Shared Video Memory plus CM, does it work?

[kipanderson]

Shared Video Memory plus CM, does it work?

Hi,

May I first apologies for posting this enquiry here, but there I two reason why I hope Madmatt will tolerate this question post in this forum.

Firstly, other than word processing, I use my computer almost solely for CM. Secondly the guys here often know what they are talking about so I would value their help.

Question is, how well does “shared video memory” work in laptops? If there is, say, 32mb or 64mb of shared video memory in a laptop will CMBO and, of course, CMBB run OK on the system?

I have read a lot about the different graphic cards but know nothing about shared video memory.

Thanks for your help,

All the best,

Kip.

[ 12-26-2001: Message edited by: kipanderson ]</p>

[WWB]

Shared memory will work with CM, from what I understand. And, if you have enough RAM in the laptop (at least 256mb) then the shared RAM is not that big of an issue.

The main problem is that graphics processors which use shared memory also tend to be substandard in and of themselves. Likely certain functions (fog, transparency, etc) will not be supported and speed will be poor at best.

But it will work.

WWB

[Schrullenhaft]

wwb_99 is right. Most 'video cores' that utilize shared memory tend to be substandard 3D performers and may lack in support for several DirectX features like fog and transparency, etc.

Shared memory video devices (also denoted as 'UMA' architecture) take a portion of your main system memory and use that as dedicated video memory. Most of these schemes max out at 8Mb for the display memory. They tend to be poor performers since the activity (reads and writes) on the memory allocated to video affects the overall memory bandwidth. Your main memory is also typically slower than most of the better video card memory. For most 2D apps this really isn't much of a problem, but for a 3D game it is really undesirable.

Some laptops (and economy desktops) have resorted to shared memory video schemes to cut down on cost and (in the case of laptops) save power by having fewer electrical devices using energy.

If you have the money, I'd suggest purchasing (if that's what your currently considering) a laptop with a GeForce2 Go video chipset (16 or 32Mb of dedicated video memory). However these video chips tend to be in more expensive laptops. Another good candidate is the ATI Rage (now there are Radeon) Mobility chipsets with 8 or 16Mb of video memory (though they won't have fog and it is questionable whether they support transparencies properly - but they may). I'm not sure what to think of the S3-based video chipsets in laptops since I haven't looked at them lately (some of them may be shared memory).

[Silvio Manuel]

My HP 6645C has a 2 MB (maybe 4MB?) shared video chip. I do, however, have 191MB normal ram. I use mostly high-res mods, except for certain buildings (Panzertruppen's?) that slow it down too much.

I don't have serious problems, even while playing monsters like an 8000 pt. Armor ME scenario. OTOH, I wouldn't know if it looked way crappier than it should. Also, I don't get any fog.

[kipanderson]

Gentlemen, hi,

Thanks for all the help. This is exactly the sort of information I was after. Clearly, Shared Video Memory will not quite do the trick. If I want all the features CM has to offer, I will have go for a branded graphics card. In my reading on the subject I had already reached the view that in laptop graphics cards the GeForce2Go and the ATI Radeon Mobility were the two leaders. Will keep a look out for them. In fact all the best, most famous brands of laptop, Dell, Toshiba, Sony… seem to use them already. No doubt because they are all there is at the moment for serious graphics use in laptops. ATI even produce a 64mb laptop graphics card used by Dell. There seems to be a real rush on to produce quality cards for laptops. All to the good.

Thanks again,

All the best,

Kip.