I was wondering how much of a difference if any by using intel accelerated graphics 950 or a 256MB ATI MobilityTM Radeon® X1400 HyperMemory, i wont be playing any games but i dont want my computer to slow down using normal aero stuff like flip 3d and sidebar.
I was wondering how much of a difference if any by using intel accelerated graphics 950 or a 256MB ATI MobilityTM Radeon® X1400 HyperMemory, i wont be playing any games but i dont want my computer to slow down using normal aero stuff like flip 3d and sidebar.
The GMA 950 is very very low end for Aero, and not a good choice, the GMA965 would be the low end of acceptable IMO.
If they are the same price, get the X1400 it will help under the most stressful situations, and things like widgets already consume memory so best if it's not cutting into what little you have available.
Short video, don't know resolution, limited functionality exposed.
What features were disabled or reduced? I bet you transparency is set low.
Also what is the core system, how much memory does the host provide, and is it a fast Core2Duo they offloaded to? That would make all the difference, pretty much all the GMA950 demos I've seen sofar have been on MacBook which have 2.13 GHZ Core2Duos. Offloading to that isn't as bad as stealing resources from a Lowvoltage CPU.
Without hardware vertex support, I wouldn't trust it on a light laptop.
Either way if there is no or little price difference then the X1400 is the clear choice. If the price difference is alot them nmaybe it's worth saving a few buck, but the GMA950 doesn't even have the same level of feature support for 2D, so why bother unless you're really pressed for money?
Heck an X200/X1100 or GF6100/6150 would be better than the GMA950, and I wouldn't recommend those either.
its not my video... just something i found on youtube
Anyway, i had a celeron 410 thats 1.46ghz 512mb of ram, 1280x800 with the GMA950, transparency at full and it plowed right through RC2 with no problems.
Is the x1400 the clear choice? maybe not... what if you take battery life into consideration? Would the integrated graphics not consume less energy than the x1400? Remember that hes not trying to play games.
it would be on a dell e1505 with a T7200 2 gigs of ram, and idk for sure the resolution but its 15.4" Widescreen SXGA+ Display with Truelife so if you could tell me i would like to know the resolution
I was wondering how much of a difference if any by using intel accelerated graphics 950 or a 256MB ATI MobilityTM Radeon® X1400 HyperMemory, i wont be playing any games but i dont want my computer to slow down using normal aero stuff like flip 3d and sidebar.
The GMA 950 is very very low end for Aero, and not a good choice, the GMA965 would be the low end of acceptable IMO.
If they are the same price, get the X1400 it will help under the most stressful situations, and things like widgets already consume memory so best if it's not cutting into what little you have available.
I was using the 950 with Aero. All seems to work (the windows, the Alt-Tab, bubbles screen saver, etc. However, try to push it, as in run the GF8800Demoreel_High_8000.wmv video. Then you know how high-end the 950 really is. The 8800 demo clip isn't even a 3D app!
From what little I know, the future g35 chipset should be better at doing this.
Is the x1400 the clear choice? maybe not... what if you take battery life into consideration? Would the integrated graphics not consume less energy than the x1400? Remember that hes not trying to play games.
Have you seen the battery life of the ATi solutions? Powerplay does a great job of reducing power consumption. An X1400 will outpace a GF7300 by about 10-20% when plugged in, yet when running on battery (without changing the default profile) the X1400 will throttle itself back to where it gets about 30-40% the performance of the GFGO7300 because it conserves energy. Now unless you need the power it won't sap it that much more and the difference between the GMA950 sapping resources versus the extra power for the X1400's dedicated ram the power consumption is pretty comparable.
And that's the great part, grunt when you need it and miserly when you need that. Check a few reviews and see.
I was using the 950 with Aero. All seems to work (the windows, the Alt-Tab, bubbles screen saver, etc. However, try to push it, as in run the GF8800Demoreel_High_8000.wmv video. Then you know how high-end the 950 really is. The 8800 demo clip isn't even a 3D app!
Yeah but the GMA950 has basically no HD video acceleration, you need to go to the GMA965/X3000 to get that, and even still the dedicated solutions will do better in more situations.
The GMA965 is the bare minimum IMO for acceptable use and to not sp system resources as badly, and even then like the X200/GF6100 I wouldn't recommend it.
Quote :
From what little I know, the future g35 chipset should be better at doing this.
Yeah but it will have other competition to run against too. I think itnel is going in the rigth directoin focusing on basic 3D and then primarily 2D video acceleration and decryption, as that is what this market segment needs most. But the GMA950 is not that level of solution.
Hey I use a GMA950 in my Optiplex GX520 as well as an 82865G in my GX270 everyday at work, and while they are capable 2D parts, their 3D sucks (even for basic geomatics or GoogleEarth stuff) and so my experience even in a Win2K and XP environment isn't great for anything beyond the basic uses.
If someone has the X1400 as an option and its not much money difference, I'd say take it. But then again I like having free memory not something coggling it up. Think about what you lose of a 1GB laptop to shared memory on a system that already wants 2GB to run smoothly, and people recommend 4GB? I wouldn't give back anything to the GMA950.
Also if you're paying the price for a T7200, why hold it back by shared access?
