Spoilt for choice: Sager NP5793 or M70?

They are similar in most aspects except the video card (nvidia vs ati) hard disk (m70 wins in terms of space), ports (eSATA for m70). Which one would you pick?

Although I don't game, I do lots of video editing, numerical simulations (computational fluid mechanics, optimization) and visualizations ...

 

The Asus is 2.4" thick, whilst the Sager is 1"-1.8" thick, and if you configure the Sager with an 8800M GTX it'll be 2-2.5 times faster than the M70 with dual 8700M GTs. Lastly, the M70 is huge. Definitely go for the NP5793.

 

It's the same power, one 8800GTX = 8700GT Sli. Not 2-2.5 times faster.

 

The 8800M GTX is actually 2-2.5 times faster than dual 8700M GTs. SLI is poorly optimized.

 

yeah yeah
3DMark06
Sager NP9261 (Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz, Dual Nvidia 8700M-GT) 9,145
Sager NP9261 (Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz, Dual Nvidia 8700M-GT Overclocked) 10,397

3Dmark06
Sager NP5793(Intel Core 2 Extreme X9000, 8800GTX ) 9358.

I suppose that you can do the math
Don't say if you don't know unless you want me to prove you wrong.

 

3DMark is simply for bragging rights. Show us some real world benchmarks.

 

Pray tells. Define for me real world benchmarks.

 

Those are unfair benchmarks. The Sager is using a quad-core desktop processor, which'll up it's score by about 2,000-2,500 points. In real world tests, Crysis and Unreal Tournament 3 for example, the 8800M GTX will run 2-2.5 times faster than dual 8700M GTs.

 

Dude, those are for GPU benchmark, the CPU does not do such a thing like you say.
OMG, CPU ups GPU scores by 2000 points
Don't just say it, show me documents if you know it....
Never mind, I'm talking to a wrong person.

Ps: I would take that back if I were you, before somebody else reads it.

 

The 8800M GTX and 8700 GT SLI are on the same page performance wise. And heat wise. The 8800M GTX by no means blows the 8700 GT SLI out of the water, it might be a little better, but not much.

 

3DMark stresses both the CPU and the GPU, 2 of it's tests that're added to it's score are CPU-based! "In real world tests, Crysis and Unreal Tournament 3 for example, the 8800M GTX will run 2-2.5 times faster than dual 8700M GTs." That statement is 100% true, anyone that knows about notebook GPUs will be able to tell you the same thing.

 

Yeah yeah Mr. Know it all.
If you don't have proof, don't say it.
How about creating a thread in the gaming and GPU forum, there you would know if you're right or wrong.

 

Sure, it stresses both, but that damn card might run faster, but it's not going to run twice as fast, it's not that much better.

 

Alright, this was the best direct benchmark I could get. Both systems are using the 2.8GHz Intel Extreme processor. The first is the XPS M1730 with dual 8700M GTs and the second is the Alienware m15x with a single 8800M GTX.
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4086
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsId=4329

First of all, take note how the XPS M1730 is using significantly lower settings in most of its' tests and that the m15x is currently running poorly-optimised drivers. In the Crysis test, with shaders and shadows set to medium (framerates would be almost half what they are now if they were set to high) on 1440x900 resolution the XPS M1730 barely churns out an average of 8 frames per second. The m15x with an 8800M GTX got a 23 frames per second average running at 1400x1050 with everything on high. So in this case, the 8800M GTX is running over three times faster than dual 8700M GTs. Chaz did both tests, so if you have any questions, ask him.

Pwnage

 

Actually, CPUs can increase 3dmark06 scores by 2000 points. Check out this link.
Someone from tomshardware forum reported,

"3dmark06 on my system:
e6850 @3.0 (333x9) with 3870x2 stock = 14,400
e6850 @3.777 (420x9) with 3870 stock = 16,699"

 

From the M1730 review

also, that 8 seems like a mistype for 18. Why would the average be 8 when the minimum is 11?

So lets say avg for dx9 is 18, ALienware manages 23 on what are probably similar settings. But do realize, both are essentially single card systems since crysis does not support sli.

 

Oh and also on the cpu increasing 3dmark06 scores - then why would an Asus C90s with conroe processors not dominate all 8600gt equipped laptops? I get 4k on a good day with my ddr2 8600gt which seems to be not 2k above other 8600gt equipped systems. I have the E6420 with OC on max so we're talking 2.55ghz, 1.2ghz FSB here.

And even if the CPU factor is true then throw the m1730 vs M15x benchmarks out since those benchmarks on the M1730 were on santa rosa processors and the m15x has penryn.

 

Well if you read more that thread you can see that people with the E6400 get the scores as high as the Quad-core.
There have been many discussions about this, the CPU sure can increase 3Dmark scores, but not that much.

Good posts ! Pwnd

 

Yes, the guy that has the E6400 overclocked to 3.2ghz was comparing to a Q6600 2.4ghz stock.

 

Clock speed means nothing here, you're comparing a core 2 dual to a QUAD-core.

 

Alright, Unreal Tournament 3 supports SLI. Take a look at those results. The M1730 with dual 8700M GTs is running at 2/5 detail levels at 1920x1200 resolution, whilst the m15x with an 8800M GTX is running maxed at 5/5 detail and 1920x1200 and the m15x is getting a 56 average, the M1730 is only getting a 29 average, which would probably be around 15-20 fps average if it was running maxed.

 

Well does 3dmark support multi-core processors? If so then the quad core still has the advantage due to double the number of physical cores. And if it doesn't then brute speed is all that matters which renders the cpu portion pointless but then again, all reviewrs of video cards keep the cpu and memory the same between systems just in case this could possibly be the bottleneck. Also we are comparing laptop 3dmark scores to desktop scores. If we can break 10k with an voerclocked single 8800gtx mobile what's stopping an overclocked 3870 from getting to 14k on its own? Plus perhaps the drivers for ATI don't let 3dmark06 take full advantage of the 3870x2. We had these problems in the past with the 7900gx2 if anyone remembers.

And why is this argument going on? The M70 is a multimedia/gaming laptop with a supposed broader market appeal and is probably meant to be sold in stores as well as online orders. The 5793 is a dedicated gaming machine from design to production. It is also meant to be custom built from resellers. If they're similar in price then just pick whichever one fits your neds and wants.

Much better argument, thank you. I'm not trying to take a side it's just if you guys are going to argue at least use equal footing.

I have two issues with the UT3 testing though
1) The m1730 has a physics card, why was hardware physics disabled?
2) What driver was the m1730 using and on what OS?

Oh and if they are identical specs to what was sued in the review I would like to point out that the M1730 has 2 gigs of rm to the m15x's 4 (3.5). That might not seem like a big deal but on higher settings, every little bit counts at that level. Toshiba puts 3 gigs of ram in their single 8700gt systems.

 

That doesn't make sense though.
Person A has a Q6600 stock + 8800GTS. 3dmark06 score of under 12k
Person B has E6400 Oc to 3.2ghz + 8800GTS. 3dmark06 of 13.2k

apparently an OC dual core with less cache will out perform a quad core with lower clock speed.

 

I would like to point out again that desktop cards score much higher than laptop counterparts and that lower end processors could very well be a limiting factor and if 3dmark does not support quad core then congrats, in this synthetic benchmark you win with an OC dual core.

 

Of course desktop CPU would score higher! We were just comparing how they affect 3dmark06 scores... that's all. No one was comparing a conroe to a santa rosa. I'm just curious about it and throwing out numbers hoping people would respond and explain how CPU really affects the score

 

...it doesn't. If it did the Asus C90 would be scoring ridiculously higher than any other 8600gt notebook but it doesn't.

Well it does when the video card is the bottleneck and then it's probably the brute speed of the card since a dual can beat a quad but in real world performance the quad core wins.

 

That's my point, the one with Core 2 dual outperform the one with Quad-core, so the CPU doesn't affect the score much.
Well anyhow, like you said it's only a discussion
Just let it be the end of it. I'm not gonna post more.

 

The discussion somehow turned into something quite unexpected...
The specs I'm seeing says "1024MB (1GB) ATI HD 3650 (DX10)" for M70. How did 8700 come into the picture? Also M70 is 16" * 11.6" * 1.5".

 

I think OP meant G70. It's Asus' hybrid gaming/multimedia laptop designed to appeal to everyone in the higher end segment where Asus typically has lacked such a computer. Asus typically likes their models to be stocked on shelves so custom building the super-high end laptops are a little out of the picture but this seems like it might be their flagship model. It does have Sli, 1TB of storage and HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players were planned but I think only blu-ray will make it to market.

 

man this turned into an e-peen sword fight. a conroe is better than a santa rosa, but at 2.4 comparatively in gaming, or a synth bench they're not much different, and overclocking it like 300mhz is not going to make your dick bigger, neither your score. when you do a 1ghz+ OC scores start to change, there are certain tests in 3dmark06 that stress your CPU specifically. if you want to compare the graphics cards, look at the SM2.0 and HDR/SM3.0, and disregard the CPU score...and put it back in your pants guys, it's the internet. lol.

 

Basically the thread went like this - it started when one person wrongly posted a single 8800gtx as being 2-2.5 times faster than dual 8700gt in sli. Wrong facts were stated, bad info was used to back up claims. This then boiled down to a 3dmark argument. As we question the effect high powered cpus have on the score I brought up that if the difference was so great then the Asus C90 should be scoring much higher than it's contemporaries with 8600gt cards but I'm willing to bet that even a napa-based 8600gt would score about the same provided all other parts are equal. Benchmarks and comparisons from around the C90s release would show that its scores are in line with other notebooks so I'd say that this pretty much debunks the whole "massive cpu makes up for crappy video card in 3dmark" discussion. Oh and the whole thing was kind of retarded anyways since in a discussion about laptops, desktop components were getting involved...

I think this thread has been mangled to the point where it is but an ugly scrap of what it used to be.

 

Not retarded at all. Desktop components Han first mentioned was pertaining to the Sager NP9261 when he tried to prove michael wrong. I just thought it was interesting (and kinda surprising) how the same CPU when overclocked can add more than 2000 points in 3dmark06.
Either way, if I offended anyone, then i'm sorry.

 

Yeah, but the 8800M GTX is 2-2.5 times faster than dual 8700M GTs. Go look up any comparable benchmarks and you'll see that I'm not just making **** up.

Back to the original thread, I'd get the Sager NP5793 since it's better built and is configurable with an 8800M GTX.

 

Notice how you are the only one trying to defend that statement

 

Oh and it's hard to compare quality and configuration with a laptop that has not even been released yet.

 

OK stop flaming.....

I really dont think it matters. Over the two, I would go with sager due to the fact that Sli is a pain in the ***, and that its a bit smaller.

He is going to be doing Video editing.Which is CPU, GPU Mem independent. So in this case, the m70 would ge better due to 1GB of video memory. However, once again, Video edition is strongly CPU dependent. Due to the fact that you are considering the M70, which it in itself is a monster due to its size, you may also want to consider the Sager 9262, which has desktop QC and can support 3HDDS for your video storage. The only cons are dimensions(once again the m70 is pretty bad too) and battery life. Are you going to be taking it places? What is your budget? Although this is the ASUS subforum, filling out the FAQ might help you in your decision, and us in giving you advice.

 

9262 is out of consideration due to its size:

NP9262: 11.75" (w) x 15.5" (d) x 2.35" (h) 11.55lb
NP5793: 15.6" (w) x 11.5" (d) x 1" ~ 1.8" (h) 8.35lb
M70: 16" x 11.6" x 1.5" 8.6lb

Yes, I do need some form of portability. Anything below 3k is ok.

Btw, I am talking about this laptop:
http://www.xoticpc.com/asus-m70sac1-notebook-order-p-2382.html

... and not a conroe.

 

MICHAELSD01, time to throw in the towel. You are wrong! 8800m GTX is twice the card of a single 8700m GT so no way a 8800m GTX is 2.5 times the 8700m GT SLI! Sorry but you are just wrong.

 

^^^^ What powerpack said! A single 8800M GTX is comparable to a 7950M GTX SLi or a 8700M GT SLi configuration, but still better nonetheless Not like 2.5 times faster Maybe almost 2.5 times faster than a single 8700M GT

 

Then I would get the m70. you will need that 1TB size and 1GB video mem for video editing

 

Isn't the M70 much cheaper than the 5973? Granted you get what you pay for and it is a far inferior machine but this thread has been kinda off from the get go. Now the 3650 in the M70 could be beaten at elast twice, maybe 2.4 times over by the 8800gtx but the G70 which has dual 8700 cards and probably an extreme processor option will be on near equal footing with good drivers as a similarly equipped 5793 with a single 8800gtx. how much the G70 will cost is something we don't quite know since it is not yet released but depending on his budget that would determine what to get or just take hkman's suggestion because I <3 asus.

And for the last time - 8800gtx ~= 8700gt sli or 7950sli. The 7950s will perform a bit better but dont scoff at dual 8700s, they'll still pump out some amazing details at high resolutions.

 

I think jrjrg needs to specify once and for all if hes talking about the M70 or the G70.

Moreover I await your either further defense of your ludricous position in this discussion Michaels or your admission of being wrong.

 

I"m a bit late to the game and didn't feel like going over pages of flames, but if you want to comapre GPU performance, don't even look at the overall score, just look @ the Sm 2.0 and Sm 3.0 scores as those have nothing to do with the cpu in the tests. There is also a cpu score too you can use pretty much independant of the gpu performance, gotta love benchmark cowboys

 

Hes talking about M70.

HES NOT GAMING

 

M70 all the way then. It is a multimedia based machine with massive storage capacity, blu-ray, high memory video card, and 4.1 sound in a $2000ish package depending on where you go. It's not as customizable as the sager but it is a better fit for you. And the HD3650 will be able to game decently on it's own so if you're an occasional gamer and not hardcore, gotta play the newest games on highest settings then the 5793 w/8800gtx is overkill.