right there with you man! Not many people are aware they are being cheated - whether its nVidia or Dell or ATI - Dell need to be clear what physical memory we are buying, none of this "shared"

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66182/Advertise_Graphics_RAM_correctly

But, you can't say that the information is not there. Select "help me choose" and all the info is right there.

For example: http://www.dell.com/content/learnmore/learnmore.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=gen&~ have to highlight, copy&paste the URL.

that is the point though benjesuit, when it says 256MB ATI etc on the sales page that is EXACTLY what we'd expect to be getting, why on earth should we have to search out an optional "help me choose" page only to find out it is NOT 256MB but 128MB plus shared memory that is rediculous.... It should say EXACTLY 128MB physical memory on the Sales page... it is not the comsumers responsibility to have to try to fathom out why graphics cards manufacturers have adopted this route of selling nor should it be their function to have to seek it out - it is misleading and contractictory sales marketing and I dare say in some communities possibly illegal.... when I buy RAM I wouldn't expect to purchase a 1GB stick to find out afterwards that its actually a 512MB stick and the rest is taken from virtual memory.... it is a cheap ploy based on peoples ignorance

I don't know, maybe it's just me... but I tend to keep up with Nvidia and ATI's models because specs are important if you're going to play games on your rig. For the average, aka "ignorant" user, it doesn't really matter as they more concerned with price than with specs. Notice how most of the manufacturers of PC's have dumbed down specs these days. Remember back just a few years ago when you could get fairly detailed specs? Yeah, well most people didn't even understand those specs and frankly didn't care all that much.

On the XPS units, these a bit more detail in specs because they know that the gamer or high end user greatly cares about such things. Most already know the specs of the components regardless of what Dell lists. Only a discrepancy would cause a stir.

Anyway, I sort of like your idea, but ultimately, the average user still doesn't understand what "shared memory" is or its impact. As far as they are concerned, what advantage is there in paying $200+ more for a dedicated memory card? And shared memory doesn't mean it's always sharing the full amount it is spec'd to share but that it will share up to that amount.

Sidebar: as far as illegal - not as long as Dell explains it somewhere on their site. And they put it in an appropriate area. Judges and juries are getting tired of lazy consumers who refuse to read.

The FTC has a power, known as "fencing in." This enables the FTC to bar misleading ads with respect to a particular product and across all of a business's other unrelated product lines. For example a testimonial constituting false advertising regarding product A (nVidia FX3500) could lead purchasers to believe that products B (nVidia FX350M Turbocache) and c (other checked items that cross-over from Dell's mid to high end range on the 'help me choose' link) must also be great. In that case, the FTC could bar use of the ad for products A, B, and C. I returned the FX350M Turbocache because I was lead to believe it was 512Mb physical like the FX3500 (it never stated shared on the bill of invoice) - consequently my graphics apps didn't work, that's what prompted me to look deeper and complain - maybe I should've looked deeper to start with? Or maybe the advertising should've clearly stated 512Mb physical and 512Mb shared on the two very very similar named products.....?

I can't see that I am alone, I am certainly not lazy, I have to purchase lots of different systems for different users and simple do not have time to research asterixed comments in linked pages to decypher what the numbering means... I hope the average user gets better information from the point of sale and not through trouble-shooting 3months down the road when their games don't work....

plus I think it would help the gaming world in general, more people would want the higher specs and we would steadily get cheaper high spec'd graphics ram win-win! :-)

The gaming community already knows the difference between the various cards, mostly before they're even released to the system manufacturer because they stay current with Nvidia and ATI's product lines.

Disagree on the FTC and the issue of misleading advertising. A shared memory video card will use up to whatever it's spec'd to use for video. A misleading ad would be one where it explicitly states that the memory is dedicated yet found to be shared. Or one where that information cannot be found conveniently on their site.

So let's say that Dell terms the cards as shared right up front. How many average users will actually know what it means and how many would even care? Hey, even on HP's site, they don't just like Dell. But they do have a link that says, "more info" which tells you about the video cards. But you have to click "specs."

All the information an educated consumer needs is mostly there to make an informed decision. The idea of false or misleading advertising, legally, is without merit.

With the internet, there really is no excuse for not knowing something before making a purchase. Did you know what shared memory was before you made your decision? If you did, you'd have wanted to make sure that the video card wasn't shared. I know I certainly would want to know given what I know beforehand about them.

Sorry if this all sounds insinuating and perhaps condescending, but false and misleading advertising is a serious contention. IMO, you shouldn't have gone there. A simple, "Dell should openly advise of shared versus dedicated memory" would have been better.

Not at all - i'm seeking clarity - forgetting the legality in all it's contention (I'm no Boston Legal and you are correct it is not the venue for it), still does not change the fact that the emphasis is on the purchaser to seek out information relating to the sale of the product when it is unnecessarily ambiguous. I don't have time to find the magic decoded ring hidden in some chain of weblinks, yet even calling the technical guys at Dell still resulted in a conference of pc engineers and finally a "hang on Ill have to find out whether our cards are the 3500 512Mb dedicated or 512Mb shared, and call you back" (Dell gets different nVidia cards with the same product number than other manufacturers apparently) - if from my experience, Dell's own sales and technical staff have to search out the specs, and these specs are not standard through differnt manufacturers - I do not think it is a fair statement to expect the customer to have to search through page after page of sites to find this information out - it should be explicitly clear to the customer what he or she is buying at the point of sale...

"All the information an educated consumer needs is mostly there to make an informed decision" - mostly there.... and that is the point... it's the missing bits that get us into trouble

"Dell should openly advise of shared versus dedicated memory" - sure I agree, just tell us what physical memory we are buying upfront - I applaud your knowledge on the subject but some of us want to jump on the page blast through clearly marked specs, get what we ask for and then get on with the rest of our jobs (unless it's Sunday night haha)

There are many items in the ordering process that require reading. For example, in order to get the mobile broadband antennae in the XPS1210, you need to order the the camera package. It is not "hidden" but it doesn't follow common sense (what does a video camera have to do with the mobile broadband). For this case, if you don't understand shared memory, then you probably really don't care about shared

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DYCWLGS...

In many ways this is not about how it is now, it is what it is - it's about what we want it to be like in the future.... If you could have clearer sales info on the products relevant to you, would you not want it? We state our opinions and ideas to let the people decide and help Dell with our needs - if its a bad idea then the promote number will drop to zero or negative, if people agree the number will rise - I count over 100 people who agree with this idea so far (maybe more taking into account demoting votes).... a small number perhaps, but if Dell want to act upon it then that is their perogative, and if not then so be it - it is opinion and I think the discussion is really interesting, to be honest I am suprised and happy that I am not the only person who has come accross this and applaud Dell for opening this type of discussion - and yes... I am cynical (but secretly hopeful) that it will actually change....

On a side note: I was in a store today looking at laptops - I noticed that ACER do put this information on their pc's whereas HP and Toshiba do not... After this learning experience my gut feeling was telling me (misguided or not) that if ACER can openly and confidently state this information then why shouldn't others?

bottom line is: information is available, its just a matter of research.
most low-end (eithter portable or desktop) systems use shared memory on the video card (turbocache/hypermemory) and its only implemented by dell, dell doesnt manufacture video cards (every card says either nvidia or ati).
those video card solutions belongs to the manufacturers, and they have the same information available on their website.

sigh... bottom line: "Don't advertise a 256MB video card for notebooks and then have a small footnote that says not really 256MB on board but 128".... if you agree promote - if you don't demote... it really is that simple of a suggestion... and we all had icecream, the end.

claypidgeon, your example about the M1210 isn't exactly the same as the TurboCache/HyperMemory marketing issue: Dell makes it very clear when you are in the configuration screen making your choice selections (even using red ink), that you must have the A/V Communications package if you want to use an internal Mini-Card cellular broadband module. I think a "Configuration Checker" pop-up appears as well. It is far harder to notice that these graphics processors don't actually have as much VRAM as they appear to.

drsevrin, thanks for an excellent post that managed to stir up a lot of debate! joffe, good posts! Excellent discussion, everyone! If you would like to vote on a similar post, here is mine about not even offering such video cards on XPS systems:

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66504/No_HyperMemory_or_TurboCache_grap...

Also, there's quite a problem with multiple similar posts, that never get to the level to get Dell to respond. I've made posts suggesting that we users should be able to associate related posts ourselves, and have a combined score for the associated posts:

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66450
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66451

Integrated graphic solutions are preferred due to the lower power consumption. Btw, the GMA uses UP TO 225MB (now 384MB with the X3100), so most of the game (when not gaming), it will only take a few MB's.

sayuuk - i agree with your comments but i must say that the dell customers do get cheated out of memory with the integrated graphics. gaming requires a dedicated video card PERIOD - there is no substitue to that (speaking as a gamer myself). on laptops, with the new santa rosa platform, you stated it will take 384MB from 1GB so imagine how slow vista will run. i know how slow it will be because i've tested vista on various systems with different memory configurations - it's not a pretty site to see Aero chugging along.

if dell is going to keep using GMA than it's only fair to it's customers for them to install, at a minimum, 1.5GB (1 x 1GB and 1 x 512MB) of memory in each laptop/desktop using GMA. desktops should be using dedicated vid cards in the first place to cut down the work load on the CPU.

the Intel GMA 950 is part of the Intel motherboard when you don't upgrade your intel system. The AMD uses an ATI graphics card, which is 256 but stil shares the RAM. Dell needs to offer dedicated video cards for notebooks 15 inches and below.

Also, an ATI X1400 HyperMemory does not have 256MB as advertised, it has 128MB and SHARES the another 128MB. As far as i know 128MB + 128MB = 256MB, but i really hated Dell when i found out, the information is not visible if you don't click the "Help me choose" button when you order. I do like gaming, and i really wanted 256MB of GPU memory. If they had told me i would have payed more for real 256.

Leave the integrated graphics on the low-end desktops. For high-end desktops, save a few pennies on mobo costs and leave it off.

merge/duplicate/variant of earlier

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66182/Advertise_Graphics_RAM_correctly
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66264/Dont_Advertise_a_256MB_video_card...
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66504/No_HyperMemory_or_TurboCache_grap...< lot of us have issues with the way graphics is represented for various reasons...

We just plain need decent video cards across the entire product spectrum. I want to buy a medium system (around $700-$800) with a decent video card. At that price most of the systems come with either integrated or a lame ATI card. That sucks and is steering me away from Dell.

I'm not a power gamer but today with the CPUs being SO powerful, Hard drives so large, the video card becomes a larger deciding factor. Give us some choice here.

4th mote

You should offer better video cards, but I prefer integrated- simply because I'm only using office/itunes/surfing the internet so I don't need graphics processing power and I cut down on power consumption.

dell definetly needs to use dedicated videocards for most of the laptops. But Of course there are those who dont game at all and dont need that power drain, so the most viable option seems to be to offer both dedicated (Better than whats offered now) and integrated and not just stick us to a few choices.

Very true.

Yeah when you order a system it says 512MB video ram, but it's actually 256 and 256 shared, but it only tells you that in the fine-fine print when you click More Info on the video options...very sneaky and hard to find for the normal user.

That's the problem when the marketing dept controls the advertisements, and not geeks who design, build and use them. Take note Dell... The users whom you target for these pc's are far smarter when it comes to tech!! Remember we are the cutting edge purchasers!

I agree, this is a no-brainer. Why risk the reputation of a premium brand with such a bone-head move? Dell should be looking for more ways to differentiate the XPS line, not more ways to muddy the waters. Offer the Turbo Cache and HyperMemory on the Inspiron line and below. If they want a value on high-end media features but don't want to spend the extra $50-$100 for a video card, link to the Inspiron- or the OLPC.

Could we merge the posts - there is power in numbers.... the problem is not just an XPS one, its a general "let's treat the customer as if they were idiots and try and scam them" problem - I had to raise complaints over a precision M series because they tried to sneak the 512 "turbocache" nonesense onto a machine that requires 512Mb dedicated graphics resource for CAE apps, see also;

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66182/Advertise_Graphics_RAM_correctly

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66264

Thank you, joffe. I've posted the suggestion that we users ourselves should be able to link related posts, and have a combined score for the entire group. I recently did a search for requests for backlit or illuminated keyboards, and in only a few minutes, I found over 6500 points worth of posts (the hottest post had 3300 votes). How many other hot ideas get lost because nobody sees the larger picture?

If you're interested, read my posts, make a comment, and vote on them:

http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66450
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66451

Waa Waa - If you don't know what you are buying, hjwasson - don't blame Dell, or any other PC company for your own ignorance and lack of research.

Know what you are buying - don't blame others for your mistakes.

reg, I wish you would give my posts more than a glance before posting a response. I DO know what I'm buying. In this post, I'm suggesting that low-end video cards don't belong within Dell's premier line of computers - they belong in the less highly touted lines. If my posts are too long to keep your attention, please refrain from responding to them. You only show ignorance by responding to a post with comments that don't actually address the post.

When buying XPS systems - don't you have the choice of what graphics cards to pick?

If you do, always go for the second to the top, or the top of the line card.

I usually buy the Second to the Top of the Line.

The Top Of The Line card from nVidia or ATI will absolutely give you the best Graphics - for a bucket full of cash!
The card will only be top of the line for a short time, like 8 to 11 months before the next great thing comes out.

Seeing no need to waste money, the second to the best card will give you excellent graphics,
better than those memory sharing cards, and almost as good as the Top Of The Line Cards.

I have found web sites like Tom's Hardware to be a wonderful resource for learning the real performance specs of
Graphics cards:

Spring 2007 Graphics Card Line Up





Also check out:The Best Video Game Cards for the Money.

Good link Reg, thanks for posting, however doesn't help with the FX3500 vs FX350M series, it doesn't help with critical CAE apps that require dedicated memory because the gaming link is not always relevant to the way users handle memory, for example my older 256MB dedicated card could only handle one large OpenGL CAE app at a time, more than one and the refresh would kill the computer, the core memory required to run the apps we use in the CAE industry can typically surpass 500MB for models with a large number of nodes displayed on the screen (these nodes are handled through the graphics to build a mathmatical representation of a 3D model and can swallow resource). My new 512MB dedicated can handle 3 large models (also partly due to an increase in physical RAM) this allows me to multi-task on several projects at once and make my customers happy, imagine the disappointment when I ordered a 512MB which resulted in similar re-freshing and a slow-down in resolving customers models, as it turned out the 512MB card I requested was an FX350M 512MB and not a FX3500 512MB - Dell sells to a large market of users with different needs, some of those users have a distinct need to use the machines for business use and do request components on the basis of what Dell is showing on the sales description as is - the business community does not always have the ability or time to search through forums (mainly because forums are blocked on our web and we have time constraints) and require Dell to inform us of the correct information when we request it on a basis of business trust - it has not been my experience, Dell were unable to tell me upfront whether the cards they sold were shared or dedicated, the confusion seemed to stretch into Dell's own sales force and resulted in protracted communication with Dell's technical managers slowing down the whole purchase and resolution of the problem. If this were the case for me, how many other users only find out they have issues with their equipment after they buy from Dell, only to be disappointed and purchase another manufacturers pc the next time - Dell needs to take an active responsibility in ensuring it informs its customers on the specifications of the components they require (or at the very least have the sales information available to their own staff when we call in with the question because ironically they don't) or even better have that information available upfront on the sales page.

Most of the detractors for the idea of advertising memory correctly is based on the concept that "most users are ignorant/lazy" or assume "most users do not need to know the specifics upfront"

Assumption is the mother of all ****-ups and I find the attitude quite elitist, I didn't intend to challenge this paradigm, but the GPU community is not just for gamers - I for one was just requesting the information to be displayed upfront to avoid confusion and improve clarity and still think its a great idea to do that... what joe bloggs does with this information is up to them.

There was some SuperDuper Graphics card from Germany - my company bought 2 of them.
Each one was like, $4,000 - just for the video card. Packed with RAM and custom drivers for CAD software and modeling software, those cards could run animation in real time - that the top of the line GPU consumer grade cards would need a weekend to render.

I can't remember the name - the box and documentation was all in German / English. A custom workstation card for engineers.

Nice post, reg. Yes, with XPS systems (like any other system Dell offers), you do get a choice on which GPU you want to purchase. But those choices are always constrained by what Dell chooses to offer with that system. My reasons for creating this post are:

1. XPS is Dell's premier line of consumer computers, both desktops and notebooks. As such, they are the flagships of Dell's offerings, and Dell makes them flashy and eye-catching because they are meant to be shown off. You can consider them the flashy sports cars of Dell's lineups.

2. People who purchase XPS systems desire high-performance systems. Most of them like these systems to be bold, because the are proud to be seen using the best. Granted, there are some people who would prefer a "stealth" high performance system that wasn't visually bold.

3. Offering low-performance parts in a high-performance line cheapens the entire line. It's like putting a 100 HP four-cylinder engine in a Porsche, when people are expecting a 250 HP turbo. When people see that car, they'll be wondering what's under the hood, and if the driver is just a poser. Same with XPS computers - is that an nVidia 7950 under the hood, or something pathetic? If people purchasing an XPS M1710 don't care about graphical performance, they should be purchasing an Inspiron 9400 or E1705.

4. The only reason I suggest allowing Intel integrated GPU's (as long as the user can upgrade later) is that I do realize that we sometimes stretch our budgets to the breaking point to get something we badly want - and giving the user the ability to build their dream system in steps would allow more users to do it. Utilizing integrated video, but having a drop-in socket for an upgrade GPU would allow for this. I do realize this violates my rule about not cheapening the line, and I would be okay with dropping it.

I'm not sure how many consumers are research hounds like us, reg, though I suspect that the majority of IdeaStorm members are! Thanks for your post on Tom's Hardware. I regularly check both www.tomshardware.com and www.anandtech.com for performance reviews, as well as Googling for reviews on whatever hardware I'm curious about at the moment.

http://www.engadget.com is another great tech news site too.

Who else posts stories like this?

DARPA's C-Sniper program to detect, neutralize enemy snipers.



Get Those D@m Campers! ! !

ROFL! That's beautiful! D@m Campers indeed....

Another favorite site of mine: http://slashdot.org/

And if you're into political parody: http://www.theonion.com

Computers companies make more money by listing the low-end graphic cards, with the High-End computer. They will include the low-end card with the computer. Then the customer will have to pay $200 or more to get a better card.

Ha! jhill25570 - that's genius! Evil Genius, but still quite the fast move there...

Next, we'll be seeing sharks with lasers....

I wish that your comment was the whole story, jhill - because there could be a happy ending if users simply could choose a better card. Sadly, on the M1210 - the best option is the "256 MB" nVidia Go 7400 TurboCache (64MB VRAM/ up to 192MB shared DRAM). A mere 25% of the claimed RAM is video RAM, and there is no better card offered! Yes, on an XPS rig - can you believe it? Thus my offended stance that led me to make this post in the first place!

 http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2965&review=XPS+M1210+Review

Wrong! Don't eliminate NVidia on XPS! Besides, the NVidia video cards for XPS are alwas dedicated 100%, not shared.

winoffice, I'm afraid that you are incorrect about the nVidia cards always being 100% dedicated video RAM on XPS systems. If any nVidia graphics card has "TurboCache" appended to its name, then it only has a little bit of video RAM, and the rest of it's claimed memory is shared system memory. The same goes for ATI graphics processors that have "HyperMemory" appended to their names.

However, I completely agree with you that Dell should not eliminate nVidia from their offerings - that would be the exact opposite of what I want. I want more high end graphics card choices for XPS systems, not less.