*OFFICIAL* Alienware M18x Benchmark Thread

With my 320 series Intel SSD, the system fly's! Another friend of mine has an OCZ Vertex 3 240GB and his drive puts up some insane numbers.

 

@The1TruJok3r

I'm excited that you managed to get the M4 working. Did you only have to change the before mentioned things in the registry to make it stop stuttering? Is the system stable when you switch to IGP and run on battery?

 

I also have a 160GB Intel 320 coming, looking forward to benching it.

 

here is a comparison between the g2 vs 320 series.

 

Your 4k's are low but nice otherwise!

 

not the fastest but i'm satisfied. was thinking of getting a 600gb 320 series but need to sell off my 300gb first.

 

Your 4ks are low on both drives, not just the 320

I will compare the 2 directly tomorrow night as well when mine gets here

 

Only 19k in 3dmark 06? My 5870's were putting out better figures, anyone with a 2920xm and dual 6970ms care to share their 3dmark 06 scores?

 

really? thought it was comparable to other intel benches i've seen. haven't tweaked anything on it.

 

You know 06 is an abysmal gauge of modern hardware performance right?

That score was also the lowest CPU not an extreme

And here is my 160GB and 80GB Intel G2 scores inap

 

wow your right. any tips to get it up to speed????

 

Check out the tweaks from the SSD thread that we had for a while (think it is in the SSD forum now)

 

no i want you to re-write every single step for me. hahahah j/k

i'll check it out, thanks bud.

 

Really want to see someone do stock benches, 2630, 6970 CF, 4gb Ram, 7200 RPM HD ....

 

Off topic but i had an inspiron 1720 and loaned it to my brother but it was still one of the best systems I've owned to date.

 

I am a bit disappointed to hear about The Witcher 2 having problems on this system. I don't see why it should, given the specifications. Perhaps the cards are a bit starved at the moment. I know that the argument about just one card running the game isn't enough to satisfy the issue since the performance at it stands is below 10 FPS, which means even with two cards things won't look promising. I think there's more to be had from this system and people will quickly figure it out. Hell, this could also be a driver-maturation issue. So I shall keep positive. Besides, those benchmarks look bloody awesome!

Also, it seems clear that out of the box, this thing is matching and in some cases, exceeding tweaked out R2 performance after months of diligent hardwork and research from the benchmarking community. That observation by itself is noteworthy. Dell's stuff at stock is usually crap! I doubt that such a trend has suddenly taken a 180 degree turn for no apparent reason.

--

More importantly. . . d*mn! This would be a great performance jump from my R1. I never bothered to use the R2 -- sitting boxed as new.

. . .

I VANT! And I have a plan! Once the dust settles and the stoke-reading for this machine reaches a stable point, I will use the most proficient means of stealth infiltration, and nab BatBoy's M18x. Upon seeing that task through to the final letter, I shall have fulfilled the ancient prophecy and satisfied the requirements of my legacy as the harbinger of the apocalypse.

"First he shall rip-off Dell, then he shall rip-off Dell again, and then. . . he will steal the omnipotent artifact from the Dark Boyish Knight." -- Translated excerpt from obscure ancient Sumerian scripture (Dated 2600 BC)

The benchmarks and sheer power of this behemoth -- once unshackled --shall bring forth and offer prelude to. . . The Revolution!

Seriously though, I want this machine. . . badly.

 

Could not agree with you more, thus my upgrade

 

Man i swear, I got the worst 6970M on the planet. Mine maxes out at like 800/1000.

I always get shafted with GPUs that can't handle overclocking.

 

isn't m18x support Sata lll? why those crystaldiskmark bench almost same like r2?

 

Because if you use a Sata 2 drive even on a Sata 3 port you still get Sata 2 speeds

And Kevin_Jack, Clevo cards tend to not overclock as high as Dell ones if the 5870s are any indicator.

 

damn.. brian hitting around 7.6k in 3dmark 2011 w/ blk oc & gpu oc. these laptops have potential.

 

3DMark 11 out of the box (1 HD and only 4GB of memory) is:
P5652 ( Result)

3DMark06:
22716 ( http://3dmark.com/3dm06/15730250)

 

install the official 11.5 and youll get a massive boost in 3dmark 2011 and games

 

That is my plan, just wanted a base to start with. Just put in my 2nd HD and memory a nd am now doing installs. This laptop is sick so far though

 

Why do people still use 3DMark 06? Terrible gauge of performance, thus the 06.

 

But it gives the biggest numbers, and people really like that lol

 

Also to compare to systems that can't run 11.

 

That is what vantage is for......

 

^
|
|
|
Not that I'm hostile to you or something, haha, I just ask because you shouldn't waste your time with the Benchmark anymore.

 

noone has c300 or m4? it support sata 3.

 

Some people do. Personally the only Sata 3 drives I would consider are the Intel 510 series but they are too pricey per GB right now for me. I love the Intel reliability. I am done with SandForce drives and especially done with OCZ.

My dream SSD would be an Intel Sata 3 drive using an Intel controller but that is not happening at all this year

 

Don't get me wrong, I will still be running 06 haha - I happen to like big numbers

 

I can't wait to see someone bench with a ssd sata 3's insane boot up speed.

 

The boot speed is not that much better actually....Sata 3 drives have about the same 4k speeds as Sata 2 drives, just the sequentials got bigger mainly. That is why I did not feel bad getting myself an Intel 320 instead of a 510

 

Unfortunately this isn't the case. One of our T|I guys got a vertex 3 240gb and his 4k numbers annihilate my Intel 320 series. Of course, if I perform registry tweaks things may change but out of the box, the vertex 3 is king by far.

 

Interesting, the initial Vertex 3 benches had not wowed me too much

 

Did one of your T|I guy tells what's boots up speed he got?

PS : I know im annoying , but I'm fans of boot up speed lol

 

I'm telling you, after tons of reading and asking and personal emails to Anand from Anandtech, the Crucial M4 is the winner right now! Can't beat the price for performance and they're reliable. They are just as reliable as the Intel Drives and use the same controller also.

 

Upgraded to a Crucial M4 128gb. Here is the proof even the 128gb drive is fast....very fast. Windows 7 Boot time on fresh install to Desktop is 16 seconds. Memory score went from 7.6 to 7.8 on the Hyper-X Kingston 1600mhz in Intel XMP profile 2.

 

Thank you very much for posting the M4 info. It looks like it is a solid choice for those who don't want to spend the extra for the Intel 510 or OCZ Vertex 3. It will be interesting to see how the other sata III, Corsair Force 3, will perform as well.

 

Where are the "benchmarks" for some video games? Like these for Crysis 2: Crysis 2 GPU & CPU Performance Test > Benchmarks: Extreme Performance - TechSpot Reviews. That is what I am interested in seeing....

 

@ The1TruJok3r , Thanks man Rep + love to see 0% cpu usage lol

 

Could someone with 6970M Xfire run furmark multiGPU 1.82 and have two instances of GPU-Z open and report back what the differences in temperatuers are between GPU 1 and 2? My GPU 2 is reporting 10C higher temps despite having just repasted both GPUs. Looks like I may have to go back in and open up the system. BTW, the M18x is MUCH harder to open than the R2, there's a high risk of breaking something when dealing with the M18x. I would only recommend advanced users messing with it.

 

it's not in keeping with some of the hardware accessibility improvements made to the M17x R3?

 

Some aspects are much improved (e.g. media bar) but getting to the GPUs and CPU...not an easy task. And it looks like I gotta go back in again and repaste GPU 2 sigh.

 

what are your temps like Brian on load and idle?

 

What are the load temps?

 

would think the design engineers had kept hardware access a priority on such a model, especially with the units overall build quality reportedly quite high...

 

Let's face it, all these new SATA III drives are exactly that, new, so no one knows the reliability. One persons opinion does not truth make, no matter how experienced.

 

After repasting GPU 1 doesn't go above 77C with furmark on xtreme settings. However GPU 2 runs about 5-9C hotter despite being careful with the paste job. I opened it up again and repasted, tested it this time with the system half assembled and noticed that if I press down on the heatsink for GPU 2, the temps drop and fall in line with GPU 1. So that tells me the sink isn't making full contact like it should despite being screwed in all the way. I either got a bum heatsink from the factory (in which case I'll call tomorrow for a system replacement) or they are all like that by design.

When one of you gets your system in tomorrow, could you run furmark multigpu 1.82 + two instances of GPUz and see how the temps compare between both GPUs and post your results here? Thanks.