Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,259
Little bit of thinking our loud, but need some input please to ratify my understanding of a 'Good' card and my new GT650M equipped machine.
From my understanding graphics cards comprise of the following variables that impact good FPS:
Obviously it would appear that the GPU core is important to a certain degree but are the pipelines more important? E.g. a GTX680M has 1536 vs say a GT650M has 384. The former card runs at a clock speed of 720mhz core speed vs the 735-850 of the GT650M. So I think, ha GT650 not much of a slouch in comparison as these can easily clock above 1000mhz with good cooling. Mine is currently sat just shy of 1200mhz core and 2800mhz memory.
However I assume the GTX680M is a lot quicker is because more pipes equals more efficient delivery?
So overclocking.
GT650M runs stock up to 850MHZ and 2000MHZ memory
Same card in my Lenovo Y500 is 1150-1200mhz vs 2800mhz
What FPS advantage am I gaining and is it all worth it? I ran 3DMark11 and yes came out with a much better score than the stock Notebookcheck numbers, but what is this equating in the real world?
I purchased my laptop to run FSX the only game that interests my anorak appeal to the game and upon installation hoped Ultra settings all the way haha no way!!
However with a few tweaks of the FSX.cfg file and slider adjustments can get circa 25-40 average over dense populated areas.
I can run MOH max settings in ultra a game I purchased for a tenner merely out of curiosity as to my new laptops ability.
I want to try BF3 primarily our of interest at the power of my laptop and tweaking to see if 'Ultra 1080p' is doable. What sort of FPS would I be expecting or even in it's overclocked state would be <20 and somewhat unplayable at these settings.
My other specs are an I7 3630QM and 8GB RAM.
Thanks all.
From my understanding graphics cards comprise of the following variables that impact good FPS:
- GPU Core Speed
- Memory size/Type DDR3/5
- Memory Speed
- Pipelines
Obviously it would appear that the GPU core is important to a certain degree but are the pipelines more important? E.g. a GTX680M has 1536 vs say a GT650M has 384. The former card runs at a clock speed of 720mhz core speed vs the 735-850 of the GT650M. So I think, ha GT650 not much of a slouch in comparison as these can easily clock above 1000mhz with good cooling. Mine is currently sat just shy of 1200mhz core and 2800mhz memory.
However I assume the GTX680M is a lot quicker is because more pipes equals more efficient delivery?
So overclocking.
GT650M runs stock up to 850MHZ and 2000MHZ memory
Same card in my Lenovo Y500 is 1150-1200mhz vs 2800mhz
What FPS advantage am I gaining and is it all worth it? I ran 3DMark11 and yes came out with a much better score than the stock Notebookcheck numbers, but what is this equating in the real world?
I purchased my laptop to run FSX the only game that interests my anorak appeal to the game and upon installation hoped Ultra settings all the way haha no way!!
However with a few tweaks of the FSX.cfg file and slider adjustments can get circa 25-40 average over dense populated areas.
I can run MOH max settings in ultra a game I purchased for a tenner merely out of curiosity as to my new laptops ability.
I want to try BF3 primarily our of interest at the power of my laptop and tweaking to see if 'Ultra 1080p' is doable. What sort of FPS would I be expecting or even in it's overclocked state would be <20 and somewhat unplayable at these settings.
My other specs are an I7 3630QM and 8GB RAM.
Thanks all.
is that the gddr3 or 5 version? don't know what fps you'd get in bf3, but I'd consider 20fps the absolute minimum. I had a netbook with an Intel 945 chip in it that could just about play Mafia 1 at 20fps so I kinda just got used to itt lol.