• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Mobility x600 vs Mobility 9700

S

SmithyJones

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 14, 2000
Messages
2,085
Which is the better card? I would like to think that they would be near even with each other, being that they are both based on the same core.
 
if the machine with the x600 will allow it to be replaced in the future, I would go with that...otherwise I recall reading that they performed almost exactly the same
 
Maybe I am reading the article wrong but I see the 9700 and the x600 as being pretty even depending on how the manufacturer clocks them and sets them. x600 has better memory bandwidth but the 9700 has better fill rate. x600 would probably still be my choice if the price was right but the 9700 still holds its own just fine.
 
if youre looking into a new lappy, take a look at the Acer TravelMate 8100 series notebook. it has a 128mb x700 chipset. the x700 has surprisingly more power than the x600.
 
Code: 
                Mobility 9700  Mobility x600  Mobility x700
                =============  =============  =============
Core speed:     450MHz         400MHz         350MHz
Memory speed:   260MHz DDR     250MHz         350MHz DDR*    
Core:           RV360 (M11)    RV380 (M24)    RV410 (M26)
Mem Interface:  128-bit        128-bit        128-bit
Pipelines:      4              4              8
Bus Interface:  AGP            PCI-E          PCI-E
*x700 reference memory speed is 350MHz DDR, TM8100 memory speed is 300MHz DDR

The 9700 is better, but the x600 probably has more headroom for overclocking. :drool: @ Mobility x700.
 
pxc said:
Code: 
                Mobility 9700  Mobility x600  Mobility x700
                =============  =============  =============
Core speed:     450MHz         400MHz         350MHz
Memory speed:   260MHz DDR     250MHz         350MHz DDR*    
Core:           RV360 (M11)    RV380 (M24)    RV410 (M26)
Mem Interface:  128-bit        128-bit        128-bit
Pipelines:      4              4              8
Bus Interface:  AGP            PCI-E          PCI-E
*x700 reference memory speed is 350MHz DDR, TM8100 memory speed is 300MHz DDR

The 9700 is better, but the x600 probably has more headroom for overclocking. :drool: @ Mobility x700.
Click to expand...
just slap on some AS5 and you can OC the x700 a small amount. the x700 has faster memory and twice as many pipelines, along w/ PCI-E, so how is the 9700 necessarily better? the x700 is still probably more powerful.

tomshardware had a comparison of mulitiple GPUs (desktop versions), and they ran 3DMark05. the x700 had about 1500 more Marks than the x600. pretty impressive. http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20050203/index-02.html#3d_mark_2005
 
I think he was indicating that the 9700 is better than the x600. However comparing a notebook MRx600 to a MRx700 like you would do for the desktop versions of those cards probably would not yield accurate results. I do agree that by the numbers that the x700 mobility should be faster by a nice margin. However the mobility radeons are based off of all different desktop GPUs. The MR9700 is actually based off the desktop 9600 chip. The MR9800 is based off the desktop x800 chip. Maybe the x700 is based off the same chip as the x600 but I would not count on it. And in reality video cards do not even take advantage of the bandwidth provided by AGP 8x fully so having PCI-e is not exactly a must have at the moment and does not offer any kind of performance gain on this current generation of video cards. It does offer a lot of room for future video cards however as well as possible upgradeability if the manufacturer should so choose. Should be fun watching the future of video cards unravel.
 
Donk3y said:
I think he was indicating that the 9700 is better than the x600. However comparing a notebook MRx600 to a MRx700 like you would do for the desktop versions of those cards probably would not yield accurate results. I do agree that by the numbers that the x700 mobility should be faster by a nice margin. However the mobility radeons are based off of all different desktop GPUs. The MR9700 is actually based off the desktop 9600 chip. The MR9800 is based off the desktop x800 chip. Maybe the x700 is based off the same chip as the x600 but I would not count on it. And in reality video cards do not even take advantage of the bandwidth provided by AGP 8x fully so having PCI-e is not exactly a must have at the moment and does not offer any kind of performance gain on this current generation of video cards. It does offer a lot of room for future video cards however as well as possible upgradeability if the manufacturer should so choose. Should be fun watching the future of video cards unravel.
Click to expand...

Well, with the lack of actual benchmarks comparing the number of pipes and clock speeds is a very very good estimation of the performance of the cards. Case in point, I was going to buy a D610 with the X300, but ended up getting a pretty hefty 8600 with the M8600 instead. Some people on this forum that the X300 was based upon ATI's 9200 and would probably be slower and so I went with that as a fact. Turns out the X300 and M9600 perform within a few percentage points of each other which is statistically insignificant. I believe the X300 was ahead by a nose probably because of the architectural enhancements in the X300. The number of pipes the mobility part has is what determines which desktop card it is based upon.

So approximate performance wise I get these equivalencies
9600 pro turbo = X300
9700 = X600
9800 (rare) = X700
X800 (rare) = drool ;) (for no portability in mind I guess :D )
 
So approximate performance wise I get these equivalencies
9600 pro turbo = X300
9700 = X600
9800 (rare) = X700
X800 (rare) = drool ;) (for no portability in mind I guess :D )[/QUOTE]


The 9600SE is what the X300 is based off of, not a 9200, but it performs about as well as a regular mobility 9600.
 
Rix2357 said:
Well, with the lack of actual benchmarks comparing the number of pipes and clock speeds is a very very good estimation of the performance of the cards. Case in point, I was going to buy a D610 with the X300, but ended up getting a pretty hefty 8600 with the M8600 instead. Some people on this forum that the X300 was based upon ATI's 9200 and would probably be slower and so I went with that as a fact. Turns out the X300 and M9600 perform within a few percentage points of each other which is statistically insignificant. I believe the X300 was ahead by a nose probably because of the architectural enhancements in the X300. The number of pipes the mobility part has is what determines which desktop card it is based upon.

So approximate performance wise I get these equivalencies
9600 pro turbo = X300
9700 = X600
9800 (rare) = X700
X800 (rare) = drool ;) (for no portability in mind I guess :D )
Click to expand...


It is all pretty much a guess without the numbers. I would agree with what you compared there for the most part. And I did already know about the x300. Even the new intel integrated PCI-E graphics performs on par with a mobility 9200 almost from what I hear. Would make sense for the x300 to be a good distance above integrated. I simply was pointing out that comparing desktop named parts to their notebook named equivalent is not going to show very accurate results.
 
Asian Fury said:
So approximate performance wise I get these equivalencies
9600 pro turbo = X300
...
Click to expand...
The 9600SE is what the X300 is based off of, not a 9200, but it performs about as well as a regular mobility 9600.
Click to expand...
The x300 SE is about equal to a 9600SE, but the regular x300 is like a 9600 non-pro. The x600 and x300 cores are almost the same spec-wise, but are made in different processes (110nm for the x300 and 130nm for the x600). Why? I have no idea.

-----
Rix2357: the Mobility 9600 Pro Turbo (338/486 on mine... the speeds are all over the place depending on the manufacturer) is between a 9600 non-pro/x300 (325/400) and a 9600 Pro (400/600), but definitely faster than a x300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top