notebook empfehlung

Hallo!

Ich suche ein notebook in der 900€ klasse.
sollte einen pentium m prozessor haben und eine non shared grafikkarte. displaygröße ab 14 zoll. anwendungsgebiet: office, spielen, multimedia und interent surfen.

gibt um das geld ein besseres als diese hier?

http://www.geizhals.at/a151616.html

darf auch billiger sein. was ist mit turion prozessoren? taugen die was?

Zitat von iCA-

was verstehst du unter "spielen"?

non shared grafik

nein, da es nicht für mich sein soll und ich diese anforderungen so gelistet bekommen habe lassen wir es mal so im raum stehen. Wow oder irgendwelche high end spiele werden es nicht werden.

Sagen wir es mal so, NFS MW wirst mit dem ned zum laufen bekommen.

Ausser du stehst auf Ruckeln bei 640x 480 und lowest details. Für Spiele ist ein solcher Rechner absolut ungeeignet. Unter einer X700 128MB kannst du zocken vergessen. Ab da geht dann NFS MW in 1024x 768 und mittleren details bei 50 fps.

rofl wenn du meinst

[quote]System Specifications:

14" WXGA+ Glossy LCD (1280 x 768)
Pentium M 760 (2.0GHz 533MHz FSB)
GeForce 6200 Go 128MB
1GB DDR2 533 (2 x 512MB Supertalent)
100GB 5400RPM Hitachi Hard Drive
8X Dual Layer/Format DVDRW
Intel Pro Wireless 2915 (802.11a/b/g)
Integrated Bluetooth
6 Cell Li-Ion Battery
[/quote]

Das System bringt gerade mal so 1000 3dMark05 Scores.....

Das ganze deshalb da die 128MB der Graka nur mittels Turboshare aus dem Ram gezogen vornanden sind. Normal hat das Teil nur 32MB und muß schon aufpassen von ner X300 nicht geowned zu werden.
Bitte unterschätzt nicht das ein Notebook nunmal keine richtigen Grakas eingebaut hat. So ist eine X700 wie ich sie verbaut habe eine der wenigen die in etwa mit der Desktopvariante mithalten kann. --> X700 pro = ~ 9800pro.

[quote]GRAPHICS CARD CLASSES AND INDIVIDUAL CARD BREAKDOWN

Integrated

Integrated cards include Intel Extreme Graphics, Intel Extreme Graphics 2, ATI 320M/340M IGP, S3 or SiS chips -- If you're not planning on doing any gaming, or not doing any gaming beyond Quake 3, these types of cards will be satisfactory. However, if you do plan on gaming, avoid integrated cards at all costs. For what it's worth, I had a dedicated S3 chip with 16MB of video RAM in an old notebook that struggled with Unreal Tournament. 1999.

Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900/950:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit bus, uses memory shared with system
These get about as far as Unreal Tournament 2004, but the performance is still miserable and worse, while ATI's integrated parts will actually run pretty much any game out there (playability is another story entirely), Intel actually needs a compatibility list, as the GMA 900/950 won't properly run some games. Even though the GMA 900/950 also has more pipelines than the other IGP parts, it lacks some crucial modern features that chips like the X200M have, which explains its inferior performance to that part.

ATI Mobility Radeon 9000/9100 IGP:

DirectX Level: DirectX 8.1
Pipelines: 2 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bits, shared with system
Not completely miserable but not stellar, either. These usually are only found on Pentium 4 notebooks, and if they're only found on Pentium 4 notebooks, chances are you won't ever be using them anyhow. For the curious, though, Unreal Tournament 2004 and Half-Life 2 on low settings will be about as far as you'll go.

ATI Radeon Xpress 200M:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 2 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: Width varies; 16MB, 32MB, and 128MB
Now we're talking. This is alternately the good stuff and the most confusing stuff. As far as IGPs go this is the best you can get. Some versions of this actually come with 128MB of dedicated memory, which is weird, because it's an IGP. The smaller versions of these actually use HyperMemory coupled with a small dedicated buffer (the 16MB and 32MB parts), while the large one (128MB) uses HyperMemory to boost its addressable RAM to a very impressive 256MB, even though the core itself can't really use more than 128MB. Compatibility of this part is flawless and it'll play most games available barring the super intense ones, even if at very low resolutions. The 128MB version is, of course, the most desirable one.

Low End Dedicated Cards

Low end dedicated cards include the ATI Mobility Radeon, ATI Mobility Radeon 7500, ATI Mobility Radeon 9000, ATI Mobility Radeon 9200, nVidia GeForce 4 Go Series, nVidia GeForce FX Go 5200 -- These parts have actually been virtually eclipsed performance-wise by modern IGP parts. The GMA 900/950 and the Radeon Xpress 200M can offer comparable performance to these older dedicated parts.

ATI Mobility Radeon X300:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 64-bit/128-bit; 32MB (w/ HyperMemory), 64MB, 128MB
Dell has this nasty habit of demanding Dell-specific GPUs from ATI, and this is no exception. Dell's will have different X300s than the norm. The X300 is a curiosity in that the Radeon Xpress 200M is a stripped down version of it, while the X300 is itself a stripped down version of the X600. These generally provide the best performance in the low-end (barring the GeForce Go 6400), and the 128MB versions achieve performance comparable to a Mobility Radeon 9600. The HyperMemory version won't hit Doom 3, but will be acceptable performance-wise for most older games.

nVidia GeForce Go 6200 and 6400:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9c
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 64-bit width; 32MB (128MB after TurboCache) / 64MB (256MB after TurboCache)
These almost exclusively use TurboCache; I lumped them together because the 6400 is basically an overclocked 6200. These are passable in so much that they "play games," but their performance is less than stellar due to the lack of dedicated memory. Worse still, as I mentioned before, these are frequently mismarketed as having more video memory than they actually possess. While the Go 6400's performance is probably on par with an X300 with dedicated memory, the 6200 should generally be avoided.

Mainstream Cards

ATI Mobility Radeon 9600 (9550) (Pro) (Turbo):

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 32MB (64-bit), 64MB (128-bit), 128MB (128-bit)
This was a revolutionary graphics chip in its day and ushered in an era of notebook gaming. The Pro and Pro Turbo simply noted differences in memory and core speeds (different, faster memory was used). The 9550, which appeared in some Gateway 74xx series notebooks, was just an underclocked 9600. The performance of the chip is still somewhat impressive, and it will run all modern games, albeit some on low settings. Antialiasing and anisotropic filtering can be enabled on older games while keeping playable framerates. A 64MB Mobility Radeon 9600 should be considered the bare minimum for the casual gamer.

ATI Mobility Radeon 9700:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit; 64MB, 128MB
At the time of its release, this was the fastest notebook GPU available. In actuality, it's merely an incremental increase in speed from the 9600. The best way to describe it is "it's a little faster than the 9600." It'll give you better framerates than the 9600 did, and possibly a bump in detail for some newer games, but antialiasing and anisotropic filtering still remain essentially confined to older games.

ATI Mobility Radeon X600:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit; 64MB, 128MB
The PCI Express version of the Mobility Radeon 9700, for modern notebooks. It is in some cases slower, in some cases faster, than the 9700, but is essentially comparable. For what it's worth, I've used a 64MB 9600 and a 128MB X600, and found the performance jump to be slight. Notable, but slight.

nVidia GeForce FX Go 5700:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 4 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit; 64MB, 128MB
The slowest of the mainstream parts, the Go 5700 can provide performance comparable to a Mobility Radeon 9600, but generally falters on newer games that make extensive use of DirectX 9 features. As a general rule, the FX series of chips should be avoided, as they usually provide inferior performance to their ATI counterparts.

High End Cards

ATI Mobility Radeon 9800:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9
Pipelines: 8 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 256-bit; 128MB, 256MB
Sitting right around the middle of the pack in the high end game, the 9800 appears only in older Dell notebooks and offers performance comparable to a desktop 9800 Pro. The Mobility Radeon 9800 offers excellent performance and allows the use of antialiasing and anisotropic filtering on some recent games, and still performs well even on newer titles like FarCry, Doom 3, and F.E.A.R.

ATI Mobility Radeon X700:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9b
Pipelines: 8 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit; 64MB, 128MB
The X700 is mainstream on desktops, but its performance is nearly comparable to the Mobility Radeon 9800. It is only marginally slower, but is still a very impressive performer and is one of the most ideal GPUs on 15.4" notebooks. Its performance is comparable to a desktop Radeon X700 Pro.

ATI Mobility Radeon X800 (XT):

DirectX Level: DirectX 9b
Pipelines: 12 Pipelines (16 Pipelines for the XT)
Memory Configurations: 256-bit 256MB
At about the same level of performance as the GeForce Go 6800, the Mobility Radeon X800 is substantially harder to find and generally only appears in certain boutique notebooks. It offers performance comparable to a desktop Radeon X800 Pro, and will allow antialiasing and anisotropic filtering even in modern games with very playable performance. The XT version has been announced but, like the desktop XT PE editions, is virtually impossible to find.

nVidia GeForce Go 6600:

DirectX Level: DirectX 9c
Pipelines: 8 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 128-bit; 64MB, 128MB
The Go 6600's performance is comparable to a Mobility Radeon X700; the primary difference is the 6600 is more futureproof than the X700, supporting 9c as opposed to just 9b. As a result, some games, like Far Cry, will be able to turn on additional details as compared to the X700. For that reason, the 6600 is generally preferable. You can expect the 6600 to perform beautifully in all modern games, though you won't be able to run the extremely taxing games with antialiasing or anisotropic filtering at high resolutions. This is likely the most preferable GPU in the 15.4" range of notebooks.

nVidia GeForce Go 6800 (Ultra):

DirectX Level: DirectX 9c
Pipelines: 12 Pipelines
Memory Configurations: 256-bit 256MB
Generally regarded as the best GPU you can buy in a notebook, barring the MIA Mobility Radeon X800XT. The Ultra version is simply a higher-clocked version of this GPU, which offers incredible performance. It allows for antialiasing and anisotropic filtering even in modern games and will run any game you throw at it extremely well.

[/quote]

sieht mal nicht soooo schlecht aus...
Ich persönlich halte nix von Siemens..paar Schlechte Erfahrungen mit Support usw. gemacht. Aber kann auch nur Pech gewesen sein.

Da hast du natürlich recht, ich kann jetzt von meinem nicht gerade behaupten das er ne Rakete ist. Kostete 1400.- und bildet meiner Meinung nach den Einstieg ins mobile Gaming oder auch die gute Mittelklasse bei Notebooks. Alles drunter is maximal für Office zu gebrauchen und für sonst nix. Auch wird von vielen der Unterschied zwischen einem 1.73Ghz und einem 2.0GHz unterschätzt. Das sind bei Notebooks noch Welten! Mein book mit dem aktuellen Cata 5.13 - 2900 3Dmark05 Scores, nicht gerade der Bringer... Mit Omegadriver werdens dann 3000 sein was auch ned so der Hit ist für das Geld. Also nie vergessen, ein Desktop schlägt ein Notebook in punkto Performance um längen!

Das Siemens sieht ganz gut aus, die X700 128MB ist nur marginal langsamer als meine 256Mb Version. Allerdings kommt es dann stark auf die CPU an die du wählst. Den Unterschied zwischen 1.6GHz und 2.0GHz merkst du da wie Himmel und Hölle. 1GB Ram ist Pflicht bei nem Notebook, eine 80GB HDD is auch nicht schlecht da die meisten Hersteller nur ne Recovery Version von WinXP beilegen und für ihr Recovery bis zu 5Gb von Laufwerk reservieren.

Schneller ist der Siemens, schöner der HP. Ich halte wenig von Siemens, gehn bei uns in der Firma pausenlos in die Knie und zum Service....