ATI vs nVidia Graphics

[cDuck28Z1]

Hey, I'm looking for a good laptop. Im not a heavy gamer but i will be using it for graphics intensive rendering for 3DS, Maya, CAD, Revit, Etc. I've looked at the XPS 16, lenovo Y550, and the Asus N81VP-D2. All have comparable stats but im focusing on the graphics card.

XPS 16 - ATI Mobility RADEON™ HD 4670–1GB
lenovo Y550 - nVidia Geforce GT 240M-1GB
Asus N81VP-D2 -ATI HD4650 1,024MB PCI-Express GDDR3


Of these, what would be the most optimal setup for graphic rendering (Mind you the Asus has 8gb DDR2 while the other two have 6GbDDR3; all have the Intel T9600)

Also, are there any companies that would give me a better setup than the computer listed above? (Preferably a 14.1" screen over the 15.4" this is all i could find...)

 

[Spartan109]

first off wrong spot, this should be posted in the harware section, now to answer your question...

the Lenovo would be the best choice, because the 240 is a new chipset than the 46xx series. also ddr3 is superior to ddr2 even if there is a bit less

 

[GibsonSGKing]

the Lenovo would be the best choice, because the 240 is a new chipset than the 46xx series.

Doesn't mean it's faster though...

 

[Spartan109]

Doesn't mean it's faster though...

but it definatley counts for it, different architecture, and the 2xx chipsets are superior to the 46xx anyway

 

[JogaBonito1502]

You're definitely looking at the wrong class of Lenovos. Check out the ThinkPad line. Under ThinkPad, look at the W series.

 

[cDuck28Z1]

The W Series are way to expensive for my price range. I've found the HP dv6t quad with the nVidia 230M, the XPS 16 with the nVidia 240M, and the lenovo with the ATI HD4670. I've pretty much ruled out the Asus because of the price as well as the RAM.

Would it be worth the extra $200-300 to get the dv6t quad over the standard dv6t?? I know not many programs can utilize the quad core yet, but i feel like that may change soon. Also, the i7 runs @ 45W compared to the P9600 25W. Im guessing about a 30min - 1hr loss in batter life in the i7 (Both running the 230M and 240M series graphics respectively). Any thoughts??

 

[familyman1]

If you are doing a bunch of graphics intensive programs, the lenovo with the nvidia GT240M would be the best of the three.

 

[Spartan109]

The W Series are way to expensive for my price range. I've found the HP dv6t quad with the nVidia 230M, the XPS 16 with the nVidia 240M, and the lenovo with the ATI HD4670. I've pretty much ruled out the Asus because of the price as well as the RAM.

Would it be worth the extra $200-300 to get the dv6t quad over the standard dv6t?? I know not many programs can utilize the quad core yet, but i feel like that may change soon. Also, the i7 runs @ 45W compared to the P9600 25W. Im guessing about a 30min - 1hr loss in batter life in the i7 (Both running the 230M and 240M series graphics respectively). Any thoughts??

well what will you be doing with it, because quite a few programs use quad, games dont however. Joga is right though and you should rule out the 46xx series if your focusing on video cards

 

[worshipme]

but it definatley counts for it, different architecture, and the 2xx chipsets are superior to the 46xx anyway

Nvidia renaming strikes again. The 240 is a stripped down 9600GT.
The HD 4670 is faster.

 

[Gamputer]

Nvidia renaming strikes again. The 240 is a stripped down 9600GT.
The HD 4670 is faster.

Actually, I don't quite agree when you say "Stripped down 9600gt"...

The 240 uses a newer 40nm transistors (better architecture) and it's performance rivals hd4670 with lesser power usage.

The price range seems similar, and since the performance level is the same, I would go for 240 gt.

In terms of performance, I agree that it's not much different from 9600gt, but since it uses less power and the performance level is not that much different from 4670 as well, I would go for 240 gt.

http://http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-240,2475.html