X1600 vs. 320M

aiolosaiolos
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
Hey all,



I was wondering how the Ati X1600 compares to the Nvidia 320M in the new MBA's.



After I looked at notebookcheck.net, it seems as though the Nvidia outperforms the X1600 on every test except for Doom 3 Ultra. Any reason for that?



ATI: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...ist.844.0.html



Nvidia: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...tage3dmarkgpu=



How do you guys think they compare since the 320M is integrated and the X1600 is dedicated?



Thanks.



Edit: Can't get the link to work for the X1600. Just type it in the search box to see the results displayed the same way as the 320M

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    After I looked at notebookcheck.net, it seems as though the Nvidia outperforms the X1600 on every test except for Doom 3 Ultra. Any reason for that?



    Because the 320M came out in April 2010 and the X1600 came out in 2005?!



    How is this even a question?
  • Reply 2 of 4
    aiolosaiolos Posts: 228member
    I was mostly asking about the discrepancy in the scores for that one game. Is that just random? Or does the old dedicated card have something that gives it an advantage for that game?



    As for the question of their comparison, I guess it really isn't a question on performance. Nvidia's integrated GPU's of today have definitely passed the old mid level dedicated card in the 2006 MBP's.
  • Reply 3 of 4
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,326moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    I was mostly asking about the discrepancy in the scores for that one game. Is that just random? Or does the old dedicated card have something that gives it an advantage for that game?



    They had the same amount of video memory so the Ultra mode with high resolution textures shouldn't really have made a significant difference. I wouldn't take the numbers on that site as accurate. They are saying that Crysis gets 16fps on medium quality on the 320M. This is not the case as I played it right through and it was easily 25-30fps. You'll notice the Quake 4 Ultra mode is higher for the 320M but they use the same engine as Doom 3.



    The Ultra mode actually requires 512MB of VRAM so both GPUs wouldn't be adequate for that test but the dedicated VRAM might have a slight edge when it comes to handling games that exceed the available VRAM.



    Suffice to say, the 320M is almost as fast as the 9600M GT in the previous generation Macbook Pro.
  • Reply 4 of 4
    aiolosaiolos Posts: 228member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    They had the same amount of video memory so the Ultra mode with high resolution textures shouldn't really have made a significant difference. I wouldn't take the numbers on that site as accurate. They are saying that Crysis gets 16fps on medium quality on the 320M. This is not the case as I played it right through and it was easily 25-30fps. You'll notice the Quake 4 Ultra mode is higher for the 320M but they use the same engine as Doom 3.



    The Ultra mode actually requires 512MB of VRAM so both GPUs wouldn't be adequate for that test but the dedicated VRAM might have a slight edge when it comes to handling games that exceed the available VRAM.



    Suffice to say, the 320M is almost as fast as the 9600M GT in the previous generation Macbook Pro.



    Cool, thanks for your input.
Sign In or Register to comment.