Printable View
I will buy a laptop computer mounted to the card with my friend. But I hesitate for the graphics card. I am thinking of 9800 GTS, but does it bring something to take it in rather 1GB only 512MB?
According to a friend, the interest would be that when it comes up in high resolutions, that it will not change the quality of images generated. However he was unable to tell me what he meant by high resolutions. Does this play a lot in 1920 x 1200? And 1680 x 1050?
A large amount of memory is used only in high resolutions, as was so aptly put your friend. For high resolution, I mean, resolution of 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 style. A 9800M GTS 1GB version is slightly more effective in these conditions, a 9800M GTS 512MB version.
After that, there are also filters that play:
If you add antialiasing, anisotropic filter ... Eventually you saturate the memory. Thus, the more memory you have, the better
Unlike perf is low, but it is always saved
Ok thank you, because in fact I have a budget of around Rs. 97500, and I would like a 9800M GTS. So I was paying for 17" 1920x1200 with 9800M GTS with 512MB or a 15" 1680x1050 with 9800M GTS with 1GB. The question is not easy ... What would you do?
A config-based 9800M GTS 1GB of 1680x1050 will be much more comfortable in the calculations rendered graphics. If you are looking for performance, take this config.
Explanation:
In the case of a game, the graphics card produces a lot of calculations to create a scene. This scene is represented by pixels. Thus, the fewer pixels to display, plus the graphics card is fast in the job.
In the first configuration, we have: 1920x1200 pixels, which gives us 2304000 pixels to be processed.
In the second configuration, on: 1680x1050 pixels, which gives us 1764000 pixels to be processed.
Thus, the second configuration offers more performance in games because the graphics card performs fewer calculations to arrive at the final scene. Moreover, as the second configuration is equipped with a 9800M GTS with 1GB of memory, you can save a lot of filters (FSAA, AA ...), which increases the feeling of realism (better picture quality)
Well, later, for the comfort of the user, it is better to use a 17 "with a high resolution then a 15" to watch a movie for example
Basically, to see if you should focus on performance in games, and overall comfort, like playing a movie for example
As for the screen size it is true that 17" is attractive, it's much more comfortable, and then in games I will not be obliged to put myself in native resolution, but a 15" other side is really more mobile ...
So there by against, let me tell you the opposite:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky58
When you play a game, the golden rule is to play with the native resolution. Otherwise, you risk to have a terribly distorted image
And, 15" is obviously synonymous with mobility while 17", but rather comfort