Slashdot Mirror


Mobile vs. Desktop Gaming

Mr.Tweak writes "TweakTown has just posted an article investigating Mobile vs. Desktop gaming in their latest article entitled "New Age Computer Gaming - Mobile vs. Desktop Investigation". The article compares a Dell Inspiron 8200 with ATI Mobility 9000 graphics to a standard desktop system with nVidia GeForce4 Ti4200 graphics. Can notebook gaming really be taken seriously? We think so, and so should you!"

10 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. There is one main problem with mobile gaming by packeteer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest problem of mobile gaming is there is mainly one game in town, the radeon 9000. The gf4go is not bad but its not the best either. Mobile has caught up enough but its going to take a while for people to think of laptops as gaming machines.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  2. seriously? by tanveer1979 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well not yet, but when WLAN picks up is would be nice. Imaging waiting for a flight, you scan and find 3 other people running a QUAKE3 on WLAN, and join in.

    But only one problem battery. Yea unless we have long battery lives this wont really do. Most laptop owners will use it for gaming when they have spare battery life. So if we have 20 hour battery backup, which dosent burn you then maybe yes!

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
  3. Re:Hardware choice.. by tanveer1979 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    hmm.. most of the laptop sales are directed towards business users. I doubt a laptop geared for gaming will sell that much. So in a way the test is good. Take a mainstream laptop, the kind most people will buy and then see wether it performs. Moreover many people get laptops on a temporary basis from the place they work, now a company will by the latest dell, but wont buy a laptop for gaming, right?

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
  4. Is it just me or... by Anik315 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    do laptop's always seem to be "on the brink" of desktop performance? Do sites just repeat this news item everytime a more powerful laptops come out? The Geforce2go was a major step; this is a normal business cycle advance. The performance of laptops is never anywhere near the performance level of a similarly priced desktop, and that has been static for 15 years, yet over and over again we get reports about how laptops are becoming more and more like desktops... please.

  5. Input devices by bezza · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I agree that laptops have come close to (above average) desktops in terms of performance there is one thing that a mobile device in a mobile environment will never have...proper input devices.

    When I am on the road there is no space to pull out my little baby optical mouse and a hard surface to use it on. Tried playing Medal of Honor with the trackpad? Entertaining to say the least.

    The keyboard as well leaves a lot to be desired. My Compaq Evo N160 (P3 1.2GHz, 512MB, Radeon Mobility M7) has rediculously sized and placed Ctrl keys. How the hell am I meant to crouch! The test bed for this article however uses a Dell, and I notice that their keyboards are normal in their key placement.

    For this reason, gaming is not quite as good as a desktop. Even if the hardware is, (my laptop was quite quicker than my desktop up until recently) the interface is not up to scratch. This sort of includes the LCD monitor, too.

    --
    WARNING: This sig does not contain a joke
  6. Don't be sane or anything.. by Large+Green+Mallard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why compare a laptop with a Radeon 9000 to a Desktop with a Radeon 9000 when you can compare it to something totally different and draw your conlusion about laptop gaming from that!

    If you're looking at the performance of laptops for gaming, you make your desktop as similar as possible.. same RAM, same CPU speed, SAME VIDEO CARD. Otherwise, it's not truely useful stats.

  7. nVidia's new NV28M GF4 4200 Go chip by huntdwumpus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Too bad they couldn't have tested this one too...

    Bringing mobile gaming to new heights
    nVidia GPU Delivers Fastest Mobile 3D Performance
    Nvidia to launch NV28M at Comdex - The first known notebook design is slated for Q1 next year, from long time Nvidia partner Dell

  8. Gaming is not only about CPU and graphics card... by TV-SET · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While CPU and graphic cards are important, they are not all you need. Keyboards, mice, and joysticks are an IMPORTANT issue here, until of course you are talking tetris. :)

    If in doubt, visit sometime one of those gaming forums sites, like EsReallity.com. Discussions of input devices do appear there more then often.

    Not to mention the fact that I yet have to see at least one gamer (pro prefferably) which uses LCD (or similar technology) monitor. :)

    --
    Leonid Mamtchenkov ...i don't need your civil war...
  9. The usual Framerate bullshitting going on here... by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just for the information of the ones that like to flame on people who claim to need 80 fps or more.

    FPS isn't the same all the time! When you test FPS in a quick singleplayer it can be as high as 60 and still break in to a useless 10 when you're in a hot pursuit of 3 enemys along with 4 teammates, with everyone firing at maxrate. A max of roundabouts 80FPS minimum is needed if you don't want to notice a performance break when everyone meets for the big showdown in the center of a map. FPS break-in is noticed once it goes below 20 and that will allways happen eventually on a laptop.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  10. Doom III Alpha is not a reliable measure by securitas · · Score: 3, Insightful


    It's an Alpha, which means its full of buggy code and hasnt been optimized to the point where the final product will eventually perform. That also means that any benchmarks run using something as unstable, sloppy and chunky as an alpha are a false measure and therefore are completely unreliable.

    The cool factor or street cred he thinks he might gain by using a leaked bit of unstable software as part of the testbed are completely worthless when trying to establish some reliable manner of measuring performance.

    As Jericho pointed out, using the alpha demonstrates poor judgement, not only because it's technically unsound (or even for the legal risks), but just as a matter of common sense.