Mobility Radeon 9800 @ HardOCP.com

Nice review, but i wished you would have compared performance from the 9700 vs 9800. I'm in the midst of choosing a notebook atm, either the Acer Ferrari with the 9700, or XPS with the 9800... and am conflicted whether the increased in performance of the XPS is worth the extra weight.
 
I would also have liked to see performance comparisons. Not only to the 9700 but also to nvidias current ones. Flipping back and forth to the old review was too much of a hassle to compare the few benchmarks that were included in both. Would be easy enough to include the old numbers in the new graph, don't you think?

Maybe even include a "reference system" which you compare to. Of course the "reference system" could be a standard setup and used in many reviews.

As a whole though it was quite informative.
 
The 9800 mobility is just screaming to be bundled with a Pentium M Dothan. What intel really needs IMO is a dual channel successor to the 855 chipset. The videochip & videomemory are not taking that much power, its the 80+ watt P4's in these monster notebooks that are gobbling up the juice.

I can totally understand the weight "issues" with luggables, how can anyone practially lug around something heavier than 12 pounds that may have 1 hour of battery life? Recommendations from me usually sway toward 6-7 pound Pentium M with ~3 hours battery life for the vast majority of users. Anything below about 5 pounds, and higher-end handhelds are sometimes preferred.

There is no doubt though that the Dell is the ultimate gaming notebook, all other things taken into consideration.
 
I am a personal owner of the 9100 (which is basically same thing as the xps), and have been considering buying the mobility radeon 9800 from dell and swapping video cards. I would too much appreciate a comparison between the two video cards. Speed and if theres anything more that just the extra pipelines. ;)
 
IIRC the m9800 uses more juice then the 2.0 dothan...

Im waiting for a Alviso/m x600, which should perform at least as well as the m9800 but w/o the power drain...
 
I'm not so sure the Radeon 9800 mobility would use more than a Dothan. But noone knows for sure because vidcard makers refuse to quote power consumption specs.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/ati-vs-nv-power_10.html are the measured power consumption levels of desktop videocards.

A good percentage of that power is going to the video memory (Dothan's 21 watts do not include the power consumption of the DDR memory) Also, the laptop part probably uses much higher quality caps/resistors for greater energy efficiency over a typical desktop part. Assuming the 8-pipe Radeon 9800 mobility is somewhere around the speed of a X800pro with 8 pipes instead of 12 and with slight power tweaks/better components it could easily be at Dothan power levels. Its nowhere near the ~80 watts a P4 is at.
 
Woot I have a Dell 9100 ith a 9800, p4 2.8ghz,640mb ram(gonna add another 512 stick later) I get around 6500 on 3dmark03 and i have seen people get upto 7500 after alittle overclocking. The size isnt really that bad imo. I can personally tell you the 9800 is almost double the speed of the 9700.
 
takuma said:
Woot I have a Dell 9100 ith a 9800, p4 2.8ghz,640mb ram(gonna add another 512 stick later) I get around 6500 on 3dmark03 and i have seen people get upto 7500 after alittle overclocking. The size isnt really that bad imo. I can personally tell you the 9800 is almost double the speed of the 9700.
Click to expand...

Exactly correct, the 9800 is almost double the speed of the 9700 and definately worth buying. But Sager is coming out with something even faster in a few months. They're skipping the 9800 since Dell has the 30 day exclusive, and it won't be the x600 either. This has been confirmed on the sager forums. So I'm waiting to see what they come out with, even if it means not buying until Christmas.

Great review, thanks for posting it.
 
Am I the only geek out here who wanted to see it taken apart?

At least for pictures of the video card to see how easy it would be to upgrade. Memory and HD too while we are at it.
 
I would like to point out that while working with four different laptops from three different manufacturers (HP, Compaq, and 2x Dell), I have never seen any incompatiblilty or lack of functionality related to either the official Catalysts that have been modified with the Driverheaven tool, or the Omega drivers. The HP had a Radeon IGP, the Compaq (which I'm using now) has a 9600 Mobility, and the Dells are both 9700 Mobiles.

Obviously this is just anecdotal evidence, but both the laptop OEMs and ATI seem to be trying to make it seem like mobile drivers are vastly different from desktop drivers, when in fact they are 99% identical in most cases (with a modern GPU of course).
 
Calavaro said:
I would also have liked to see performance comparisons. Not only to the 9700 but also to nvidias current ones. Flipping back and forth to the old review was too much of a hassle to compare the few benchmarks that were included in both. Would be easy enough to include the old numbers in the new graph, don't you think?
Click to expand...

But you can't even really do that, because the resolutions that each were tested at were different (take Farcry for example).

THG took a look at the 9800 a little while back, and they did compare it to the RM 9700 as well as desktop setups... but i just wanted some confirmation on the results.
 
The name 9700 on the 9700m is misleading I believe if im not mistaken it is only a 4pixil pipe card so its more of a 9600pro/xt if you compare it to a desktop card the 9800 is actually an x800 core with 8 pipelines so it performs on par with an actual desktop 9800 pro
 
Quite correct the 9700m with 4 ppls was a dissapointment. However I do recommend Dell to my customers as their support infrastructure is above average. In fact I recommended one of my customers to buy the XPS system last week. (Should be in her hands by next week) What Kyle says about the screen is true you have to see it to believe it - clearer than any other LCDs AND CRTs ive seen - it's liquid smooth, and here I sit with my old C600 :p oh well we are supposed to refresh harware next year. I seriously doubt my company would go with the XPS, but I can dream!

So far I've recommended about 10K worth of Dell purchases... wish I got commision :(
 
Firingsquad did a review yesterday on the MR 9800 as well... but according to them, they got a Prescott... and as far as i know, Dell is only offering Northwood (aside from the EE).
 
to note:
the x600 is just a 9600/9700 mobility with a pci-e interface
4 pipes, 300-400mhz core, 200mhz(400ddr)mem

as for power drain on the 9800 mobility
it is segnificant at full speed
something about 25-35watts
the p-m(2mb) is rated for a max of 35

what needs to be done to really see performance in the mobile segment
is a 16pipe card with a slower core speed
on a .90micron fab using SOI
the cost of doing so is probobly very prohibitive right now though

i really really want to see a mobile version of the Nvid 6600 with the 8 pipes
the core is very power friendly
and much much faster than the ati 9600/9700

Ati has firmly raised the bar in the DTR segment with the 9800
but has left those of us who want a truely mobile high performance platform stranded with the now outdated r360(9600) core
 
The 9700 mobility was very badly named. Its not anywhere near equivalent to a desktop 9700.

4 pipes and a 128bit (sometimes even 64 bit) memory interface. I don't think the 4-pipe configuration hurt it so much as the 128-bit memory interface does. After all, a lot of 9700 mobilities overclock to 500+mhz, so there is plenty of GPU horsepower. Its bottlenecked massively by the ~200mhz 128-bit memory that its usually bundled with.

Then again, ATi probably left it at 128-bit because there was no competition from Nvidia at the time (5200 go /5700 go) to make the suggestion to laptop makers to complicate thier PCB's with a 256-bit design. There would be a lot more rejects with a 256-bit design (at least a couple years ago)
 
wolrahnaes said:
I have never seen any incompatiblilty or lack of functionality related to either the official Catalysts that have been modified with the Driverheaven tool, or the Omega drivers.
Click to expand...
I also installed the Omega driver on a Fujitsu-Siemens laptop with P4 3.06 HT 533, Mobility Radeon 9000 (Feb 2004), which immediately and totally fixed the problem I had with the original Catalyst. The main of those fixed problems was lack of some frequencies in dual screen.

I recall that the Omega's are the earliest alternative ATI drivers, and the only ones that are fully recommended by ATI.

Paris, Wed 15 Sep 2004 14:36:25 +0200
 
Even though it has to be astonishingly low, I would have liked to know how long the battery lasted. :(
 
According to Tommy:

52 minutes for the Inspiron 9100, 62 minutes for the XPS when playing games.
 
tiebird321 said:
to note:
the x600 is just a 9600/9700 mobility with a pci-e interface
4 pipes, 300-400mhz core, 200mhz(400ddr)mem
Click to expand...
Source?
I didn't think ATI had released details on the m x600 yet
 
RagingSamster said:
Quite correct the 9700m with 4 ppls was a dissapointment.
Click to expand...

A dissapointment? What exactly have you been smoking? Sure the naming scheme was incorrect and misleading, and if you expected it to perform on par with a 9700 desktop part then maybe it was dissapointing but you need to say that then.

Having said that the 9700M was not a dissapointment, it was the fastest mobile graphics solution on the market and was only trounced by it's big brother the 9800M.

The 9700M is capable of playing Far Cry @ 1024X768 with medium detail settings, which to me is pretty impressive.
 
Yeah, in no way can you call the 9700 mobility a disappointment. It still trounces a GF5700go pretty easily, and until the 6600 mobile shows up, the Radeon 9700 and 9800 mobility rule the roost. Even the 9600 mobility is more than a match for NVidias current mobile offerings.

It could have been so much more though, if it had more in common with the desktop part.
 
Sorry, I was going to say "somewhat of a dissapointment" but I decided not to mince words. When they said 9700 I assumed an equivalence to the desktop version (which is still a very capable card)

The laptop has forever lagged behind the desktop in graphics horsepower. Now though, it would seem ATI is decreasing the performance difference between the two which is a good thing. I by no means would kick a 9700M out of bed for eating crackers! The 9800 seems to be a quantum leap towards decreasing the performance gap, and from the review the GPU lives up to the reputation of it's desktop brother.
 
In my opinion that's exactly what the XPS system is. I just received mine about 4 days ago, and I have to say, this lappy is amazing in every aspect. Granted it's not the lightest nor does it last long on batteries, but I bought it for a portable replacement for my desktop to take to lans and it does exactly that. I love this box.

Also, has anyone tried that utility that Kyle mentioned in the review? The one that replaces the laptop drivers with the current destkop drivers? I want to try it, but I'm leary about the effects it may have since it doesn't specifically say that it supports the 9800M. Anyone tried this yet that has this particular graphics chipset?
 
RagingSamster said:
Sorry, I was going to say "somewhat of a dissapointment" but I decided not to mince words. When they said 9700 I assumed an equivalence to the desktop version (which is still a very capable card)

The laptop has forever lagged behind the desktop in graphics horsepower. Now though, it would seem ATI is decreasing the performance difference between the two which is a good thing. I by no means would kick a 9700M out of bed for eating crackers! The 9800 seems to be a quantum leap towards decreasing the performance gap, and from the review the GPU lives up to the reputation of it's desktop brother.
Click to expand...

Well you must not have been around when the RM 9700 first debuted several months back, because the speed increased from the RM9700 128mb and the RM9600 64MB was just as large as the current RM9800 vs RM9700. I read about a dozen different reviews back when the RM9700 first came out, and i don't remember a single review that was negative towards it or unimpressed with the results.

True, the RM9700 was in no way anywhere near the performance of a 9800XT at the tim, but neither is the RM9800 anywhere near an X800PE or 6800 Ultra.
 
moralpanic said:
Well you must not have been around when the RM 9700 first debuted several months back, because the speed increased from the RM9700 128mb and the RM9600 64MB was just as large as the current RM9800 vs RM9700.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I have followed the release of the the MR9600, MR9700 and MR9800 closely (continuing through to the latest models today) and have never seen any such numbers. In some cases, I have seen benchmarks where a Dell 8600 with the MR9600 outpaced a similarly speced machine from another brand with a MR9700. At best, there is a slight increase in performance (5-10%), which is maybe a handful of frames when there is any difference at all.

On the other hand, all numbers I've seen for the MR9800 have shown a leap of 30-40%+ performance over the MR9700 across a wide range of games and benchmarks.
 
Sorry, but that review entirely misses the point which IMHO is this:

The XPS is not a notebook, it's a very expensive and very protable desktop with poor video performance (for the money compared with other desktops). If you have not seen one of these things in the flesh prepare to be shocked at how big and heavy it is, and that's just the main unit. The power supply is also huge and unbelievably heavy. Of course, its much much more portable than even a shuttle PC plus compact flat panel monitor can ever be, and likewise performance is much better than any other notebook for gaming (I agree with those who said the Radeon 9700M is krap, it is krap, ATI's last truly good mobile chip was the mobility 7500, that sucker was surprisingly close to good desktop card when it first appeared. And that's not something you can say of even the 9800 mobility, its nowhere near a 6800 or x800 desktop card).

And then there's the fact that the XPS is made out of pretty cheap and nasty plastic. I also happen to think that its laughably ugly, but that's just an opinion. One thing that is a fact, however, is that the screen quality is nowhere near that of Sony's Xbrite notebook displays.

Overall, the XPS is seriously flawed as both a notebook and a desktop and the review really doesnt get that fact across.
 
I really like the naming scheme for the 9800 mobility. Its a X800 that only has 8 pipes, which is roughly equivalent to a desktop 9800 with 8 pipes (and nowhere near a X800pro with 12 or XT with 16) It also has the full 256-bit memory interface, which can be tricky to fit in a notebook.

There are probably quite a few PCB rejects just because of the 256-bit memory interface. Its a good thing that modular upgradeable videocards for laptops have finally surfaced, since a bad trace on a videocard PCB means you only have to rework the videocard and not the whole laptop motherboard if something goes wrong.
 
berzerker said:
Hmm, I have followed the release of the the MR9600, MR9700 and MR9800 closely (continuing through to the latest models today) and have never seen any such numbers. In some cases, I have seen benchmarks where a Dell 8600 with the MR9600 outpaced a similarly speced machine from another brand with a MR9700. At best, there is a slight increase in performance (5-10%), which is maybe a handful of frames when there is any difference at all.

On the other hand, all numbers I've seen for the MR9800 have shown a leap of 30-40%+ performance over the MR9700 across a wide range of games and benchmarks.
Click to expand...

5-10%?! I wonder what reviews you were reading.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20040203/
 
moralpanic said:
5-10%?! I wonder what reviews you were reading.
http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20040203/
Click to expand...

Ok, I think I was mistakenly recalling the numbers for 64MB vs. 128MB peformance. It looks like the real figures are 7-25% depending on the game.

Anyway, the average performance jump from the MR9700 to MR9800 still beats the previous generations improvement by a good margin, not to mention the significant improvements moving from the R360 architecture and 4 pipelines to an 8 pipeline R420 based core (as opposed to the move from RV350 to RV360).

From your link:

Compared to the previous top-of-the-line model, the Mobility Radeon 9600 PRO, the new chip offers nothing new aside from higher maximum clockspeed of 450MHz.

Consequently, if you've only just purchased a notebook using the MR9600Pro or MR9600, there's no need to feel twitchy about upgrading just yet.
Click to expand...

ATI's Mobility Radeon 9700 - What's in a name?

...the Mobility Radeon 9700 doesn't outright provide large benefits over the Mobility Radeon 9600...
Click to expand...

The point is not that the MR9800 and newer mobile GPUs are matching high-end desktop performance, I think he was pointing out that the gap between mobile and desktop GPU performance is narrowing, which is true.

RagingSamster said:
The laptop has forever lagged behind the desktop in graphics horsepower. Now though, it would seem ATI is decreasing the performance difference between the two which is a good thing.
Click to expand...
 
The 9600 mobility to 9700 mobility was a "minor" upgrade, especially compared to the 9700 mobility to 9800 mobility.

The only thing the 9700 brought was slightly higher core speeds, and I think slightly improved idle power consumption. Still easily beats out the Nvidia lines though, I'm almost hoping NVidia gets around to a 6600 mobility by next year, if just to get ATi kickstarted again.
 
ZenOps said:
Still easily beats out the Nvidia lines though, I'm almost hoping NVidia gets around to a 6600 mobility by next year, if just to get ATi kickstarted again.
Click to expand...

Well, if you look at the upcoming Sager model in the other thread, I'm guessing it will have MXM and the 256MB Mobile 6800go. They're keeping a lid on the exact name and specs of the card until Nvidia decides to give the official announcement.

Nvidia NV41M to target notebooks: 6800 derivative for mobiles

The Mobile 6600go should be out early next year and be aimed at more mainstream and power-conscious Pentium-M machines.

Bench mark of the GeForce 6600 GT Go

GeForce 6600 Go Benchmarks

They got 33.7fps in the time demo in Doom 3 on High Quality at 1024x768 on a 1.87GHz Dothan on an Alviso board. That's compared with a MR9700/1.7Ghz Dothan scoring 17.1fps with the same settings.

The 6800 Go should perform at a good notch above that, hopefully on par or better than the MR9800.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top