at least what I got out of it)... and my question is if TurboCache is the Nvidias version of the same thing or whether its actual power behind it?
Any comments would really help, thank you in advance!
The 128MB indicates how much physical memory there is on the video card. But, the card supports 512MB - that's where HM/TC kicks in. The technology allocates 384MB of system memory (Your DDR/DDR2) to account for the full 512MB supported by the card.
They are just that, the same thing...I have a 256mb X1600 Mobility with Hypermemory and My friend has a 256mb 7600 mobility and mine has hyper memory and his turbo cache, which means that if we wanted to we could make our cards into "512mb" cards by allocating ram from the system itself!
Im more of an ATI guy myself, I also believe that the battery life of the ATI is better with the power now tech, but im not sure about that. I would say go with the ATI depending on what the res of the system is, If the rest of the system is better on the one with the nVidia then I would go with that one, otherwise I say ATI all the way!
Both Turbocache and Hypermemory are no more than marketing fluff. They both mean that the card steals some of your system memory to simulate having more of their own, much like on-board video does. I have a feeling that performance between the 2 display adapters you listed will be darn similar so buy ATI since they have a cooler looking logo.