ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470 vs. NVIDA GeForce 9300M 256MB?

Which card do you think is more powerful for digital photography processing and occasional gaming? I have been monitoring the newer threads regarding the SL400 and T400 but I don't believe anyone as addressed the performance difference of the two. Thanks...

 

The 3470 is much faster than the 9300m gs.

 

the 3470 is much faster. In terms of performance its a bit better than the 8400 GT.

HD3470 > 8400 GT > 9300

 

They're pretty close in performance according to benchmark tests. However, I'd go with the ATI since Nvidia is having some issues with their chips atm, I'd stay away from Nividia until they sort out some problems first. I was really disappointed that when they announced all the G84 chips are defective, but yet they haven't announced any solution.

 

Not according to the numbers shown here.

 

the 9300GS might be ranked higher but if you look at the stats the 3470 out performs it.

9300 GS -- Core speed: 550
Memory speed: 700
3DMark06: 1500
Bus: 64

HD 3470 -- Core speed: 680
Memory speed: 800
3DMark06: 1933
Bus: 64

8400 GT -- Core speed: 450
Memory speed: 600
3DMark06: 1033
Bus: 128

I would say the 3470 outperforms both or them. And has less heat issues.

 

Thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated!!!

 

i think the 8400m gt will beat the hd 3470 because of its 128bit bus. it can use more memory

 

There must be a reason why they ranked the 9300M higher, no?

 

You're seriously trusting notebookcheck? They use no standard for testing their systems and provide results of absolutely no value. Sorry.

 

Unless you can provide another source with a better "standard" and "value"?

 

Yeah, sorry there is no real index of all graphics cards, but you can't be like "well there's nothing better so I'll just use something unreliable"

What you do is do some actual research and find someone who put the cards head to head in comprable systems, instead of comparing the 3dmark score of a card that was run with a 1.2ghz single core CPU to one that was run with a 2.4ghz dual core CPU. Yes, that is how little standard notebookcheck carries.

So sorry I have nothing better but only a fool would trust notebookcheck.

 

This is only slightly on topic, but how does the Radeon HD 3470 compare to cards of the last ATI generation, specifically the HD 2600? Is the 3470 that much faster than the 2600? Is the 2600 faster than the 9300? I ask because there are still quite a few laptops that come with 2600s.

 

Before you can provide proof about how low notebookcheck's standard is, your claim is as foolish as you say about people trusting notebookcheck. Also, your theory can apply to pretty much every notebook review website out there.

P.S. I'm not saying notebookcheck is 100% reliable either. You should know that it's only a reference to give us "an idea".

 

Stop complaining about whether notebookcheck has great standards or not. the end idea is that it gives a pretty good idea of what to expect from the GPU. Your not going to get a perfect understanding of it, but it will give you a very general look.

Obviously there are other factors that add some and take some away, for instance, this review of the FW with a 3470 gives it a 2,630 on 3DMark06 on that model.

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/sony-vaio-vgn-fw198u-h.aspx?page=2

thats about 700 more points than the one in notebookcheck but that seems like an alright range when you take into account the differences.

 

Okay if you want to use notebook check for an "idea" then fine. It will give you a VERY basic idea.

But to say someone else's ranking is wrong and your proof is notebook check said otherwise... no... just no.


And proof? I don't need proof (though I know there are articles about it). Use common sense. You know some graphics cards simply couldn't be in the same system as another.

 

I have no problem with how everyone wants to rank the cards. I just stated some of the stats and my opinion.

I put up the first rank about GPUs and it didnt match the notebookcheck rank, though we could find no reason for it since notebookchecks stats for the cards matched my ranking.

 

Didn't I just wrote "only a reference to give us an idea"?

You just said it yourself, some graphics cards simply couldn't be in the same system as another, so show me your "perfect" standard. Your "common sense" is only looking at it from one angle. It's very possible that they used a lower spec system on Card A, but at the same time it is also very possible that they used a lower spec system on Card B. You keep on saying there are source or article about it, but yet cannot provide them.

 

Look, there's no point in arguing, if I had the choice, I'd get the 3470 hands down because it IS faster.

Of course I can't use benchmarks to prove this (only based on the specs for each card) until we get some actual benchmark results for the 9300m gs as well. Since there hasn't been a single actual review of a laptop with a 9300m gs, chances are that all the benchmark results out there are completely made up.

 

For the record, my first reply in this thread also said to go with the ATI. The numbers I posted were not to support the Nvidia choice, just want to make this clear.

 

Let's keep it reasonable in here, thanks. No need to argue over this.

We have a GPU Guide that may interest you. It is updated when new information is available.

 

thank you chaz.

 

This is kind of off-topic but how dow the 3470 compare to Quadro NVS 140M (didn't see it in the GPU guide)? I'd hope the ATI card is better, since it is the replacement.

 

Actually the 3470 isn't the replacement for the 140m. The 140m is a workstation card which is based on the 8400m gt while the 3470 is a regular consumer card. Performance-wise they are probably pretty close.

 

Honestly, Heres the fact. Theyre the same lol. I bet you If you dont run FRAPS while gaming you wont tell a difference, both of them well give you mediocore gaming- and the only games on a laptop w/o a CD to play are any Source games and of course MMO's.

I dont think between the cards you'll get more AA or AF or higher details comparing to the other.
9300M GS and 3470 are pretty much hand in hand, One may have higher speeds but no one on the thread has posted pipeline inf and they dont understand how Nvidia Pipelines and ATI pipelines work Nvidia may say 8 Shader Cores where ATI will say 40 shader cores. But Nvidia Shader Cores are so to speak "5 dimensional" whereas ATI arent, so 8 Pipelines will workout the same as 40.

 

Would the HD 3470 be faster than a Fire GL Mobility T2?

 

Thanks. Yes, I know the 140M is a workstation card. I meant replacement in the Thinkpad line.

 

A interesing aspect of the HD 3470 is that it works in Hybrid Crossfire (cooperates) with the ATI IGP HD 3200 in the newer AMD Puma platform. Do anyone have any impression or links to how the performance is boosted with the 3470 working in unison with the ATI IGP?

 

No, because they don't test the systems themselves "that" much? They get data from users and then compare them by average value of scores. Of course the value is off or misleading if they only have 1 or 2 results per graphics card, that's why you can use mouseover the score to see how many different results the average is based on.

 

what is better

ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470 vs. NVIDA GeForce 9300M 512MB?

the amount RAM in more in GeForce influence the performance?

 

Do you know?

 

Video RAM has little to no influence on performance in the vast majority of applications.

Extra RAM tends to help when running at extremely high resolutions (1920x1200+) and/or when using a high end workstation application (solidworks, Maya, etc.).

For games, 256MB is almost always more than adequate.

 

If you've got large textures in a large playable area you suffer penalties when having to fetch them into the VRAM though, so it does impact in some ways.

 

the 3470 is DEFINITELY faster in games.

 

@ oscaroxy, little or no difference to standard 9300 gs. that amount of video memory is only useful in higher end cards. go by last 3 digits, generally 400<600<800, and if its ddr3> ddr2 video ram

notebookcheck may not be super reliable but they have this
http://www.notebookcheck.net/How-much-graphic-memory-makes-sense.2558.0.html

and also, read individual reviews and you will see which processors, how much ram they use. then you can compare 3d06 scores roughly

 

exactly right pi3

Even right now in high end cards there isnt much of a difference between 1gb and 512mb

so for a lower ranged card 512 and 256 is negligible.