The Acer Travelmate 8100 And The Test

As we mentioned, this test will pit the Mobility Radeon X700 against its desktop partners. And again, we unfortunately do not have an Alviso based desktop system in which to test our desktop parts.

Thus, we are resigned to testing against a high end Intel PCI Express platform. This comparison, as in our last mobile graphics article, will be used as a yardstick by which to measure the closeness of the notebook platform to a high end desktop. This time, the mobile processor is a little slower, but it's also matched to an Intel desktop platform.

The display on the Travelmate 8100 consists of a 1680x1050 panel. The 16:10 panel is quite nice for watching widescreen movies or working with multiple documents at a time. This does stretch most other normal resolutions, but this generally isn't a problem. The only issue we run into on tests like this is that the notebook can't run resolutions above the native vertical resolution. In order to perform these tests, we could hook up CRT and run the display to that. Of course, we will see that the MRX700 has plenty of work to do without looking beyond its native screen size.

Based on the panel resolution and the type of notebook and graphics solution we are dealing with, we decided to employ a resolution of 1280x1024 for our tests.

Our Acer Travelmate 8100 is configured as follows:
Intel Pentium M 2.0GHz
Intel Alviso based motherboard
1GB DDR2 533 4:4: 4:11
ATI Mobility Radeon X700 (clocked at 350/600)
Windows XP Service Pack 2 with DirectX 9.0c
ATI Catalyst Driver 8.083-041297a-020061C
And the desktop platform looks like this:
Intel Pentium 4 3.4GHz EE
Intel D925XECV2 motherboard
1GB DDR2 533 4:4: 4:12
ATI Radeon X700 Pro 128/256
Windows XP Service Pack 2 with DirectX 9.0c
ATI Catalyst Driver 4.11

Index Doom 3 Performance
POST A COMMENT

14 Comments

View All Comments

  • Hikari - Wednesday, March 02, 2005 - link

    This is something like 2x as fast as the 9700 mobility, get real. It is pretty much the equivalent of a 9700 pro desktop part, however. Reply
  • randomman - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    I realize that it would not be an exact comparison, but could you add some old benchies from the 9700 Mobility and 9800 M. This would give a better point of comparison than just against a desktop sys.
    Also are there any things available talking about the differences in power optimizations between the old 9700 and the X700?
    Reply
  • Guspaz - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    Is there much point to the review of of a notebook graphics chip that has NO comparison to any other mobile graphics chips?

    Personally I find the benchmarks in this review totally useless.
    Reply
  • Jep4444 - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    the big selling feature of this over the mobile 9700 is that it provides better battery life, it is also a more powerful chip than the mobile 9700 Reply
  • onix - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    How do we think graphics chip on this computer will compare to the Thinkpad T43p's ATI Mobility FIRE GL V3200 (128 MB)? Reply
  • bobsmith1492 - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    Yeah, I play Doom 3 on medium, 1280x1024; runs pretty well. Same processor too; P-M, but with regular DDR, OCd to 2.125. Reply
  • trikster2 - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    #6

    This is the same as the 9700 mobility????

    Blech.

    This is what we have been waiting for?

    Reply
  • arfan - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    where is the pictures? Reply
  • bobsmith1492 - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    So, basically this performs about the same as my 9700 mobility. Yay. Reply
  • L3p3rM355i4h - Tuesday, March 01, 2005 - link

    ho hum...how much does this thing weigh? Surely not as much as that brick XPS. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now