GTX 280M or Dual Geforce GTX 9800M/GT

[awdogsgo2heaven]

I'm Looking at laptops for gamming and im wondering which one of these are better? And if one is better, is it better by that much? I like the sager 5797, however only the gtx 280M is for it not the dual...but if the performance is that big then im better off looking at a model with the dual support. Can anyone give me some insight on what to choose? I see some of the benchmarks online, seems to list 280M higher than 9800 STL But im not sure even though that say "STL" if its still really two cards being tested.

 

[one-shot]

280M I believe uses the same chip G92 chip as a 9800GTX+ does. Not the GT200 chip used on the GTX 260 or GTX280, for example. It is misleading to those who don't know. Did you mean 9800 SLI? SLI usually refers to two or more graphics cards being used. I would go with the 9800 SLI (two cards) over the single GTX280m/9800GTX+.

 

[awdogsgo2heaven]

STI yeah. But the Sager with the dual option sadly does not have an hdmi port like the other one.
its got dvi though

 

[daedalus685]

I've never seen BM's on the "new" 280M, but I imagine it would only be slightly faster than the old 9800 with a tweak here and ther, and that two 9800M's would win out. How much memory are the cards? I'd take thr one with the most dedicated, even high end mobile cards often have rediculously low ram, depending on themanufacturer. Your primary consideration here should be things like cost and battery life if this will really be a portable computer. I'm sure double 9800's will use substantially more power.

As for no HDMI, you can pick up a good enough dvi-hdmi adapter from walmart for 10 bucks so I wouldnt worry about that. Although most laptops, and in fact even Nvidia desktop solutions, would not be able to transmit 5.1 audio over HDMI, adapter or not.

 

[daedalus685]

I still can't find any useful benchmark comparisons. But Fudzilla reported taht the 280M would be "up to" 50% faster than the old 9800M in Crysis/ WaW/etc.

I would still believe that the 9800M SLI would be faster, dependign on how large their framebuffer is and what resolution the laptop in question runs at.

 

[L1qu1d]

280M GTX is just a 9800M GTX revisions from what I understand.

 

[awdogsgo2heaven]

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
This website throws me off, it rates the GTX 280M at 4 and the GTX SLI 9800M as 3...just one position over it. I suppose what im really interested in is if its really this minor of a difference if it is, im fine with the one card as long as it doesn't mean being able to play 'high' in a game and having to lower it to medium.

Edit: also more related to games notice the postiion of the 8800M SLI, if you restrict it to show how well it performs with crysis. it gets 125 fps on low and 39 fps on high XGA...and its listed in 8th, So I would assume that the 280M would do much better than it.

 

[L1qu1d]

Don't trust their benchnmarks, just read the specs.

 

[L1qu1d]

280M GTX (55 nm)has 128 Unified shaders and 585 mhz core, 1463 MHz shader speed, and 950 Memory + 1 gig gddr3

9800M GTX (65 nm) is 112 unified shaders and 500 mhz core, 1250 MHz shader speed and 800 mhz memory + 1 gig gddr3

So it would be like the 8800 GT vs 8800 GTS basically.

def not 50% faster than the 9800M GTX, more like 10-15% if any.

 

[cjl]

9800m SLI is faster, but your battery life would be a lot better with the single card.

 

[awdogsgo2heaven]

But is it ALOT faster? Would it make the difference between medium or high in games?