Mobility 9700... dissappointed?

[RagingSamster]

After reading the review of the Mobility 9700 at beyond 3D, i was left crestfallen. Not that it's a bad GPU, but I was expecting more from arguably the leader in graphics performance. I love my AIW9700Pro, I find it equal to all the tasks that I can throw at it. But one item which hampers the GPUs performance was something I was so looking forward to: Laptop Pipelines!

Why did they have to emasculate the 9700 to 4 pipes? or better yet, why did they refer to it as a "9700" when it's performance, while respectable in the environment it serves, so undershoots the performance of it's namesake.

If I am missing something here? please feel free to slap me upside the head, but I for one am underwhelmed.

 

[pxc]

Simple: what's a faster graphics chip in laptops? Nothing. The B3D review did a huge disservice to this mobile chip by exclusively comparing it to desktop chips. While a desktop card can get around AGP power limitations (~30W) by simply adding an external power connector, a laptop chip does have to limit power consumption not just for the sake of battery life, but also to prevent the chip itself from overheating.

The name is a little disappointing considering it's missing what make a 9700 on the desktop different from the 9500/9600. But I think we're all tired of suffixes. What did you expect ATI to call it? The Mobility Radeon 9600XT or something like that?

 

[RAutrey]

Originally posted by RagingSamster
Why did they have to emasculate the 9700 to 4 pipes? or better yet, why did they refer to it as a "9700" when it's performance, while respectable in the environment it serves, so undershoots the performance of it's namesake.

Gotta say I agree. Last time I checked, 4 pipes were associated with a 9500(less the pro)/9600. Plus, laptop performance is still not to desktop replacement levels for the gamer/enthusiast.

 

[TimothyB]

Isn't a 9700 non pro desktop card 256bit, like a pro? This mobile 9700 is 128bit, that of a 9600 models, so that's why it doesn't compare to dekstop model numbers.

I think I recently notice when checking reviews on the mobile 9600 that the first one was 64bit, and the benches looked horrible, like 1152 in 3Dmark03. But the 9600 I have in my laptop is 128bit, and it gets 2400pts in 3Dmark03.

So maybe down the line there will be a 256bit faster version of the mobile 9700.

Why doesn't that dang reviewer give the overall score to 3Dmark01 and 03 before of the individual stuff. I would have like to have known what the m9700 got compared to the m9600 in my machine, I bet it's not much.

 

[obs]

Normally, when cards are labeled the same as a desktop counterpart, you are expecting slightly less performance because of lower voltages and clock speeds. Not half the pipelines. However, it's still the best mobile chip out there. It just should have been called a 9500.

 

[Ponder]

I do agree ATi made an error with naming the new part...The theory was since they had 9600/9600 pro a new higher clocked part should be called the 9600xt...The problem XT refers to overclockable as well. So they went with 9700 to suggest it is better then the older parts.

Anyways 9650 pro was what they should of gone with...

 

[0ldman]

I agree. 9650 would have been a better name.

There has got to be at least a few people out there that bought the system expecting the true 9700, 8 pipes and all.

Baddest mobile vid card to date, but it isn't an 8 pipe part, nor does it have the clock speed to offset that.

Excellent chip, I have no doubt, but the name is misleading.

 

[digiram]

9650, lol