E6400 graphics question

I know what you mean but that comparison does feel a bit off track when discussing these laptops, in my opinion. We are not talking about any gaming monsters here, but in this priceclass i would expect as good performance as possible, even in pretty demanding applications.

Well ok, if you wanted just "a websurfing and typing machine" (for lighter work) with high battery capacity then some would choose the intel graphics... but I would rather use my notebook then. But thats me, luckily is the need and wants different between us and it is good that we can share our experiences.

 

I use my intel graphics equipped E6400 for the basic stuff plus HD video viewing, photo editing, and some video editing. Works great. The Intel 4500MHD handles HD videos very well. Much better than netbooks with the GM950 graphics processor.

So, other than gaming, is there anything that you would need the Nvidia graphics for?

 

Im pretty convinced youre not interested in doing your work with the best speed possible for this computer, so you dont want a Nvidia card, I understand that. You have other needs than me, and perhaps you also have problems with power supply (like John). But I use my e6400 for some 3d modeling and spatial information presentations and I hardly ever use it for a long time on battery. I also like to game occationally, so for me its an easy choice. I still dont understand all the badtalk on the 160m card, its a very good alternative if you dont rate batterytime over performance.

 

Well for one your Intel can't use the GPU for programming purposes, so photoediting in PhotoShop CS4 is all rendered on the CPU, which is slower. Moreover, Adobe Premier Pro and After Effects CS4 also take advantage of the GPU to render instead of using the CPU:
More info: http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html
Granted the laptop has a low-end Quadro, but anything that can help, helps.

Also, the Nvidia solution for this laptop, uses dedicated memory, instead of eating your RAM. Not to mention that they are more reliable when it comes to software compatibility, and you know that this GPU will run well on any operating system presuming you have the drivers. Look at the Geforce FX 5900 on good old AGP (I have that one). Now THAT is an old GPU... but Nvidia still makes Windows 7 64-bit drivers for it (not to mention Linux), and it runs Aero just fine. Remember when Vista was released, I remember when no Intel GPU users were able to draw Aero, but an extreamly old Geforce, such as the FX series (even the low-end 5200) can with no problems.

In addition, Windows 7 support Direct Compute, which uses the GPU instead of the CPU to do many thing increasing system performance (this is good for all ATI and Nvidia users, sadly not Intel as their GPU are not programmable in any way):
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/08/25/nvidia-releases-windows-7-direct-compute-dr/1

Also, I am not convinced that Intel 4500HD can play HD 1080p video on a 1900x1080 (or 1900x1200) display perfectly smooth with no sign for stress. Why? Simply because the Geforce 7400M (which is almost identical in performance in all aspects) simply can't perfectly smoothly. Meaning, you block yourself in high screen resolution external display if you come to need it. And we never know what will happen in 3-4 years from now (which is usually the life span of a laptop). Not to mention that the Nvidia solution can play blu-ray movies perfectly without any issues (Blu-ray drive is now an option for this laptop)
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/812/2/

 

It is very illuminating how you made up your mind, and just ignore data. You have been told already about the 4500HD is optimized for HD video, and you kept forgetting it:

http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/chipsets/g45/g45-overview.htm

The Intel® G45 Express Chipset, with the next-generation Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X4500HD (Intel® GMA X4500HD), includes built-in support for full 1080p high-definition video playback, including Blu-ray* disc movies. This powerful video engine provides users with a rich, new media experience to deliver smooth HD playback without the need for add-in video cards or decoders. Intel® GMA X4500HD comes with Intel® Clear Video Technology, a combination of video processing hardware and software technologies designed to enhance the visual experience.

As for the GPU being used for other computations, yes I can see that being a great feature in the higher-end GPU's. The NV160M is a low-end GPU and I would like to see data on how it improves CS4 or how well it can used for other computation tasks.

 

I never said it can't...

 

I'll make a comment to this. As a previous M2400 owner, and current E4300 owner, I DETEST Nvidia's closed source stance on their linux drivers. Every time I installed a new kernel on my laptop, I had to re-install the Nvidia video drivers. What a pain in the rear....just release the drivers as open source for crying out loud. It's been quite nice to not have to do that every time a new kernel is released. Thank you Intel.

 

Im not sure i understand you right, but if you think the intel card is in more powerful than the Nvidia one than you have been mislead. Have you really read that? Happy for you if you are satisfied with your machine but other people may want more performance, and then is the Nvidia card a good (the only ;-) ) alternative.

 

You can avoid the grind by compiling your own kernel, and then choose when to upgrade.

The main thing that concerns me about the Intel drivers is that they perform poorly (e.g. video playback was broken recently?) and lack full functionality in utilising all of the gfx chips features (e.g. multiple displays or HD decoding).

I would prefer open source drivers, and not because they are easier from an installation point of view, but because I'm less at risk of support being dropped. As a laptop user, pragamatically I think you have to accept that certain drivers or their firmware binary blobs are closed source.

 

You did not understand me right. Try reading again.