128MB NVS140M vs. 128MB FX570M

I'm getting ready to buy a 14.1" T61 or T61p. No widescreens, and I've found both T61s and T61ps available with similar specs. Given that the FX570 card is crippled in the T61p, is it really any better than the NVS140 in the T61? Also, is the NVS140 DX10 capable? I know the FX570 is, but can't seem to get a reliable answer about the NVS140 (Lenovo's salespeople don't know and don't seem interested in finding out for me. HP's sales people weht to the effort of contacting their product engineers to find out wether the 6910p's Radeon X2300 card is DX10 capable, which it isn't).

 

The NVS 140M is based on the 8400M GS/GT, so it shouldn't have a problem running DX10.

 

The FX570M is based off an 8600M GT core, so it should be more powerful than the NVS140M, which as mentioned is pretty much an 8400M GS with GDDR3 memory. Although the crippled bus may have a more detrimental effect on its performance, I'd still gander it to be more powerful than the NVS140M. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The NVS140M supports DX10.

 

The 8600M GT is not a 8400M GS with GDDR3 memory. There are plenty of machines out there with a 8600M GT with DDR2 memory.

 

QFT. FWIW, I can run Team Fortress 2 @ reduced resolutions (details @ low) easily with my NVS 140M based R61 (2.0 Ghz T7300).

 

GeForce 8400 (and hence NVS140M) is good enough to run Vista's 3d interface and other minor 3d applications as well as old games, but it is by no means a gaming card.

There's a world of difference between GF 8400 and GF 8600 (and hence FX570M) and it is mainly the graphics processor, which is much more powerful in GF 8600 (and especially GT version). The memory specifications only follow up to the processor's power: GF 8600GT typically has either 512MB DDR2 or 256MB DDR3.

[For FX570M a smaller but faster 256MB DDR3 is more sensible because it's a professional card and in AutoCAD or 3ds max or other serious applications speed and responsiveness is more important than the amount of data you need to mill - as opposed to games where in the newer titles you'd have huge textures and polygon numbers.]

GF 8600GT should be considered a mid-range gaming card for notebooks, but in desktops it's already old stuff, as the GF 9x00 cards are a standard now and GF 9600GT is the current mid-range option.
Some manufacturers (e.g. Asus) already offer a GeForce 9500 in laptops but if you look at its tech specs it's just a renamed GF 8600 GT... (read: marketing stunt.) So we're still waiting for the GF 9x00 range to truly find its way into mobile computers.

 

Here are some specs I pulled off of a review site. Power consumption and bus width is a big difference on these two. Such a shame for Lenovo to not use any of the HD supported connectors. Hope this helps with you quest. Asus likes the pack some pretty powerful video cards in their small notebooks. Most have the MXM upgradeable format also, so upgrades may someday be mainstream. The 9650M looks pretty nice, but for now mostly in the huge laptops.

Quadro NVS 140
Codename G84M
Pipelines 16 - unified
Memory Speed 700 MHz
Memory Bus Width 64 Bit
Memory Type GDDR3, GDDR2
Max. Amount of Memory 256 MB
Shared Memory yes
DirectX DirectX 10, Shader 4.0
Current Consumption 10 Watt
Transistors 210 Million
Features VGA, DVI-D, LVDS, HDTV, HDMI screen connections, max 2 per card, nView, PCI-e 16x
Date of Announcement 09.05.2007

Quadro FX 570M
Codename G64GLM
Pipelines 32 - unified
Core Speed 475 MHz
Memory Speed 700 MHz
Memory Bus Width 128 Bit
Memory Type GDDR3
Max. Memory 256 MB
Shared Memory no
DirectX DirectX 10, Shader 4.0
Current Consumption 35 Watt
Transistors 289 Million
Date of Announcement 01.06.2007

 

Thanks to everyone who responded. Looks like I should be looking for a T61p based on the information I've recieved. I'm not a hardcore gamer but I would like to be able to play Call of Duty 4, S.T.A.L.K.E.R, Quake 4, and a few other relatively recent games on my machine.

 

I did not say that the 8600M GT was an 8400M GS with GDDR3, I said that the NVS140M was.

 

Unfortunately in the 14.1" screen T61ps the memory is cut to 128MB and the bus is 64-bit. How badly will that affect game performance?

 

A lot, 64 bit is quite crippled actually, since the bus interface is one of the important factors to determine performance. However, it's still quite powerful for a 14.1''.

 

I really don't understand why the FX570M was crippled on the 14.1" T61p. The T60p featured a 256MB ATI FireGL card in the 14.1" version.

 

Because the memory bus if halved.

 

I understand that the halved memory bus is what makes it crippled, I'm more wondering why Lenovo chose to put in a crippled GPU since the platform is capable of supporting a 256MB ATI FireGL mobile workstation graphics chip in a 14.1" screen package.

 

That I'm not sure, could be the problem with heat??? But that doesn't make sense to me, I guess you have to call them and ask.

 

The only difference i can make out between those two would be the number of pipelines.
Does some1 have a 3dmark 06 of the crippled 570m? Coz i believe the performance difference isnt all too dramatic.

 

Not too different from an NVS140M or not too different from an uncrippled FX570M?

 

from a nvs 140m ofc.

 

they should just a gaming oriented machine(gfx card) already. its clear that there are people who would buy it....

(as i put on my helmet and take cover from the responses)

 

I remember Quadro FX 570m 128 MB reach about 2700 at 3D Mark 2006 while 256 MB was at 3700. Only 128 MB is not enough for recent games.

 

How does that compare against the NVS140M? 128MB should be enough for most games unless you're running them with all the graphics settings turned to maximum.

 

They are about the same.

G86 A2 Envidia GPU in the R61 I often use. Has 128mb of DDR3 with the 64bit memory interface which limits it.


3DMARK06 score is in my sig for the R61 with the NVS 140m.

 

RAM is less about the graphics settigns than about the textures. If u have alot of textures, and theyre also highres, the RAM and also the bandwidth will limit pretty badly.

 

Of course not it's not enough for today games. If you don't enough VRAM for most used texture, shader and buffer, GPU have to swap from VRAM to main RAM witch is much slower and also used by the CPU.I will never go with less than 256 MB for a gaming GPU.
http://www.yougamers.com/articles/13801_video_ram_-_how_much_do_you_really_need/