How good is an integrated Radeon Mobility 64 meg shared notebook graphics?

[Wolfchild]

I just bought a nearly-new Compaq 2199 laptop from someone, it's being shipped so I don't have it in my hands just yet.

It has a Radeon Mobility integrated graphics with 64 MB shared video memory. I'm just wondering what I can expect out of this, what desktop cards would it be comparable to. Can't seem to find much info on it anywhere.

I'm not expecting to play the likes of Far Cry and Painkiller but if it could run Quake 3 based games like Jedi Outcast and MOHAA that would be awesome...so just wondering. Or is it even that good. I don't need the highest resolutions settings etc, I'd just like to be able to play some games on it while I'm away from home. I wanted a higher end laptop but for now this one is much more affordable to me.

 

[Connoisseur]

I'd expect between GeForce2MX-GeForce2GTS performance. It's a wide margin but based on what I know, it's the best I can do. The 64 megs of shared video really hurt the system and the clock speed is pretty slow. The good news is you WILL be able to play Quake 3 based games...just not at the highest resolutions. I'm betting you'll get very playable fps at 800x600. Tops res. would be 1024x768 but I doubt it'll be totally chop free at that speed.

 

[Naruto]

I think I can shed some light.

I have used both a 9100 IGP (desktop) and mobility 9000 (laptop). As of now, most laptops using the 9100IGP are limited to dual channel pc2700. And the 9100IGP memory bandwith is not that efficient, so it got around 3300Mb/s. It also got around 5200 3dmark2k1 marks. For my mobility 9000 on a i855pm centrino chipset, it got 7300 3dmarks2k1 on 64mb dedicated 400mhz ram and pc2100 system ram. You can expect the IGP to be able to play games, but not at resolutions above 800x600 that well. As for mobility 9000, I was surprised how great it was. It was running warcraft 3 well at 1280x1024 and it even gave me acceptable and steady 30fps+ online in call of duty at 1024x768.


Oh whoops, you said radeon mobility. I'm not sure about that one, sorry. Its more like the radeon 7500. Well if you can recall the first radeon 64mb card performance, it will be less than that because of the memory bandwith. Just imagine a radeon 64mb with 64bit ram and that should be the performance level.

 

[alexruiz]

Given the fact that the ATi IGP320 has embedded Radeon 7000 graphics (original radeon R100 without T&L) I think Connoisseur is right, leaning more towards the GF2 MX.... but I think it will play what you want at 1024x768 at 40 fps....

Try it and let us know!

Alex

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I have the 320M IGP in my Compaq 900z with 2000+ t-bred mobile and 512mb 2100DDR I bought 18months back or so and it'll do QIII, Ghost Recon, that type of game with 8x6 low settings smooth but I haven't even attempted newer games on it as it would probably not be too enjoyable of a gaming experience. HTH.

 

[chilled]

Originally posted by: Wolfchild
It has a Radeon Mobility integrated graphics with 64 MB shared video memory. I'm just wondering what I can expect out of this, what desktop cards would it be comparable to.

I've got a Compaq Presario 2100, with Athlon-XP-M 2400+ (1.8GHz, Barton) CPU, 512MB PC2100 DDR, 30GB Hitachi HD and Radeon Mobility IGP320 Shared graphics.

I took a few benchies when I got it last year, note at the time it had 256MB total RAM so I set 32MB shared memory. With 64MB shared memory I get about 100 more 3d2k1 marks. Using CAT v3.10 Sys 2: AthlonXP 2700+, nForce2, 512MB PC2700 Dual channel DDR, 32MB GeForce2 GTS @ default 200/333. Sys 3: P3 866MHz, VIA Apollo 133A Pro, 512MB PC133 SDRAM, 32MB GeForce2 GTS @ default 200/333.

DronezMark, Benchmark option - OpenGL
1024 x 768 x 32 + 2AA + 2AF (just for fun )
21.35fps (Sys 2: 46.33fps, Sys 3: 43.17fps)

3DMark2000 - DX7 - Weirdly low?
1024 x 768 x 16
1658 (2: 9483, 3: 5930)

3DMark2001 - DX8
1024 x 768 x 32
1688 (2: 4694, 3: 3103)

3DMark2003 - DX9
1024 x 768 x 32
93 (2: 257, 3: 119)

UT2003 - DX8
1024 x 768 x 32 + 2AA + 2AF
antalus, asbestos, citadel
7.8fps, 12.09fps 8.88fps
(2: 12.37, 19.23, 13.26; 3: 15.80, 21.18, 10.97)

Aquamark 3, GFX Scores - DX9
1024 x 768 + 4AF
369 (2: 252, 3: 627)

OK, I know this is a dumb set of resolutions, but I do have a 9800 PRO too
My point is, at least u could try to compare with a GF2 GTS now and interpolate a bit for situations without AA or AF. Hope this helps.

So what spec is the 2199 laptop?

Update: Forgot this one, again excuse the res

Quake 3 Arena emo
640 x 480 x 16
48.58fps (2: 87.09, 79.92)

 

[gtd2000]

So this spec of laptop is perfect for playing HL based games then

...or not?

 

[eLiu]

Originally posted by: Wolfchild
I just bought a nearly-new Compaq 2199 laptop from someone, it's being shipped so I don't have it in my hands just yet.

It has a Radeon Mobility integrated graphics with 64 MB shared video memory. I'm just wondering what I can expect out of this, what desktop cards would it be comparable to. Can't seem to find much info on it anywhere.

I'm not expecting to play the likes of Far Cry and Painkiller but if it could run Quake 3 based games like Jedi Outcast and MOHAA that would be awesome...so just wondering. Or is it even that good. I don't need the highest resolutions settings etc, I'd just like to be able to play some games on it while I'm away from home. I wanted a higher end laptop but for now this one is much more affordable to me.

Well, I played Far Cry on an old Geforce 2...i think those two things are about equal. Granted, I ran Far Cry at 800x600 w/all settings on low, except textures & explosions (hey, I like my fireballs). Anyhow, it was definitely playable. Quake 3 games ran pretty smooth...like Jedi Outcast was pretty happy on my geforce2.