Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ae86_16v · Feb 15, 2003, 03:10 AM

Ok two questions.

Between the 700 w/ the ATI Radeon Mobility Radeon 16mb and the new 800 w/ the ATI Radeon 7500 32mb.

Would there be a MAJOR difference? No major graphics work here, just casual photoshop and some gaming (ie Diablo, Civ III, Sim City).

Right now, I have an iBook 600 w/ 8mb vram and 640mb. How does my machine stack up against the newer ones?

Both of the video cards above support Quartz Extreme right?

olli2 · Feb 15, 2003, 03:45 PM

The Ati Radeon is called Radeon 7000 or Radeon VE if you want to buy the same card for a PC. So, maybe you can look for tests comparing the Radeon 7000 vs the Radeon 7500.

In my eyes, the Radeon 7000 is quite old and outdated graphics chip, but delivers sharp and quality imgaes even in high resolutions, comparable to a Matrox. The Radeon 7500 is somewhere the very low-end budget priced card today in a PC Store.

By my experience, 16 MB is somewhat the lowest acceptable for gaming, 32 MB is better, but things become nice at 64 MB. THe problem with laptops is the resolution. If you run games, you can run it in a lower, 640x480 resolution. However, the TFT has a native resolution, and anything lower is usually blurry and very soft. So, if you want a sharp image, you have to set the resolution in your game at 1024x768, but this would need 32 MB of VRam and at least a 7500 chip for smooth running. I would say the same is needed for smooth DivX (not DVD).

ae86_16v · Feb 15, 2003, 09:48 PM

Ok, so for gaming, at least the 7500 w/ 32mb.

But for OS X, would you notice a big difference in daily operations?

wataru · Feb 15, 2003, 10:58 PM

16MB is the lower limit for Quartz Extreme, if that helps at all.

jaske · Feb 16, 2003, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by ae86_16v:
Between the 700 w/ the ATI Radeon Mobility Radeon 16mb and the new 800 w/ the ATI Radeon 7500 32mb.

Would there be a MAJOR difference? No major graphics work here, just casual photoshop and some gaming (ie Diablo, Civ III, Sim City).

There is a noticeable difference: hence Apple's recommendation, for example, that Keynote be run on systems with 32mb. I've owned both the 700 and 800 mhz iBooks and feel confident recommending that you buy the 800 if you can afford the difference.

By the way, since when is Photoshop "casual"? Especially on a G3, and even more so under X, which I assume you're going to be using.

olli2 · Feb 16, 2003, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by wataru:
16MB is the lower limit for Quartz Extreme, if that helps at all.

Yes, but I guess it shows the difference when you run movies and such, and want to do other things behind the movie, want to have a transparent quick time playback with a word doc behind. For other screen stuff, the 16 MB should be really enough.

There is also a difference, if you want to drive an external screen in spanning mode (not mirroring). There is hack that makes this possible for the iBooks, but when spanning, the memory is halved for the two screens. People say, even with 8 MB of memory for each this way, there is no problem with two monitors.

ae86_16v · Feb 17, 2003, 06:32 AM

yeah ok...maybe not casual then

But, I am not going to be doing an external LCD or anything.

Yeah, I am probably going to get the 800, since it has a larger HD.

But like I said, I really don't do that much multitasking.

Just probably simple iChat, Word, Safari.

You know.

lagarto · Feb 17, 2003, 09:50 AM

I had a 600 which my son has kept, and I got the 800, both running 10.2 and the difference is not that big (he's happy

. A mate has the 500, and the jump from 66 to 100 Mhz bus was really noticeable. Processor speed wise I don't think you'll notice that much. So the next big jump will be 133 mhz bus at 930 Mhz processor speed...

However, the great thing is when you enable two monitors (with the OF hack). Suddently you feel like you have a real machine. I use PhotoShop Elements with it at 1280 * 1024 and it is great!

ae86_16v · Feb 17, 2003, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by lagarto:
I had a 600 which my son has kept, and I got the 800, both running 10.2 and the difference is not that big (he's happy . A mate has the 500, and the jump from 66 to 100 Mhz bus was really noticeable. Processor speed wise I don't think you'll notice that much. So the next big jump will be 133 mhz bus at 930 Mhz processor speed...

However, the great thing is when you enable two monitors (with the OF hack). Suddently you feel like you have a real machine. I use PhotoShop Elements with it at 1280 * 1024 and it is great!

Yeah like I said I really don't care about the dual monitor thing.

But so basically, the consense is that the bus speed is the key to increase in speed. Since the I got the first generation 600mhz it should really matter that much.

olli2 · Feb 20, 2003, 09:05 AM

Well, for gaming:
iBook 600/100, 384 MB, ATI Radeon 7000 16 MB SDRam
- Otto Matic playable
- Tomb Raider III (classic) playable
- 4x4 Evolution 2 - not playable, slow-slow-slow (even with the lowest setting on everything)

Not real multitasking, just some safari, iChat, mail... hehe - this is real multitasking!!! The larger hard drive - I rather suggest to get an external HDD, like the External HDD case from Sarotech (called Cutie), and a 30 or 40 gig Fujitsu HDD. You can then backup, boot from it, etc... it has much better use then the extra 10 gig inside, but this is my experience.

Lateralus · Feb 20, 2003, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by olli2:
The Ati Radeon is called Radeon 7000 or Radeon VE if you want to buy the same card for a PC. So, maybe you can look for tests comparing the Radeon 7000 vs the Radeon 7500.

Actually, the 7000 is a crippled version of the original Radeon and it shows. I believe that the VE is an original Radeon with a slower core clock.

The Radeon in the 16MB-video iBooks is just that. A Radeon.