*Official ASUS W90Vp Owners' Lounge*

Lol nope, now go away and dont come back till you own 2 .

 

CoD4 benched.

maxed out 1920x1080 with 2xAA
First Stage with the rain and stuff on the cargo ship

Min 42fps
Max 187fps
Avg 96fps

this is with default 2ghz setting.

I do not see any issues with the quad core as you can see.

the 2.3ghz results were just a big higher, mostly in the max fps area because thats where you would see a cpu limitation when the video cards are hitting ultra high fps numbers. However in the range of playable fps (45-60) 2ghz is all you need and then some.

Thats gonna be all for now for posting benches, I did enough to show that the 2ghz quad core can and will keep up with the dual core in the X1 model, the rest I will save for my review so I can get it done faster and so that I have a reason to do a review

 

euh guys iam planning 2 buy 1 but wich 1 is better now w90VP X1 or the
W90VP A1

thx for the info guys

 

That is a large debate here, so depending on who answers you will get different responses. One thing to keep in mind, the X1 from NewEgg is very difficult to get since there are only a few available at one time. That is the reason I will be going with the A1, I will actually be able to order it and not hit refresh on NewEgg every 2m.

 

ok but what are the difences i was cheking on the internet but couldent find it in a fast notice sow may be you 'll guys can say it quick

 

Break down the differences and try to choose best on what fits your needs.

The A1 is an X1 except

> Upgraded CPU to quad core, this is the major debate is a slower ghz quad core better than a faster dual core? I say yes and so far my test have also said yes.

> Upgraded Optical Drive (blueray)

> Upgraded Hard Drives (you get two of them instead of one)

> Direct service with a reseller instead of newegg.

For $200 difference I think the A1 sells itself, but if you were so inclined you could upgrade the X1 to an A1 but it would cost you more than $200

 

ok a1 has the quad sow iam gonne get the quad then. i hope that i can have it as a gift form my internship. i am almost done there.

 

Where did I say it was faster, my quote is right there I think you misread it.

 

The W90Vp must drive you nuts then. That screen is a dust magnet. I know I've given that free microfibre cloth a thorough workout already.

 

Besides 3DMark06, I really haven't seen a huge difference in the benches (nothing that would be a noticeable difference without a benchmark number anyways).

Someone with an X1 please run Cinebench. I would be extremely interested in seeing the rendering/OpenGL difference.




Anyone know when the builders will be shipping the QX9300 units? I think both sides of this debate will shut up real quick once those hit.

 

Quite a bit especially since Linch King's visual upgrades. My home comp runs it at max settings 60 fps np which I have it limited to. And it is a night and day difference on the 2 machines.

 

He's saying that there are more important things than games, and in those things the quad is king.




...and besides the gap between the two processors in gaming really isn't that broad and will only narrow with newer releases.

 

WoW looks like poo no matter which setting you use. You either get fresh poo or sun dried poo with flies buzzing about.



Truly over-rated game that owes it's success to three things:
-Blizzard's reputation
-Easy mode/'anybody can do this' gameplay (compared to many other MMOs)
-It will scale back to play on just about anything

I understand why it is attractive to the masses and why it has been successful, but in my opinion, a good game it is not.

 

To each their own. Honestly though I think they owe their sucess to it's extreme addictivness. I have referred 5 people all who are almost as addicted as I am. I swore I would never play the game untill I saw the SP episode and decided I should try it. I now have 3 level 80 characters 2 in their 60s and one at 58 for me it is an escape from reality.

 

Screen Refresh Rate = 60Hz = Max 60 images to see.

As long as the quad maintains the same minimum frame rate as the dual core they are performing equal. Dont be fooled by average & max frame rate as anything past 60 is going out the door, and with the dual core having higher max fps numbers it also gives it a higher average fps even though the game play is the same. It may be hard for you to understand if you cant break down the concept. A better test for you to see would maybe be a test of dual core vs quad core with vsync on.

When the fps goes really high and hits a cpu limit like over 120fps thats beyond what you can even see/use and its only good for benchmarks not real life. So what I am saying is the quad has been equal to the dual core in every game so far in real life numbers, and I am posting the benchmark numbers hoping that those who view them can understand this.

When we start breaking out other real life tests like video rendering, photoshop rendering or games like Supreme Commander or Flight Simulator X that demand the power of a quad core, the dual core is not going to be able to step in and fill the same role like the quad core can in dual only situations.

I already knew this was how it was going to play out but chose not to really argue it until I could prove it with numbers. Now I have the numbers and your still in denial.

If my testing & knowledge is not enough to raise your awareness then please by all means get the dual core model, as long as your happy thats all that matters. I know I will be much happier with the quad core for many reasons.

 

His Crysis results are only a few fps better, and honestly I cant even run it in DX10 x86 without a crash so something is wrong.

Id love to see his DX9 results as mine were very high.

To do direct comparisons we need to make sure that we set up the same game options, have the same game version and the same drivers and things.

Dont let one game, just one test be the basis for your argument, you need to factor all tests in, esp this case where it was only a few fps, thats nearly within margin for error and crysis of all games wich is know to be somewhat of a mixed hat.

Wait till we start doing winrar test, and the cinebench

Any cpu bound program/task is pretty much quad core ready and you would need to overclock the dual core to 4ghz just to keep up with the stock 2ghz quad core.
Games are something that extra fps does not do you any good, but in real life things like waiting for a rar file to compress extra minutes saved is a real life thing.

Something like a large video encode your talking hours saved.

 

ViciousXUSMC,

I have to say I really like what you have been doing on these forums especially with your numbers and reviews etc. but there are a few things I might add. I just purchased from newegg the X1 and should be getting it tomorrow. I really struggled deciding between the A1 and X1 simply because of the Quad core thing (bluray is of no use to me as all my movies are on HDs and the 2 320GB HDs are also a waste as I will be throwing in 2 500 GB HDs) so the cost difference I am saving can be applied to upgraded HDs, cooler stand etc. I really feel the quad will benefit those who use Photoshop, Vue, 3D studio, CAD etc but in gaming I just don't see it right now as a faster cycle IMHO is a large boon compared to a much slower cycle even though there are 4 cores. Most programs today don't even really take advantage of 2 cores let alone 4. Also while you are throretically correct in stating that a dual core would need to run at 4.0 GHz to equal a quad core running at 2.0 Ghz this NEVER translates to real world computing as you can see in programs which even take advantage of quad cores. The numbers never work out that way. For me the X1 was a much better purchase strictly for gaming. For all the other stuff you might do with yours today (and more importantly tomorrow with the Quad core) the A1 may have been the best.

 

Well now there will be another DC to run through the ringer, I just ordered an A1 with the T9800 in it. Will OC to 15% according to sales person from Xotic. Now we will have to let me know what games I will need to order (within reason I am not rich) so i can run some benches. I will be receiving Fallout 3 with my new beast. I am sure there are tests that I can download, remember I am in the sandbox so my downloads will take a long time so I would prefer the smaller ones. I chose the DC over the QC because I will not be doing any rendering (just basic line stuff in CAD) Very limited photo stuff and never batch process anything anyway. I just dont have the need for the QC so I figured I would go for the highest DC I could get (and when i return and have learned from all you OC'ing masters I will get the QX9x00 to drop in the baby!!) And finally, I am very happy with my purchase just wish it was here already, but couldnt find the instant ship to my remote tiny a$$ base in the desert button.

 

q9000 is a lame CPU. 6MB cache is the main issue with it. T9600 with same amount of cache and much faster core clock is a better choice for this computer IMHO. Q9100 or QX9300 with 12mb cache are the CPUs which can be considered as a good upgrade to T9600. Since QX9300 can only overclock 5%, I think if Q9100 can do 15%, then Q9100 should be a very nice CPU for this machine. If anybody sells me a W90 for $1500 (No CPU or HDD is necessary), then I'll put a Q9100 in and do the benchies for you.

 

I'm looking forward to someone throwing a QX in one of these and using SetFSB to pump the hell out of it. The board can obviously handle the overclocks. Now we just need someone to do it! Oh, and if work keeps busy like it has been, I'll have one of these in a month or so. Unless something else trumps this system in the meantime.

Quad..you should download IDCC - it's the intel desktop control center. It includes the XTU and is compatible with x38 mobos. I'm thinking it may work with this build. Then you won't need the asus tool anymore. Google, download, and lemme know.

 

Ill take a peak at later today and i will be buying a Qx9300 in the next couple weeks as i just cant withstand the temptation and its for the "Greater good" of all who are interested. Right now im waiting to see if the person i spoke with is going to sell me his OEM Qx for $600 or should i just snag one of those ES ones for $450 ?.

 

You talk like you already have the pll for SetFSB. I hope it is that easy.

 

The pll shouldn't be hard to figure out. Visit the homepage of setfsb and it lists the pll and their compatabile boards. Find the one that lists the asus board.

Edit; or trial and error. We know it's not locked like the FX.

 

For the IDCC which i downloaded already for the X38 board i will still need the PLL ?.

 

sorry if this has been posted have yall tried the new mobility drivers from ATI? 9.3 ? on win 7 or vista?

 

Hey, noone have tried mobility catalyst 9.3 for Win7 or the modded one Vista by E-Wrecked ????
Come on!!

 

Justin at XOTICPC tried the E-Wrecked drivers and said they would not work.

 

I have tried every driver and option to date with no success . The win 7 drivers blue screen the machine so there a no go and vista64 drivers throw back a Code43 error like others have posted . Im going to be trying some other options over the next couple days and see what i can make of it . Got off the phone with E-wrecked abit ago as we were throwing ideas back and forth at each other and hopefully something can be figured out, but until i have tried everything i wont know.

 

I also am going to be gettin EOM QX9300 for my X1, in about a month or so, so really the battle between A1 and X1 is pointless for those who are going to do the same, I don't need BR drive, I got PS3 for that, and will be getting SSD as well, for the second drive. What is more important to me is being able to find "working" new drivers for GPU's.

 

For the record, and johnksss / faisalhero know this from my benchmarks in the GT725 thread, a dual core at 2.4 GHz and a quad core at 3.6 GHz yield all of zero FPS difference in Crysis. That's benchmarking my own system at different speeds with my old HD 4850.

So terrytownpc, you're wrong, no real dancing around that.

 

1680x1050, all High, 37 FPS. Exactly what world are you living in? Same settings I average 46 FPS with my HD 4870.

 

You're such a troll. :laugh:

Seriously, what is your motivation for participating in this thread?

...and this thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=4705492#post4705492

:laugh:

 

I don't have a Q9000, I have a Q6600.

My point is that if adding 1200 MHz and 2 more cores does not give me a single extra FPS, a T9600 is not going to make any difference in Crysis over a Q9000.

 

Strangely enough, your scores actually go down when you OC the system. Also, the scene 2 benchmark seems to be the highest I've seen for w90 systems and you're the only person to run it with a quad core system. This could suggest that this game makes use of 2 extra cores, but I didn't notice much when I upgraded to a QX9300 over a P8600. I'll run mine later to check and compare to what I had last time.

 

And who exactly buys a 1080P gaming laptop to play games at 1280x1024? Everybody knows a Core i7 965 is faster than an E5200, but you'll get the same FPS in 95% of games out there because of games being GPU limited.

 

Well, clearly he is trolling and this post is the most telling. He suggests that those two games are what really separates high end systems from everything else, yet he's adamant about playing those games at a low resolution, when actually high resolution performance in those mentioned games is what really makes that distinction.

Clearly nVidia-based cards have a more accepting frame buffer at low resolutions, which helps big time in this regard, and he already said he was going for the Sager system. I don't get why he's still here in the Asus section after the fact.

 

Agreed on one thing, doesn't make any sense to play on low rez on full HD screen. I'd rather have low 30s FPS on everything Maxed out, then 60 on low!

 

Anyone else remember a troll who used to post in this thread who repeatedly recreated accounts?

PS: A thank you to John, Vicious and Quad for repeatedly benchmarking their their machines. If I left out someone, I apologize.

 

thanks dtwn!

well would you look at that..dx9 9800m gtx actually won a msaa 8x test...i don't believe it(stock no oc)

 

Those stock clocks john?

 

yessir that would be correct.

 

here is mines no aa. gpu's stocked.

if i put aa on, my framerates will sink.

 

I'm impressed.

 

so would you say for the nVidia cards dx9 performs significantly better than dx10 in this game?

 

yes and no.
dx9 with 8x AA, yes
dx10 with 8x AA is alright, nothing fancy
dx9 with no AA and 16x AF. awesome
dx10 with no AA and 16x AF awesome
dx9 & dx10 no AA awesome

hard to say... no aa and dx10 is better, but when you start using AA, dx9 would be better in benching. but playing the game i was up to around 187 fps dx10 (averaging 100 to 130 running around killing stuff, while using 8x AA)

i need to investigate that a bit more in depth though, because i was totally surprised.

 

work has started, I plan to get most of the review done tonight if all goes well.

time to go benchmark some crysis 1280x1024... lol yeah right. heck thats not even the right aspect ratio for this screen.

 

Hey did any one upgrade BIOS downloaded from asus official site( here)?
under the category of W90 series there are three models: W90V, W90Vn, W90VP.
I just wonder whether the BIOS of W90V (version 510, sounds better than version 502 of W90VP) is available for our W90VP-X1 or A1

 

Meh, to tide me over, I ended up getting a OCZ Whitebook Xfire for $1199 till the M98 and D900F land to compare against the W90Vp.

I couldn't hack one more night on this M4400 for work or the BnC's D630.

 

$1199?! Thief!

Really tho, congrats..it's fun to toy with

 

lol, yeah, exactly. I can sit back and wait for the dust to settle with the W90Vp (We need new drivers Wahmbulance!!) vs. M98 (*knock knock* Hello? This year please?) vs. D900F (I have a big brain but only one eye!).

I was this --><-- close to pulling the trigger on a W90Vp, but $3k+ when all was said and done basically made me reel it in till the dust settles.

Hopefully the M98 will be offered in a barebones.