radeon mobility 7500 vs 9000

hey guys~ just wanted opinions and information about the two chips.

is there that much of a difference in terms of 3d gaming performance between the two chips? i know the 9000 has direct x 8.1 support, but does it really make a noticeable difference on the framerate or effects?

also, what is the deal on the new mobility 9600... i've only read info about it on ATI's site... is the hype about it really that worth it?

i just want a notebook graphics solution that i can use to play the current range of 3D shooters (i.e UT2003) and also upcoming ones (DOOM 3)...

lots of opinions encouraged~!
18 answers Last reply
More about radeon mobility 7500 9000
  1. a 2GHz notebook with an M9 (Mobility Radeon 9000) will score about 7000 3Dmarks, whereas a 2GHz Notebook with an M7 will only score about 4500 or so. The DirectX 8 compatibility of the M9 would definitely help with upcoming games and it would perform much, much better than the M7, but if you want the best performance at the moment, you will need to get a Dell notebook with a GeForce 4 Go 4200 (based on the GF4 Ti 4200).

    The Mobility Radeon 9600 will be better though and will be more thrifty when it comes to battery life.

    RaPTuRe

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  2. When will we see the Radeon 9600 in notebooks?
  3. I'm really not sure, perhaps as early as June, but it will take longer for it to be implemented into notebooks.. :(

    RaPTuRe

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  4. I've got a 2G with a 7000 and it does around 5000 3dmarks. Bill has a 2.8G with a 9000 and it does around 7000.

    The big difference is that mine (7000)skips all the really pretty tests in 3dmark cause it can't do em at all. No water world and no trees and streams and fish and stuff on the 7000.

    Give me fuel, give me fire, give me that which I desire.
  5. i read somewhere that there really wasn't much of a difference in framerate performance for games... but there were differences on 3D benchmarks because the tests are run in native direct x 8.0 mode...

    so what do you think? is there that much of a difference in game performance between 7500 and 9000? there seems to be a large difference in price~!
  6. It is true that the M7 skips out the DX8 tests in 3DMark benchmarks, but since most upcoming games are DX8 based, it seems only natural. I had an M9, and on my 1.7GHz P4 i scored 7305 3DMarks. I've compared it to a similar notebook with a M7 (a 2GHz P4), and it got 5549.

    On the otherhand, the Single Texturing fillrate of the M7 is 20% higher than the M9, but the Multi Texturing fillrate is 40% less.

    In Q3 at 1600x1200x32, Demo001:
    M9: 69.5 fps
    M7: 58.9 fps

    In Tom's Benchmarks, it seems that the M7 performs on par with the M9 in current games at low resolutions, but as you increase the resolution, so does the M9's lead increase.

    i.e. Jedi Knight 2, 1024x768x32: (performed on same system, 2GHz P4)

    M7: 76.2 fps
    M9: 78.1 fps

    but, 1600x1200x32:

    M7: 45.8 fps
    M9: 55.7 fps

    But in power consumption tests, the M9 far outperforms the M7, in that it takes 118min of DVD playback to the M7's 105min, and 72min of gaming to the M7's 67min.

    RaPTuRe

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  7. ok... more questions~!

    i'm looking at two systems at the moment...

    the specs are almost identical... except for a few key things:

    1) p4(m) 2.0ghz - 64mb radeon mobility 7500 (128bit DDR)

    2) p4(m) 1.8 - 32mb radeon mobility 9000 (64bit DDR)

    (they both have 15 inch screens, 256 ddr ram etc)

    generally speaking, how of a difference will there be in graphic performance for general windows apps... (i.e. internet surfing and document editing)

    now in terms of 3D performance (i.e running UT2003, unreal 2 and any other top 3d game) will there be a huge difference with the 32mb 9000? I've also heard that, even though the 9000 may have native dx8 support, the 64bit DDR hinders its performance and is similar to a 64mb 7500....

    quick replies would be appreciated... i'm looking to buy either one of these real soon~!

    thanks guys~!
  8. since both graphics arrays are fairly similar in terms of average frame rates, I would go for the 2GHz notebook as it will give you better performance in general (not 3d) use.


    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  9. what's the general performance difference like between a 1.8 and 2.0ghz?

    also, wouldn't the dx8 native support of the 9000 be an advantage for new and future games in terms of frame rates?

    thanks guys for all your help~
  10. The difference between 1.8GHz and 2GHz is negligable - mabe a few FPS in DivX encoding, not much difference in games, word will open a ms or two quicker, that kinda stuff. Tom has benched 1.8 and 2GHz P4's before, you can check his benchmarks.

    The DX8 support would make a difference, although not a very big one, since games newer than Doom 3 will probably not run on any notebook available at the moment (aside from the Dell Latitude/Inspiron "8"s) so it doesn't really make that much of a difference. I, personally, would not go without an M9, I would find a notebook with a fully fledged 64MB M9 and everything else I wanted.

    RaPTuRe

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  11. What about the geforce fx go5600. This card is available in the Toshiba Satelite 5200-902.(www.toshiba.de).

    Does anybody know other notebooks who have this card inside?

    thanx
  12. Noticed that your notebooks both used mobile processors? Have ou considered buying one with a desktop. I have a Sager 5670 with a 2.8ghz Northwood on the 845E chipset, ATI Radeo 9000 with 128megs, 512 of pc2100...I love mine. Even better is that you can get into them for under $2000 cause your not paying the high premium for the mobile chips. You'll pay in battery life, but I get a good 5 hours out of mine, that's DVD movie/gaming time...so give or take I think it's a good deal since I usually am plugged in anyhow!

    There's all kinds of dealers out there....but check them out before you go with a mainstream like toshiba or Dell or something.

    Note...this is the same model that Alienware sells as the Area51m. And I highly suggest the high contrast/wide angle screen. Also, the OEM is Clevo of Taiwan, if you wanted to look at their site. All around they're amazing deals. I haven't seen anything that compares.
  13. well i'm located in korea at the moment which limits my options.... most notebooks here are still business orientated and feature onboard shared video chipsets.

    also, i have looked at desktop cpu's, but like you said, battery performance and weight is a big issue for me, as i'll be using my notebook a lot for on the spot video editing (and hopefully some gaming).

    i have looked at 64mb 9000 options... but there simply aren't many acceptable models available for me to purchase here in korea... they're either way too expensive or way too expensive... heh...

    so my options are limited to the two (for the moment):

    the 1.8ghz with a 32mb Radeon 9000 (64bit DDR)

    or

    the 2.0ghz with 64mb Radeon 7500 (128bit DDR)

    so from majority of the opinions, people would go for the 2.0ghz? the other specs on the notebooks are virtually identical... also the price difference is quite high (around 300 dollars - the 1.8ghz is more expensive).
  14. I had a Sager for a while, and I was really unimpressed with it - It could've just been mine, but the build quality was terrible and I didn't much like the look of it either. What really threw me though was the performance. With a 2.4GHz P4 and an ATI M9 64MB it could barely get 7000 3DMarks!?

    Agriffin, What does your system get in terms of 3DMarks, and do you have two batteries?

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  15. Which would be preferable...the Dell with the Geforce 4200 at 2.4 Ghz or a Sager with a bigger screen and a 3.06 GHZ HT processor and the M9-P 128MB chipset?
  16. More preferable for what?

    For a heavy, noisy, bulky machine with subpar build quality but a fast processor and a big screen then go for the Sager

    For a quiet, reasonably heavy bulky machine with decent build quality and a fastish processor, but a much higher quality screen, greater battery life and better graphics performance, go for the Dell.

    Have you considered the Dell Latitude D800? It features the Pentium M 1.6GHz (equivalent to P4 2.4 - 2.8GHz depending) and a higher build quality, GF4 Go 4200 etc. A great notebook in my opinion - it can easily break the 10000 3DMark 2001 barrier.

    RaPTuRe

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
  17. What about Dell's "mobile workstation" I think it has the Quadra2 Go? Would the Quadra chipset play games well?
  18. It has a Quadro4 Go that is using the same graphics array as the GF4Go 4200, but is more suited to CAD etc. due to the drivers.

    If you trick the Quadro into thinking it is a GeForce, it will play games quite well, but not as well as the GF4Go 4200.

    Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
Ask a new question

Read More

Mobility Mobile Computing Product