Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

High power GPU's : useless for laptops?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Laptops
  • GPUs
  • High Power
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b D Laptop
February 21, 2002 7:05:32 AM

OK, I'm a Quake III Arena user and am looking into buying a laptop I can use for gaming. Why should I even bother getting anything with a top-of-the-line super high powered GPU when LCD screens are typically limited to only 40 fps anyway? Isn't a 0.13 micron mobility Radeon 8500 or Geforce4 Go just overkill???

- mus

More about : high power gpu useless laptops

February 21, 2002 8:05:45 PM

In case you didn't look at the review on this site for the new ATI Mobility "7500", the benchmarks show that it barely manages to get over 40 fps on Serious Sam: Second Encounter at 1024x768x32. If you want to be able to play anything coming out in the hopefully near future at a decent resolution and speed this is currently the best card, IMO.
February 21, 2002 8:49:13 PM

IMO, If you can run Q3 at 40fps with all detail high and on, and if you can get the min never to drop below 40fps even when there is a big map or lots of stuff going on! I think it is more then fine! afterall those 100fps benchmark is just then, a benchmark test, is not like you will enjoy playing/seeing things bunny hop all over the place at that kind of speed!
Related resources
February 22, 2002 1:37:27 AM

40 fps assuming the response time of the LCD is 25ms. The reason to get a more powerful vid card is when games get harder to run (I have a Quadro DCC and 17" LCD). That is the main reason to get better vid card, and also w/ a newer laptop comes a better LCD:) 

Only if you let me see the Umpa Lumpa- Homer Simpson.
February 22, 2002 3:36:57 AM

I may be wrong but cant the human eye only really see 40fps? and anything more then that is just there? I say 40fps is smooth already with all the high detail on and so forth..well i might be wrong, my friend told me this cause i was telling him i wanted the geforce4..but who knows..

didnt have one of em electronic pens so ill just type my name,<i>CoOoLMaNX</i>
February 22, 2002 11:01:47 AM

Your probably right about that the human eye cannot tell the difference between 40fps and higher...However in Q3 your framrate will affect gamephysics , the ideal framerate is no less than 125FPS if you can achieve this then you'll be able to jump just a little bit further than those who have lower fps.

If you ask me that's a bit twisted but thats the way it works..
February 22, 2002 11:23:05 AM

Quote:

Your probably right about that the human eye cannot tell the difference between 40fps and higher...However in Q3 your framrate will affect gamephysics , the ideal framerate is no less than 125FPS if you can achieve this then you'll be able to jump just a little bit further than those who have lower fps.

That's the first I've heard of it. Carmack has always said that he designs games have equally complex physics no matter what the system specs are. Carmack swears that he will never compromise physics on lower-end systems. I doubt your statement is true.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b D Laptop
February 23, 2002 11:42:44 PM

fps ABSOLUTELY matters in Q3A. It is well known that 125 fps is a "magic number" that vastly increases your strafe jump distance. I've experienced it first hand and there are several good posts on other forums discussing this. Here is the best I found where a guy actually wrote a mod, changed the fps settings and _quantitated_ the differences in jump velocity and height:

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Archives/Archive-000001/..." target="_new">http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Archives/Archive-000001/...;/A>

mus
February 24, 2002 1:26:31 AM

U'll still be running at 125fps if u want, but the lcd won't be displaying it at that.

Sig of the week.
!