mobile video card

[dumpy2]

I was just wondering if anyone could kind of explain to me how mobile video cards work. Can you say add a card to an existing laptop? Replace one in an laptop? Or are you just pretty much stuck with what you got? I am asking because i am looking into buying a new laptop but was wondering if i could save some cash up front and get a card later (or get a low end card then upgrade). I don't care about being able to play the lattest games maxed out, but would like to option to play games if i so desire. Thank you before hand for any info / advice.

 

[dumpy2]

would a 8400 be enough to play most games??? i really like the looks of a dell. also does any one have screen size opinion, i really like the thought of getting a 14.1", but would that be too small? i like the idea of being really compact, easy to take with me when i go places. also the dells have the option for a cd / dvd burner / blu ray player drive for an additional $160 that seams like a really good price, then i could use it as a blu ray player as well. just throwin ideas out there.

 

[dumpy2]

o, also, what about a mac? would a mac book work for gaming as well as a dell with a 8400??

 

[lostandwandering]

Most laptops you are stuck with the card you purchase. You may be able to replace them, but it is a hassle to find cards for laptops (not readily available like desktop cards). You are better off buying the laptop with the best card it comes with. The 8400GS is a little weak in the gaming department. You are probably better off getting an 8600m. the 8400 would play most games, but you won't be able to play at high resolutions or settings. As far as screen size, that's 100% personal. Best suggestion is to go to a local electronics store that sells laptops and look at the screen sizes they have on display. Get a feel for what you like and go from there. And to the Mac, don't know, don't use one.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

I agree with L&W get the best graphics you need for now and then add other easier replaced items later.

There may be more flexability in the future with things like the ASUS XGstation and ATi's Lasso solution, but they are not really very practical right now.

 

[lostandwandering]

I agree with L&W get the best graphics you need for now and then add other easier replaced items later.

There may be more flexability in the future with things like the ASUS XGstation and ATi's Lasso solution, but they are not really very practical right now.

That's the first time I've heard of Lasso. Could be good, but ATI is developing a reputation for being late to the game. Have you heard any more about the XG Station? It's been a while since Asus has said anything.

 

[dmacfour]

A Dell 1520 is the best deal I've seen so far. you can configure one with 8600m gt and a few other nice features for around 1K after coupons (dell has coupons for $200-$300 sometimes).

 

[dumpy2]

yeah i think i am gonna go with the dell. what really is sellin me is gettin the blue ray drive for 150 bucks. i think i am gonna get it with just 1 gig or ram and buy a seperate 2 gig stick to put in. should i get the glossy, or the antiglare screen??? i like the look of the glossy, but ive heard that they glare really bad, true??

 

[dumpy2]

o another question, this one is kind of a biggy i guess. xp or vista, i know its personal preference, but i haven't had that much time to play around with vista. is it true that vista makes games run slower? i guess my thoughts are i might as well get vista cuz its gonna come down to that eventually anyway, right?

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

I'm not sure if they'll let you configure it XP with BluRay, but if you have the option XP all the way.

Vista is for Summer of 2008 IMO, unless you have no legacy software or hardware you enjoy using. If it's a fresh start then it won't make much difference, even the performance differences are still small, but the hassle and legacy support issues are huge IMO.

As for the screen, I prefer the anti-glare, but the glossy gives you better staturation. I have both and I find it depends on what I'm doing. Editing and gaming I like the Glossy, but for text / surfing I much prefer the anti-glare. You don't notice the difference of the anti-glare unless they're side by side, but the reflections and overbrightness of the glossy is really noticeable to me. But it's really about preferences.
I'd prefer an anti-glare LED lit screen for the best of both worlds.

 

[ibleet]

I have both, I highly prefer the glossy...its sharper and more vivid...never really notice any glare.

I prefer XP over Vista anyday.

 

[dmacfour]

XP overall runs faster and uses much less memory. I bought my laptop with vista and downgraded to XP (it's good to know that I can upgrade again later).

 

[dumpy2]

so if i get the laptop with vista, i can downgrade it when i get it to xp and be able to upgrade again to vista later for free?

 

[Cyberat]

No Vista for laptops !!!

VISTA is another bog down your PC "upgrade" that delivers absolutely no usable features over XP,
or not enough to warrant the wasted hardware. Unless you're in the business of ripping off Mac OS
Looks & Miss-functionality. Hardware & Software compatibility will give you a real wake up call.
Some Games will not run on Vista at all. XP is fast on just 1gb ram & service pack 3 is out there to
patch some errors & add some features, get SATA/3GB drives and see your apps. open in an instant.
The only speed claims made by Engineers to topple XP is for x64 processors, 64bit hardware & 64bit Vista.
This is not your standard consumer item & definitely highly customized lots of Ks for such laptop.

Wake up and smell what Longhorn is cooking !
Squeal !

 

[cjl]

1) I run Vista on my laptop, and it most certainly does have a lot of additional useful functionality. Also, every game I've tried on it runs just fine, including some that go back to Windows 95.

2) Thread necromancy alert.

 

[piratepast40]

[2) Thread necromancy alert./quote]

Yes - LOL but perhaps timely. Lasso has matured and will be available in a Fujitsu production machine. Although the XGstation died because it was only single lane, the connection came back alive as the XGP PCIe 2.0 interface (although only available in the 8 lane version for now).

Cyberat, I'm afraid you're off base on this one. You can only use hybrid crossfire or use an XGP connection for an external graphics card with Vista as your OS.

 

[Cyberat]

Hi

To CJL this comment is objective nothing personal but - Vista is for the mentally retarded who have to have everything on a screen wide button, flashing, fading and must have all the fashionable stuff as change for the sake of change, I truly hate that. I am a firm believer in the K.I.S.S. & if it's not broken don't fix it.
Name one feature XP cannot do for you, name one hardware XP cannot handle.
As to incompatibilites here's just one example which is a simple game not too old not too new - Delta Force JOTR & I believe all the Novalogic line will not run, although I did not test them all.
(yes, my xp desktop resembles Win98 closely).

piratepast40 - external graphics card ? are you saying SLI does not work with vista ? anycase I am done with
Microsoft, I will keep and XP gamer box, the laptop/work side I will switch to linux.

 

[cjl]

Well, for starters:

1) XP does not have as easy to use or as powerful of mobility controls and power modes
2) The new search in Vista is awesome - much faster and more powerful than the one in XP
3) Any and all DX10 stuff will not have its full potential without Vista
4) Vista Ultimate does full image backups of your hard drive (XP cannot do this without an external utility)
5) Vista is far more secure - the integrated firewall is much better than XPs, and Windows Defender is pretty good too

Oh, and of course SLI works with Vista.

 

[Cyberat]

Meh, all those are software utilities or in the case of firewall hardware utilities that I can get better versions of it and rather pay, then have it all system integrated & not be able to rely on it due to being made by Microsoft.
I have DX10 never a problem, next, most backup software including Nero can do image backups of my drive, don't need vista for that.
Want mobility get Norton Ghost software, much cheaper.
Being locked into buying top dollar from Microsoft is what I DON'T need,
slowing down my hardware is what I don't WANT.
It's a shiny out of the box do a lot for you, inefficient expensive crap, that does nothing perfectly. You and Bill Gates have a nice relationship. LOL

SLI & Vista 64bit vs. 32bit systems ?

 

[cjl]

Yes, backup software can do images of your drive. It also costs money. I didn't have to pay extra to get image capability in Vista.

As for Ghost for mobility? Not quite sure what you mean, as I have a copy of Ghost for an older computer, and I fail to see how it adds mobility in any way.

By the way, I would never recommend an upgrade to Vista for anyone on their current computer. It's an improvement from XP, but an incremental enough one that I don't think it's worth the money if you're already running XP. However, for a new system, it is worth getting Vista, as you need an operating system, and the price difference between Vista and XP is minor.

(BTW, as far as inefficient goes, I actually dual booted XP for a while when I first got the computer because of initial compatibility problems, and Vista actually ran faster than XP did on the same system. Note that I have most of the really slow stuff such as the Sidebar turned off - I prefer efficiency to gadgets and eye candy)