x-300 vs. radeon 9600 (both 64 mb)

[Lucky]

I recently bought a 15" T42 wtih a radeon 9600 ($1500 Can) during the recent lenovo clearance sale (Canada). I'm mainly using this laptop for school so I really wanted a 14" T42. However, I also still want the ability to play video games: warcraft III and age of empires III in particular. Right now, a 14" T42 with a radeon 9600 is outside my budget but I can get a similiar 14" T43 with a x-300 for $1600. Is this a downgrade? Can I play the above games with a x-300?

[Hanson]

I have an x300 and Warcraft III works. However, I have to lower my display settings to 1024x768 with 16bit color quality for the game to be stable. Otherwise, the game would keep minimizing on me. Oddly, Starcraft - a nearly 8 year old game now, can't run on my laptop even if I lower my settings.

[christopher_wolf]

Not a downgrade as far as I know; Half Life 2 played very smooth on my T43 with the x300.

If HL2 should run smooth, then I think that WarCraft and AoE should be just fine.

[leif]

Not a downgrade as far as I know; Half Life 2 played very smooth on my T43 with the x300.

If HL2 should run smooth, then I think that WarCraft and AoE should be just fine.

Agreed. I just played BF2 with my little brother while I use the moderate quality. The game played well on my T43 too.

[dr_st]

The X300 and 9600 are fairly close to one another. The general consensus is that the 9600 is a bit more powerful, but if so, not by much.

[Hanson]

I have an x300 and Warcraft III works. However, I have to lower my display settings to 1024x768 with 16bit color quality for the game to be stable. Otherwise, the game would keep minimizing on me. Oddly, Starcraft - a nearly 8 year old game now, can't run on my laptop even if I lower my settings.

I hope someone can provide me with a solution on my problem above. I tried playing Pinball on full screen and it always goes back to the default size seconds after; full screen movies did not have this problem. I want to download Half Life and Counter Strike through Steam, but I don't want to waste money and bandwidth if it ends up not working on my laptop. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[xqw-fr]

I have an x300 and Warcraft III works. However, I have to lower my display settings to 1024x768 with 16bit color quality for the game to be stable. Otherwise, the game would keep minimizing on me. Oddly, Starcraft - a nearly 8 year old game now, can't run on my laptop even if I lower my settings.

I hope someone can provide me with a solution on my problem above. I tried playing Pinball on full screen and it always goes back to the default size seconds after; full screen movies did not have this problem. I want to download Half Life and Counter Strike through Steam, but I don't want to waste money and bandwidth if it ends up not working on my laptop. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

entre the bios
find the video setting.
there is one setting extend you screen

[kidofberlin]

....Oddly, Starcraft - a nearly 8 year old game now, can't run on my laptop even if I lower my settings.

Hi, I have an T43-1871 with an integrated Intel Graphics Chipset (GMA900 ?) and I can play StarCraft without any problem. I think that the graphical abilities of your ThinkPad should be better than mine.

Just my 2cents

[Hanson]

I managed to locate the problem. Apparently, the "Active Think" theme is reponsible. I have changed the theme and am now no longer having problems with some full screen applications being forced to be minimized.

[nimativ]

the x300 is slightly better than a 9600 with equal memory.
basically from the benchmarks I've seen:
x300 64mb > 9600 64mb
x200 64mb < 9600 128 mb

and warcraft3 plays absolutley fine with all setting on max even when playing 4 vs 4

ps: and the drivers have yet to squeeze out all the x300 potential....while the 9600 has been squeezed to full stretch.

[kam_]

What about this FireGL V3200?

Can anyone point me to an online benchmark comparing it against some of the better known desktop and laptop graphics cards? I can't seem to find anywhere that has laptop graphics cards benchmarks

[dr_st]

What about this FireGL V3200?

Can anyone point me to an online benchmark comparing it against some of the better known desktop and laptop graphics cards? I can't seem to find anywhere that has laptop graphics cards benchmarks

FireGL V3200 = Radeon X600. Somewhat faster than 9600/X300. And the extra 64MB are a good thing to have as well.

[Esben]

Memory bandwidth of the X300 is limited, compared to the R9600.
It uses a 64-bit interface, instead of the 128-bit interface of the R9600.
V3200 on the other hand, offers twice the memory bandwidth of the R9600.

[dr_st]

Memory bandwidth of the X300 is limited, compared to the R9600. It uses a 64-bit interface, instead of the 128-bit interface of the R9600.

Are you sure about that? I thought it was only on the X300 SEs.

V3200 on the other hand, offers twice the memory bandwidth of the R9600.

Is the memory clock really twice as high as that of the 9600? Because the bus is still 128-bit.

[Esben]

Memory bandwidth of the X300 is limited, compared to the R9600. It uses a 64-bit interface, instead of the 128-bit interface of the R9600.

Are you sure about that? I thought it was only on the X300 SEs.

From what I can see at ATIs site, the memory of the 64 MB models of the X300 are supposed to run 64-bit.
The R9600 on the other hand, is listed 128-bit.

V3200 on the other hand, offers twice the memory bandwidth of the R9600.

Is the memory clock really twice as high as that of the 9600? Because the bus is still 128-bit.

The memory bandwidth of the FireGL V3200 is listed in this document
With a 400 MHz memory clock, DDR , and 128-bit bus, the bandwidth is 12.8 GB/sec, while the R9600 is 210 MHz, DDR, for a memory bandwidth of 6.72 GB/sec.
Maybe someone can chime in, with the memory speed of the X300.