*Official ASUS W90Vp Owners' Lounge*

knowing what nvidia charges its gonna be alot lol

DAnG set fsb gets my 10 dollars lol thats alomost 2 hours of work for me

 

NOOOOOOOOOO!
Don't get me wrong Mr.Moo I am not saying you or anyone else has said " I have the best gaming laptop ever" it's just that sometimes you get people that are into the whole Nvidia/ATI-AMD Gpu war.
It's really refreshing to get into a nice forum were everyone plays nice and does not just dismiss anything other than actual owners of this laptop.
I really do like this laptop

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

lol ATI vs Nvidia is crap ... as long as it games who cares who makes it. A little competition is ok but hey who likes to loose?

if we don't play nice the ban hammer comes down

 

Got an A1 on order from XoticPC finally. Decided I couldn't wait for the X1 at Newegg, much like others have.

Question, anybody try RAID yet? I know ASUS won't support it so where would you get the drivers? Standard X38's off of Intel's site?

Thanks!

 

control + i at startup is probably the code you need. Its built into the hardware/bios I think.

 

Awesome, thanks!

 

Funds are slowly coming together, then i get to begin the newegg camping like everyone else >.<

Glad to see some headway is being made with setfsb

 

The guy just sent me a new version(setfsb) and i just awoke, so im going to give it a whirl in a bit once the fog clears from my brain.

 

Out of curiosity, ViciousXUSMC, what do you get on Crysis DX10 64 bit at 1680 x 1050 all settings high, GPU stock but CPU OC @2.3?

 

Cool let me know how it goes, I just got the kids down for a nap and been up since before work last night so I myself am just about to go to bed.

 

1680x1050 is the wrong aspect ratio for the W90Vp. No one would realistically run at those settings when it does 1920x1080 so well.

 

there seems to be some misconceptions as to what plays well on a laptop vs what plays well on a desktop. people are seriously complaining at getting the frame rates that we pull on laptops(example crysis), so that means a laptop is not playing a certain game or two very well.

any laptop playing a high end game at 60Hz/v vsync on 1920x1200 or 1920x1080/AA8x(16xQ)/AF16x/all settings maxed/getting an even 60 fps...is doing great. this means no screen tearing, which i see almost no one is mentioning. a true gamer will play at 60 fps with no tearing vs 200 fps and screen is tearing,flickering & jumping. if a laptop can pass this test, then it has literally concurred that game. (personal opinion)

 

That said, here are the scores with your requested settings with No AA and 2x AA (without proper DX10 drivers and displaying at the wrong aspect ratio):

 

Of course he wouldn't play at that resolution, hence the term "benchmark". Justin posted an identical benchmark done with a 280M and stock QX9300 (it got a 28 average) and I was just curious what the 4870 x2 would do... Of course it's already getting 30~ on very high at native, so I know it'll be high.

 

wow, now that is interesting...280m doing 28 fps while a 4870 x2 is doing 26.....

 

well crysis is a nvidia game so really any other game the 4870's would win

 

and a single 4850 is doing 27.....

 

something has to be up with the 4870s

that wasn't 2x aa either on the 4850 run, if im not mistaken.

 

Justin ran a QX9300 versus my Q9000, has DX10 drivers for the 280m, and is benching on an NVIDIA game. Are you really surprised?



*EDIT* ...and they are 2 4870 cards in crossfire, not "a 4870x2" (just so we don't go through that discussion again).

 

Will you ever go away? Such a black cloud.

Anyhow.. this Crysis run with the 4870s.. it's also using the driver version 8.11, yes? I may be wrong, but wasn't 8.12 the driver which added a 50-75% gain in Crysis..(cause crossfire wasn't being optimized previously). Or, am I blowing crap outta my rear?

 

true, but neither were the 280m runs. Regardless, the GTX 280M should score higher considering the memory advantage over the current mobility 48xx lineup.

Regardless of nVidia affinity or not, seems to be a crossfire/driver issue or crossfire doesn't want to scale at that resolution.

 

so now your correcting me huh?

Justin ran a QX9300 versus my Q9000, has DX10 drivers for the 280m, and is benching on an NVIDIA game. Are you really surprised? <--- quit complaining.
you don't see us crying about losing near every AA run tested.

*EDIT* ...and they are 2 4870 cards in crossfire, not "a 4870x2" (just so we don't go through that discussion again) <---- get over your self. i know what the card is, i know how the card should be named and i did not say it was a 4870x2 i said a 4870 x2(times two) not 2 gpus on one card.

ichime
i was going off what he said with that 2x stuff...

man, it's some more bunk information as usual.

anothergeek
is this a 2x run or not???..these things make all the difference in the world when benching.

 

Okay, now someone run the 280m in 1920x1080.

 

Those scores can't be for 2 cards.

 

Lol you guys are hilarious ..


Here is a single card run @1680x1050 .

I disabled the card in the bios and you can see in the device manager its gone as well..

I did not see if justins were high or very high but this was more a comparison to fasailheros single card run. this is his crysis test not warhead as the test is ISLAND

And quit arguing , its a one darn game and theres hundreds upon hundreds of games to play out there . Crysis is not the end all be all game and we all know its nvidia optimised Sheesh !!!!

 

thank you quadzilla!
now add the 2x AA...lol
just so we can see if it boost your frames up to 31..

also...faisalhero was running warhead and not regular crysis....

 

yeah crysis doesnt use crossfire. with my cards, crossfired or not i average 17fps on very high.

 

John click on ichimes link to the benchmark you will see it says "island" which is crysis and not warhead. Because he downloaded the demo for crysis vanilla

 

yeah, that's justin at exotic, not faisalhero..
faisalhero beat me at crysis
he has a run at like 32 fps (single card)

this is faisalhero and this is warhead....



my bad quadzilla, i see what cha mean now..clicking on the 27

 

faisal is tearing it up with the single GPU eh?!

 

yeah he is!

 

So it seems 0.o really makes me debate the msi although i don't think i could plop a quad in it

 

Newegg has them back in stock again...

 

faisalhero: he got 29 here...
here oc 1680 x 1050

09/02/2009 05:40:30 - Vista
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: High
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 72.41s, Average FPS: 27.62
Min FPS: 16.93 at frame 145, Max FPS: 33.82 at frame 875
Average Tri/Sec: -26915898, Tri/Frame: -974474
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.94
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 68.65s, Average FPS: 29.13
Min FPS: 16.93 at frame 145, Max FPS: 35.42 at frame 85
Average Tri/Sec: -28028334, Tri/Frame: -962078
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.95
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 68.50s, Average FPS: 29.20
Min FPS: 16.93 at frame 145, Max FPS: 35.72 at frame 61
Average Tri/Sec: -28113044, Tri/Frame: -962840
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.95
TimeDemo Play Ended, (3 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

Completed All Tests

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>

09/02/2009 05:40:30 - Vista

Run #1- DX10 1680x1050 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Overall Average FPS: 29.165

 

Seem to be.

Settle down, I was just poking fun at the ridiculous amount of handwringing earlier in this thread over how the cards are described.

No crying here. I'm happy with those numbers and only expect them to improve with modern drivers.

There are 2 runs in that attachment. First was NoAA, the second was 2xAA.
Quick and dirty, no min/maxing. If it's that big of a deal, i can run them again (only those who are looking to discredit the machine seem to be interested in that res, anyone else would be more concerned with the true HD res as that is what it was built for).

2 cards running according to GPU-Z and the device manager.
Running well? I would assume not as well as they could be.

 

where can i get a crysis bench mark program ?

 

and we BEEN known it was running well.. we are more interested in getting it to run right.

 

Till i can install the latest drivers (which he can) i wont say any direct comparisons are fair because ATI made alot of improvements (supposedly) in DX10 since 8.12. Ill also say for a single card his numbers are great though but id rather be on equal footing when doing comparisons.

 

Oh and if anyone wants the new SETFSB send me a message so you to can test it . right now i can OC my processor to about the same degree as Turbogear lets me but im curious to see how far a Q9000 can go OCed .

Ive been emailing the guy back and forth all night and he already made 2 revisions of the software for me for stability and this one seems very stable indeed.

 

all we can do is play with the cards we are dealt for the time being....sooner or later...one hand will become better.....

it just seems to come quicker with nvidia is all.

this was one of the reasons holding me back from getting a ati high end machine. i dont want to be waiting 6 months for a good driver only to find that now my card is out dated....

 

I am content with those numbers because I understand that they are being made with outdated drivers. That they are that close to a 280 with current nvidia drivers is very encouraging.
Honestly, it has run everything I have thrown at it remarkably well at true HD. Drivers would only serve to improve it, so why wouldn't I be happy with those results?

I've read this three times... and... I still have no idea what you were trying to say. :laugh:

I was simply answering the question that was asked.

 

One thing I think is important that a lot of people discount when comparing the W90 to the others which was of big importance to me was 6GB of RAM.

Most other brands only offer 4GB or ask for an arm and a leg to upgrade. At least for what I use the W90 for the increase in RAM is a huge plus outside the GPU/CPU/18.4 1080p screen and all the other bells and whistles.

 

same here, all i did was answer back.

nothing personal but you basically missed the whole point of that disscussion. all good.

no need to if your gonna had why it didn't do well after every run.
should have said
no need to if your gonna add why it didn't do well after every run.

you adding why it didn't do well was what i was talking about. that's it.
that basically falls right in there with your comment about the other guy and him wanting to see a different resolution. not your opinion on degrading his question for wanting to see it.
if yur gonna run it..cool. if not, cool too.

 

http://www.crymod.com/filebase.php?fileid=280&lim=0

 

W90Vp, over 2hr later, STILL in stock at Newegg.....knew the initial "Yeeehaaaa!" rush would eventually slow down.

 

Was just about to post saying that. Hopefully its stays in stock and drops to msrp

 

and you haven't hit the buy now button???

from other thread:
it was 4400 gpu stock. we don't count cpu in vantage.

terrytownpc <script type="text/javascript"> vbmenu_register("postmenu_4720371", true); </script>
yes, those are my rusults ran about 25 minutes ago today

 

Yep its now the waiting game here at Camp Lejeunistan

 

Mine is coming on friday..... I'm itching to buy QX9300 right now, of ebay!!!

 

Greetings I am thinking about purchasing a W90 the only question I have is weather to upgrade the CPU?
The choices seem to be as follows:
Intel® Q9000 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.0GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB - Default
-Intel® T9550 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 2.66GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 35 watt ( + 382 )
-Intel® P9600 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 2.66GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 25 watt ( + 417 )
-Intel® T9800 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Duo 2.93GHz w/6MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB 35 watt ( + 612 )
-Intel® Q9100 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.26GHz w/12MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB ( + 945 )
-Intel® QX9300 45nm "Montevina" Core™2 Quad 2.53GHz w/12MB L2 On-die cache - 1066MHz FSB ( + 1,147 )
I work as a design engineer using Autodesk Inventor 3D parametric Software
and my son is a Gamer!!! we would be sharing this beauty.

I am trying to get real feedback about how much real performance you would gain by spending and extra $1000.00 for the best processor???