*OFFICIAL* Alienware M11x Owners Lounge - Part 2

of course the only dumb here must be you, it's a similar configuration with only changes in GPU and CPU... the reviewed unit has a better CPU and a worse GPU... and get's a much better score in 3dmark... so it's obvious that m11x kit of GPU + CPU is worse than the kit of the reviewd system... and since m11x has a better GPU the only conclusion is that the cpu is a bottleneck...

 

http://translate.google.com.br/tran...ura-hawk-nkrt-1096/3&sl=de&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8


page translated to english.

 

"Our gaming benchmarks confirm the low performance of the G300M Plus Series. Notebooks with an older ATI Mobility Radeon HD4650 and a strong dual-core processor to achieve higher frame rates than the Samsung R580 with the Nvidia GT 330M"

how weak is that graphics chip?

 

That was kind of mean. Anyway, I will reiterate my two points:

1) The Samsung is a completely different laptop. It has both a different GPU and a different CPU, so comparing the M11x with it is silly.
2) Synthetic benchmarking software does not give a very accurate representation of how a computer will play various games. Using 3DMark as the biggest determining factor in a purchase is flawed.

And nothing is obvious right now because the M11x hasn't been released. You can't accurately say that the M11x will outperform or perform less than any other laptop right now until enough of us have gotten it into our hands.

 

youd be surprised how many times conductive reasoning fails when figuring out conputers

 

either way, like I said it's 3dMark06, if you want to compare those numbers then yay fun for you, but you should compare numbers that really mean something for whatever it is you value. Gaming? then get some actual gaming benchmarks, I prefer in-game benchmarks like using Crysis' or Street Fighter IV etc. 3Dmark06 gives you an idea of where something might lie but in this case I don't find it too helpful, especially since we know the i5 is a great processor and that will add to the score yet may not do us a whole lot when it comes to gaming (if this is what is important to you).

If encoding files and things like that is more important to you then other benchmarks are better suited.

 

I think we're all missing a couple points:
-This is a SECONDARY computer... you probably shouldn't be buying it if you intend to do ALL your hardcore gaming on it
-Comparing computers with different hardware in synthetic benchmarks doesn't really make too much sense. Instead, maybe consider the whole "it runs crysis at 50fps on full res" thing. Thats worth more in my book than some unbalanced number.
-Whats everyones deal with max settings? Its not like you're gonna see every leaf on a tree on the 11" screen anyways--if need be you can turn down the detail and get a few extra fps.

Thats just my opinion, and as an ultra-portable gaming solution, I think alienware has done DARNED well. how about we get pumped to see some full reviews for these shiny bad-boys'??

 

Most of us understand what your saying here, don't bother trying to explain to the rest it is impossible I assure you LOL Some people seem to be really sensitive in this thread about Sony Z and it will just end up with a flamewar.

 

has anyone been disappointed by the built-in ethernet being only 100Mb? I remember when I bought my Dell XPS m1200 years ago that really bummed me out. I thought I could get around the 100Mb ethernet in the M11x with a gigabit express card, but there's no express card slot. grr! It's really keeping me from buying one.

 

thank you for your words... I was called a dumb because the guy couldn't see the point in my comparasion.

 

We all understand, just none of us agree. And no one is sensitive about the Z, just compare the M11x to a computer in its own class, not something that's $1,000 more.

This. I'm getting this laptop because I plan on using it for moderate gaming (I'm not very hardcore) and dual-booting Linux. If you want hardcore gaming, get a hardcore gaming laptop. Not an 11.6" (but for an 11.6", this box is the best).

 

serious question, what do you use the ethernet port for? Network transferring files? I use the ethernet occasionally at work when the wireless fails me but it seems to do everything I need, plus the internet speed is only 9mbps anyway. So my guess is for transferring large files across a local network?

 

I'm sorry, I didn't call you dumb. I said it's dumb (silly) to compare computers with different hardware.

I see your point, but it's... wrong. You can't compare two completely different laptops and expect it to give you reliable results. I understand that the GPUs are in the same series but they just aren't the same thing.

 

Dunno about other people, but my internet speed is 75bit. And I don't have powerboost.

My entire network is on 9k jumboframes. a 100mbit adapter thrown in kinda kills things. I'll have to have my server stream at normal MTUs, and I'll lose 20-30% network performance from my WHS.

I might have to setup a secondary WHS just for the slower devices.

 

it's obvius to me that if a machine has 1000 3dmark06 points over the other it's IMPOSSIBLE that it performs worse in "real" 3d games...

 

Some games are GPU dependent, others are CPU dependent. The M11x might play GPU games better than a computer that has a better CPU and vice-versa. But according to you, using the score from 3DMark, the Samsung will play every game better. This just isn't true.

 

Umm, I may have missed something here, but how in any way is it dumb to compare computers with different hardware? Isn't that the entire point of benchmarking? To compare how different computers run versus each other?

Now I just ordered an m11x, but I'm also completely realistic about my expectations. It is basically a POWERHOUSE netbook/ultraportable, nothing more.

Is the CPU going to hold back the GPU? Probably, a little, yes. Does it really matter? For what this machine is, no it does not. If this was a 13.3inch computer, it'd be a different story. But for a 11.6inch laptop, these specs are pretty damned impressive. CULV C2D or not.

 

fscussel was using the Samsung as a basis for how well the M11x would perform.

 

3dMark06 is VERY CPU dependent

That's because at its's default (or lower res) settings, the CPU becomes the limiting factor - the GPU might be utilizing only 50% of its capabilities, so it depends on the CPU to send it information faster to utilize it

3dMark06 does NOT at all translate to real world game performance - yes, it can provide an idea of "relative" performance, but consider a few factors:

1) What resolution was the 3dMark06 score benched at for the GT335M and M11x? The Samsung was benched at 1280 x 720, which is a lot less than the default 1280 x 1024

2) Look at a recent notebook bench: the ATI 5650. http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-5650-Graphics-Card-Review.24035.0.html

It performs worse in 3dMark06 than the GTS 250M and 9700M GTS, and is on the same level as the 4670 Mobility... but it beats them in games, and some times get's close to the GTX 260M despite being way behind in the synthetic benchmarks...

And..

3) To illustrate CPU limitations, look at benchmarks of default setting 3dMark06 on desktop 5870's with a stock Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Quad and compare the scores to say... a GTX 260 on the same CPU. There's a good chance the scores will be very close (probably in the 12k-15k range) - but the 5870 will easily smoke the GTX 260 in real world games.

 

From what I saw, in certain games, it's likely to perform better than the m11x. But I'd rather have my "alien" glowing looking m11x than a Samsung that may, at best, perform slightly better in certain games.

At this point, it's all speculation. On both sides of the argument. But from where I stand, the m11x will do just fine.

I'm betting my cards that the fate of the m11x rests in just how far the SU7300 can be overclocked. Am I wrong to assume it can be pushed further than 1.73 GHZ? If we can get this baby to 2.0GHZ, well, lets just say I'm whiping the drool off the floor.

All I know for sure is the m11x will defecate on, ridicule, abuse, toy with, and then obliterate the HP 311 mini 11.6 inch netbook I used for a couple months.

And you know what's funny? I thought that was a "powerful" netbook with the Ion and all. And then Alienware drops this. WHAAAAT.

You guys have to remember, TECHNICALLY, the m11x is a netbook with notebook specs.

 

Thank you, everything else you said is important but I didn't want to quote a super long post just a few posts above me.

Basically you explained what I was trying to say. We need real world gaming benchmarks to do any [fair] comparison. Give me some numbers (FPS) of how that samsung runs MW2 at 1366x768 at all highs in single player mode or L4D2 or ME2 and then we have ourselves some good comparisons to work with.

 

I have to admit, at first, I was guilty of not seeing the very things I'm pointing out in my above post.

I was unhappy with the CPU, for instance. Then it just kind of dawned on me how I was viewing this from the wrong perspective.

 

Is there any package under 15 inches that beats the M11x? I don't believe there is. I'm not sure how 13.3 vs 11.6 makes a difference in this case.

 

fscussel, you may not be dumb but you sure are acting like it.

Do you realize you're comparing a samsung benchmark to the official benchmarks released by alienware? Every piece of info involved with the m11x has downplayed the overclocking, even both major reviews did all their benchmarks with the cpu at its standard 1.3ghz.

If the cpu on the m11x really is the major bottleneck in the system, and it got 1000 less 3dmark06 points at the standard 1.3ghz (dont forget that also includes DDR3 being clocked at 800 instead of 1066 mhz) what exactly do you think is going to happen when it is OC'ed to 1.73ghz? It's going to get a minor 50 point bump and still be 950 points behind?

Not only that, it's well know 3dmark06 is a very cpu-bound test, terrible for benching overall gaming performance. Have you seen the tests they run? They basically throw 100 units on screen and have them in a firefight. How exactly is this indicative of a game like mass effect 2 where you're at most fighting 5 or 6 enemies at once. Or civilization 4 where each of the 20 units on screen aren't fully bump mapped brown-world space marines. I think 3dmark06 even has a test that is even more overtly CPU-bound and runs at like 2fps even on hardcore i7 and phenom desktop CPUs, at least in my experience.

Not only that, 1000 points less than a laptop with a non-ULV i5 cpu with turboboost? I'm surprised you didnt mention that and just say WIN WIN WIIIIIIIIIIIIIN. In all respects with that huge of a cpu jump it should be more like 5000 points and we haven't even begun to overclock.

 

Eggs Scrambled (or another informed poster) posted tens of pages back about how the BIOS is very hard to crack so it might be a while before we can overclock up to 2.0GHz (or something to that effect). But there's a very minute heat increase when overclocked to 1.73GHz so it looks like it could handle the overclock.

 

I mentioned this earlier but it bears repeating. No one knows if AW tested the machine with the CPU overclocked. If not there is the possibility of even greater performance with the final product. A 33% overclock from stock is quite nice. I was happy to discover this after I had ordered the machine.

 

13.3 inch screen sizes are where i5/7 CPUs start popping up.

 

3dmark06 has two parts, cpu tests and gpu tests and the end result of both of those tests is how the score is created. What should be shown is both the end score and the seperate cpu and gpu tests. Then we will get a better idea of how to compare the two laptops.

 

With as cpu-bound as the m11x is at stock, I wouldn't be surprised if we were looking at a straight percentage conversion of the 3dmark06 points comparison.

If true, this would mean we would be at least expecting that the 6100 3dmarks is only 75.14% of the 1.73ghz overclock score which would be 8118 3dmarks. This doesn't even take into account the ddr3 going from 800 to 1066mhz, so lets just shave whatever benefit that would give and call it a day since we're already 1000 more than the i5/330m combo.

Let's also assume that with either setfsb or a bios mod to the bios we can get it to 2GHZ stable, which is barely more than the stable 1.73ghz so I think it's a valid possibility. the 1.3ghz is only 65% of 2ghz so the 6100 would be 65% of what would be a 9384 3dmark score. Let's just knock 384 off that for obvious overcompensating and again lets not care about the ddr3. So we're looking at about 9000 3dmarks from the cpu being OC'ed to 2ghz.

As silly as these math problems were, it follows from the silly comparison of dell's supplied 3dmark score at possibly different settings from a samsung i5/330m combo. And it shows how much a cpu-bound test can be deceiving, because you can just overclock the cpu and your 3dmarks go up rapidly.

Again with this knowledge it shows how well off we are if a 11 inch ultraportable with a comparatively crappy cpu is anywhere close to a standard laptop with an i5 with its turboboosting up to 2.9ghz and such. I mean COME ON how can you not be excited by that.

 

Yeah, but the best GPU is the 330m for those. The M11X has the most powerful GPU for 14" and under.

 

Basd upon the size on the PDF posted on this thread...this case will not work:

Solo TCA511-4 Tech Collection Netbook Mini Instant Messenger Bag ($32.09) (airport security-friendly)


Computer Model
Alienware M11x
Dimensions
Height (Front and Back)
32.7 mm (1.29 inches)
Width
285.7 mm (11.25 inches)
Depth
233.3 mm (9.19 inches)
Weight with 8-cell battery
(starting at)
1.99 kg (4.39 lb)

Solo specs say the laptop pocket is 6.5 by 11 by 2

 

Amen, people seem to get so bent out of shape over this. Just because there are other laptops just as nice or even nicer or more powerful etc than the 11x does not make it any less of a laptop it's still a very nice machine especially for the price.

 

it's true but I can't help but feel as much as I'm overjoyed about this it's really just a 330m with like 24 added SPs. So you have to be able to utilize them, I'm still wondering exactly how much the cpu bottlenecks at 1.73ghz.

 

Thats not how 3dmark scores are generated. The CPU score is only a small percentage of the total score (i think it might be 20% or so, i have a hard time remembering from my benching days) so if you increase the cpu score a bunch, but the gpu score stays the same it won't have as massive an effect as if you overclocked the GPU and left the cpu the same. If that makes sense.

 

Woops, thanks. I'll update the list. I think I got the bag's dimensions confused with another.

 

That's most likely with the processor at 1.3GHz.

 

I know that .

My point was, if the m11x was an m13x, it'd be a bit easier to expect a better processor. But in the 11.6 inch form factor, you have the best GPU, as you pointed out, and a decent but unspectacular CPU (but crazy good for 11.6 inch form factor).

 

i dont think it would be safe to overclock to 2ghz, or if its even possible so that shouldnt really be crossing anyones mind other than the hardcore modders

 

Why not?

The SU7300 is a downclocked and undervolted C2D. This isn't a regular 2.6GHZ C2D that we're pushing to 3.2 or something.

I could be wrong (I'm no expert on this stuff), but it shouldn't be too much of a big deal once the Bios are cracked.

 

24 SP's is massive in the GPU world. There is no doubt that cpu dependant games (much of the Valve games, and most RTS's) will not reach their maximum potential because of the CPU. But other games (most first person shooters, minus valve games) shouldn't be hindered too much from the CPU (because so much is stressed on the graphics).

 

Who knows where the safe limit will be. It's quite possible that 2.3ghz could be safe, you never know till you can fiddle with the fsb/voltages. Hell my core i7 920 is stock at 2.66 and OC's easily to 3.8ghz (4 cores) no sweat. It's all based on each cpu, as well as how much heat can be dispersed with these fans.

 

That's how 3dMarkVantage is scored. 3dMark06 is much much more CPU dependent (note: i didn't say CPU scored, but the final score depends a LOT on the CPU)

A 3dMark06 calculator by guys who bench daily: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=102058

Play around with the numbers. Early on, keeping SM 2.0 and SM 3.0 low, the doubling of CPU score doesnt mean a lot. Now put SM 2.0 and SM3.0 high, and see what happens...

CPU score affects the 3dMark06 score non-linearly, especially as SM2.0/3.0 scores get higher

The reason why 3dMark06 is still used by extreme benchers is because it requires the system ALL AROUND to be powerful. Hence people put the processor under dry ice to get to 5+ GHz and overvolt and overclock the GPU's... 3dMarkVantage is much more GPU oriented so increasing the CPU provides far less of a boost

Better yet, look around on the internet for some benchmarks people do on their own. See what people score on a 5870 with a stock Core 2 Quad to when they overclock it... the final score skyrockets

 

A lot of the reviewers have tested L4D and L4D2 and have found the FPS to be very good. I believe it was the HH review that ran it at the highest settings with AA off just to see how it would do and it ran extremely smoothly (better than they ever expected).

I'd wager TF2 would be of the same quality, but maybe just med/high settings.

 

It doesn't work like that LOL CPU overclock has minimal impact on 3dmark scores and there is not a chance in the world of a 300mhz OC gaining you 3000 3dmarks more likely 1 or 200 marks increase at best.

 

Correct. Most Valve games are going to play well on this thing anyways since they're low intensity graphics wise, and RTS's don't need high FPS rates anyways (and they're more CPU intense on AI calculations)

More shader intensive games will greatly benefit from the 50% extra SP's

 

that just isn't true. I will get on the orb and look at my results real quick. The problem you aren't thinking about is people usually run a stock run (both cpu and gpu stock) and then run a OC'd run, modifying both the settings on the cpu and gpu.

Again I will try and pull some results for you to show this (orb is being slow)

 

In my not-expert opinion, i would say the m11x would outperform the aforementioned Samsung 14" by a slight margin.

But here's my question to all of you: Have any of you actually gamed on an 11" screen? I assume not since i'm not aware of any netbook that is capable of it. Let me tell you, 11.6" is SMALL.

I cut a hole out of a piece of paper the exact dimensions of the screen and placed it on my 15" and i can't get over how tiny it is. I understand the portability argument. But portability or not: it's a gaming computer, and i don't feel the screen size lends itself to this task.

Even if you use this sporadically on road trips/travel, i imagine you'd be wishing the screen was at least 13.3" every single second while you're playing MW2 or Borderlands, or what have you.

 

BTW, anyone else has now a starting price $1,188 when trying to buy m11x over the EPP?

It seems the EPP "discounted" version is not really customizable and comes with all the most expensive components. Wouldn't be surprised ty Dell trying to screw the customers (yet again).

 

True, which makes my math problems make no sense whatsoever.

However, to illustrate my main point better, take a look at this article's results. What he did was keep everything in the system the same, but overclock the cpu from 3ghz to 4.4ghz simply by increasing it's multiplier. This shows the basic effect of 200 mhz differences in cpu when the cpu is base clocked at 3ghz (which shouldn't matter as much compared to when it's base clocked at 1.3ghz!). Only problem is he was using a quad so I'm sure that affects the added amount of cpu score.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/effects-of-cpu-frequency-on-3dmark06-scores-gtx-280-single-/6153-6.html

http://vr-zone.com/articles/effects-of-cpu-frequency-on-3dmark06-scores-gtx-280-single-/6153-7.html

Here's what his results were:









If you look at the results you'll see that the average or so of the cpu score starts at 400 points for each 200mhz bump and slows down to about 190 or so by the end. However, the total 3dmark06 score starts increasing by about 700 points until it caps out at about a 200 point improvement.

Not only that, the shader model 2/3 score increases substantially! This illustrates what I meant about 3dmark06 being extremely cpu-bound. Everything else in his system was the same but the supposed gpu scores are increasing at a substantial rate, 400 starting out for sm2.0 and steady 100-200 point increases for sm3.0, which shouldnt by this much.

Anyways, with this in mind, my first numbers from my silly math equations are certainly off because they were a terrible estimate. But suffice it to say if the samsung at stock i5 speeds (with turboboost even!) and stock GPU gets that 7100 or whatnot then the m11x is going to go to town once that 1.73ghz clock is thrust in.

Long story short: 3dmark06 is pretty bad

 

There is no doubt that tf2 and l4d will run smooth. But what I am saying is, because of the way valve codes their games, an increase in CPU speed sometimes has just as much of an effect, or more, than OC'ing the GPU. Not dissing the alienware, it will still do well, it just will hit a performance wall earlier than say a laptop with a better CPU.