Mobile 9700 64MB vs Geforce Go 6200 TC 128MB

[stimp]

I was looking at the Sony Vaio S-Series Notebooks, (like the looks and the size), the new one S-380 with the Geforce Go 6200 and the old one S-270 with the Mobile 9700. Are there any reviews comparing these two graphics chips? I've heard that the Mobile 9700 destroys the Go 6200. So does that mean the Go 6200 is comparable to ATI Mobile 9200? Why would Sony downgrade the Graphics Chip in the Vaio S?

 

[IEC]

The Mobile 9700 is the equivalent of a 9600-9600XT desktop part, while the GF6200 is the lowest end GF6xxx series, meaning the 9700 WILL own it in everything.

 

[mdahc]

Originally posted by: stimp
I was looking at the Sony Vaio S-Series Notebooks, (like the looks and the size), the new one S-380 with the Geforce Go 6200 and the old one S-270 with the Mobile 9700. Are there any reviews comparing these two graphics chips? I've heard that the Mobile 9700 destroys the Go 6200. So does that mean the Go 6200 is comparable to ATI Mobile 9200? Why would Sony downgrade the Graphics Chip in the Vaio S?

I think nVIDIA and Sony have some new deals that stem from their collaboration on the PS3. In addition, Sony appears to be attempting to transform their desktop/notebook/displays lines into a sort of consumer electronics/personal computer convergence entity. Thus, maybe Sony is targeting their desktops and notebooks more towards multimedia and not gaming now (it doesn't really make a lot of sense for them anyway since the PS is such a big revenue generator for them). Even on the high end Sonoma A series they've elected to go with an X600 instead of an X700 in place of the old 9700.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: ariafrost
The Mobile 9700 is the equivalent of a 9600-9600XT desktop part, while the GF6200 is the lowest end GF6xxx series, meaning the 9700 WILL own it in everything.

Just stating that "Gf6200 is lowest end GF6xxx" doesn't mean anything will own anything.
I have not seen specific benchies and I couldn't find the GF6200 hardware specs quickly, but the 9700 will not own everything. The two I believe will be very comparable. AT desktop benchies
Notice how the TC 6200's are comparable to an X300. From my experience, I would say that these results will be proportional with notebook cards as well. The X300 is the PCI-E version of the 9600, and a 9700 is just an overclocking 9600 (mobile of course). 6200TC is not a bad card and I suspect the 9700 will have advantages in some areas, but it won't "own" everything.
Regardless, neither are very sufficient for modern games anyway.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: ariafrost
The Mobile 9700 is the equivalent of a 9600-9600XT desktop part, while the GF6200 is the lowest end GF6xxx series, meaning the 9700 WILL own it in everything.

Just stating that "Gf6200 is lowest end GF6xxx" doesn't mean anything will own anything.
I have not seen specific benchies and I couldn't find the GF6200 hardware specs quickly, but the 9700 will not own everything. The two I believe will be very comparable. AT desktop benchies
Notice how the TC 6200's are comparable to an X300. From my experience, I would say that these results will be proportional with notebook cards as well. The X300 is the PCI-E version of the 9600, and a 9700 is just an overclocking 9600 (mobile of course). 6200TC is not a bad card and I suspect the 9700 will have advantages in some areas, but it won't "own" everything.
Regardless, neither are very sufficient for modern games anyway.

No, the X300 is the PCIe 9200. And that's not even a valid comparison; this is a TurboCache 6200, sharing memory from the main stash, trying to take on a card with 64MB of dedicated. 😛

Desktop TurboCache Cards for reference.

- M4H