ATI Mobility HD4570 vs HD5470

[core2kid]

I had a Dell Studio 15 laptop where the motherboard failed twice. Dell replaced the system with another Studio 15. The previous one had an HD4570 and the new one has an HD5470. Which one is better? The Windows Rating is the same for Gaming Graphics but is 0.1 lower for Desktop performance for Aero on the HD5470. Did Dell rip me off and send me a less powerful video card?

 

[tweakboy]

if you dont play games 4570 will do great for you. gl

 

[core2kid]

The thing is that I do play games. I want the best performance for games and the ability to play BluRays at 1080p HD when I buy the internal BluRay Player (The LCD is 1080p too). Battery life would be nice but I can live with anything above 6 hours and Dell estimates this system to have 8hrs. I know I won't get that playing games but for SD movies and DVDs, it's good.

 

[ViRGE]

They're both 80 shader parts. Unless the 5470 is clocked lower, I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[core2kid]

Here is a link where the two can be compared side by side. You all might understand more with the provided info than I can.
http://products.amd.com/en-gb/MobilityGPUSideBySide.aspx?id=45&id=72&id=108

I also added the x1400 because that is what was in my original laptop. I went from Inspiron E1505 -> Studio 1555 -> Studio 1558. I still have the E1505. Probably my favorite machine.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I had a Dell Studio 15 laptop where the motherboard failed twice. Dell replaced the system with another Studio 15. The previous one had an HD4570 and the new one has an HD5470. Which one is better? The Windows Rating is the same for Gaming Graphics but is 0.1 lower for Desktop performance for Aero on the HD5470. Did Dell rip me off and send me a less powerful video card?

No, they're almost exactly the same, and bench very similarly:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

According to Notebookcheck, the 5470 is a hair faster. Your 0.1 difference in Windows Rating is within the margin of error.

Also, a big bonus is that the 5470 is made on the 40nm node, rather than the 55nm node for the 4570. The 5470 should potentially consume less power for this reason.

Another small bonus is that the 5470 has the full DX 11 featureset, while the 4570 is DX 10.1.
--------

that's too bad about your Dell Studio 15. Which model did you have - the older Studio 1535, or the newer 1555? I've got a 1555 myself with the ATI 4570 graphics chip, and my laptop has been great, no problems (knock on wood!).

 

[core2kid]

I have the new Studio 1555. Basically my E1505 kept having problems where just out of nowhere it wouldn't load Windows. Only a reformat would fix it, repairs and fixmbr commands wouldn't. Finally Dell replaced the system under warranty with the Studio 1555. That system worked for 8 hours and then it blue screened out of nowhere. I removed the hard drive, backed up some pictures and put the drive back in. It wouldn't power up. My first motherboard in that lasted 8 hours. The second time it started blue screening again and kept giving errors reffering to my GPU. I called Dell and they wanted to replace the motherboard, RAM, HD and charger all over again. I told them that I don't want them replacing the parts unless they can prove that they are bad. They ended up replacing the laptop then.

I'm not complaining, I went from my original E1505 Core2Duo T7200 @ 2GHz, 2GB DDR2 RAM 120GB 5400RPM HD, ATI x1400, 15.4" 1280x800 LCD to a Corei5 520, 3GB DDR3 RAM, 250GB 7200RPM HD, ATI HD5470, 15.6" 1080p LCD.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Hah, awesome upgrade from Dell, Nmascarenhas! Too bad they sent you a lemon the first time you got the replacement - hopefully the second replacement is better!

That's funny that your old laptop was an E1505 -- I went from an Inspiron E6400 (the Canadian name for the E1505) to a Sony Vaio 14" laptop to a Studio 1555.

I loved everything about the E6400 except it was a little bit heavy to lug to school. I even had the upgraded screen on it (1440x900). I switched to the Vaio for a year because it was lighter and easier to carry, but the 1280x800 resolution was too low for me.

I ended up selling the VAIO after a year and going for the Dell Studio 1555 with the 1080p screen. The icons were a bit small for me at first but I definitely got used to it and I can't go back now.
------

Enjoy your new laptop! If you really want to make it scream, put an SSD in there. I've got a 60GB OCZ Agility in mine, and put the stock 500GB drive into a 2.5" USB/eSATA enclosure.
-------------
By the way, if your laptop has the Core i5 in there, it's a Dell Studio 1558. The 1555 has a Core 2 Duo series chip.

 

[f4phantom2500]

if you want to play games then i'd suggest upgrading the video card in your desktop. you can get a very capable desktop card for under $100 that'll totally decimate the 6800GT and anything you could get that wouldn't cost an arm and a leg in a laptop, just check the fs/ft forum.

 

[core2kid]

I loved the E1505. I too upgraded the screen but I went to a matte 1680x1050 LCD. It was pretty cheap after selling my old LCD. I loved that screen except for the fact that the bottom was brighter than the top (common problem with high resolution LCDs with the CCFL backlight). I also hated how at low brightness, it was hard to see the screen. I too found it heavy especially with the 9 cell battery but what was nice about it was that replacing a part inside was very easy. All the screws were the same size and everything was replaceable including the GPU.

So far I like the Studio 1558. The 1555 seems like it had a longer battery life though. Could that be a defective battery? From what I've heard, a Core i5 and the HD5470 uses less power than the Core2 Duo and HD4570 GPU.

I'm really surprised that my Studio 1555 motherboard died after so long. I feel that the first motherboard was a lemon and the tech that came and put in the new motherboard did something wrong since I always heard the fans on after that.

I already have a 9800GTX in my desktop so I really don't need a nice video card. I just though it'd be nice to have one so I can play some games at college.

So basic point is that the 5470 IS better than the 4570?

 

[evolucion8]

A Radeon HD 4550 which was 50MHz slower with the same amount of shaders as a similar HD 5450, proved to be faster most of the time, by an average of 5%-10% So if your new Mobility Radeon HD 5450 is clocked slower than your old HD card, means that you will loose even more performance. But bear in mind that none of those cards are meant for gaming. (Are you sure is a Radeon HD 4570? Never saw one of those)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2931/15

Moving away from the 5450 for a moment, besides the Radeon HD 5770 this is the only other card in the 5000-series that is directly similar to a 4000-series card. In fact it’s the most similar, being virtually identical to the 4550 in terms of functional units and memory speeds. With this card we can finally pin down something we couldn’t quite do with the 5770: clock-for-clock, the 5000-series is slower than the 4000-series.

This is especially evident on the 5450, where the 5450 has a 50MHz core speed advantage over the 4550, and yet with everything else being held equal it is still losing to the 4550 by upwards of 10%. This seems to the worst in shader-heavy games, which leads us to believe that actual cause is that the move from DX10.1 shader hardware on the 4000-series to DX11 shader hardware on the 5000 series. Or in other words, the shaders in particular seem to be what’s slower.

AMD made several changes here, including adding features for DX11 and rearranging the caching system for GPGPU use. We aren’t sure whether the slowdown is a hardware issue, or if it’s the shader compiler being unable to fully take advantage of the new hardware. It’s something that’s going to bear keeping an eye on in future driver revisions.

 

[core2kid]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. It's the Mobility Radeon HD series. See the link below:
http://products.amd.com/en-gb/MobilityGPUSideBySide.aspx?id=45&id=72&id=108

Does your information still apply?

 

[evolucion8]

Yeah, it would still apply, both shares the same amount of stream processors and both are based on the same desktop counterpart architecture.

 

[core2kid]

Yeah, it would still apply, both shares the same amount of stream processors and both are based on the same desktop counterpart architecture.

So Dell owes me a new laptop. They said this new system will be equivalent or better than my current configuration. It's not.

 

[evolucion8]

So Dell owes me a new laptop. They said this new system will be equivalent or better than my current configuration. It's not.

The differences in performance are insignificant enough to make a difference, both will remain unplayable regardless, probably they though that giving up a small performance share will make it up for the fact that your newer card supports DX11, consumes less power and has a slighly more robust video decoder.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I loved the E1505. I too upgraded the screen but I went to a matte 1680x1050 LCD. It was pretty cheap after selling my old LCD. I loved that screen except for the fact that the bottom was brighter than the top (common problem with high resolution LCDs with the CCFL backlight). I also hated how at low brightness, it was hard to see the screen. I too found it heavy especially with the 9 cell battery but what was nice about it was that replacing a part inside was very easy. All the screws were the same size and everything was replaceable including the GPU.

So far I like the Studio 1558. The 1555 seems like it had a longer battery life though. Could that be a defective battery? From what I've heard, a Core i5 and the HD5470 uses less power than the Core2 Duo and HD4570 GPU.

So basic point is that the 5470 IS better than the 4570?

From what I hear, Core i3/i5 plus integrated H55 GPU and northbridge use similar/less power to Core 2 Duo plus Intel X3xxx or X4xxx integrated GPU's plus older northbridge.

It changes when you go to discrete GPU's, though. Bear in mind that most Core2 Duo chips used on the Dell Studio 1555 were 25W TDP chips, while the Core i3/i5 chips are 35W TDP, meaning even if the 5xxx series ATI GPU saves you some power over the 4xxx series, overall it's going to be comparable because the up to 10W difference in CPU power consumption.
----------

What's your battery life like? I get about 3 - 3 1/2 hours of life with a 6-cell battery on my Dell Studio 1555 with a P7350 (2 GHz, 25W TDP), ATI 4570 GPU and an OCZ Agility SSD.

2 1/2 to 3 hours on a 6-cell is reasonable for your configuration...
--------

As for the 5470 vs 4570 comparison; I wouldn't really sweat the difference because if any exists, it's below 10%, and you probably save some power consumption with the new 40nm GPU.

A Radeon HD 4550 which was 50MHz slower with the same amount of shaders as a similar HD 5450, proved to be faster most of the time, by an average of 5%-10% So if your new Mobility Radeon HD 5450 is clocked slower than your old HD card, means that you will loose even more performance. But bear in mind that none of those cards are meant for gaming. (Are you sure is a Radeon HD 4570? Never saw one of those)

He's got the 5470 not the 5450 and it's the mobile card. Yes, it's the 4570, it's a mobile-only card, and a popular one for awhile too.

 

[core2kid]

The meter showed 4 hours the last I checked at 90%. I am going to charge it up all the way and do a full discharge cycle and see where it goes. I have the 9 cell battery.

As for the video cards, Dirt 2 ran pretty well on the 4570. AA Off and detail on high worked. Resolution was 720p I believe. I am going to try it on this new card.

Maybe I'll wait for a new GPU to come out and then contact Dell telling them that it's lower performance. That card is Dells highest end card, even in the XPS line of notebooks.