GTX 900M series officially announced by NVIDIA!!!

Good luck getting a refund from them in a timely manner. That company is sketchy to say the least.

The 9377 has both the eDP and LVDS connectors from what I understand so you would be able to change the monitor yourself later. I would double check with Meaker or Prema on that though. I am fairly certain it has both.

The reason why you don't see many 120hz machines is because 3D never took off and having a 120hz screen means no Intel integrated graphics option as well.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

Well where the hell have you been the last few conversations lol! That would have been good to know! Cause I can find a lot of the exact model screen but I did not know if it needed a specific mobo too. Eurocom offers a 10% student discount and if I could get it I might have done it but your information might have stopped me. So I do not need a new cord? Isn't the 120hz 50 pin while the other 60hz screens 40? Do I need a new connector or just the screen?

 

I believe both connectors are on the motherboard but ask Prema or Meaker for confirmation. It would make more sense to have both connectors than to just have one when the system was offered with screens of both types.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

Thank you! I will contact both of them. Hopefully they will know.

 

I just looked up the service manual and if it is accurate, there is only an eDP connector and there is a 3D emitter connector? This can't be right...

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

Depends on motherboard batch. Most of them have both connectors...only the reseller will be able to tell you what they have in stock. Otherwise buying directly with 120Hz screen is the only way to make sure the internal DP is present.

 

I knew you would have the answer Prema, thanks!

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

So it is motherboard dependent... I'll contact XoticPC and see if they do have it in stock.

 

Hmmm... How do you think these are gunna run comparatively: 970m @ 1080p or 980m @ 3k?

 

970M @ 1080p is faster. 3K is at least 2x the pixels as 1080p and 980M is not 100% faster than 970M.

 

3k might be twice the pixels, but it is not twice the GPU processing power needed.

Assuming equal AA settings for both 3K tends to be 33-50% lower FPS than 1080p

However you can drop AA by a single step (as in x8 becomes x4) since the increased resolution essentially builds in a x2 AA. This probably makes it only about 25-45% lower FPS depending on the game.

We do not yet have great in game benchmark comparisons of the 970m to 980m, but most signs point to a 25-35% increase in FPS.

Assuming a 30% increase in FPS for the 980m, but 35% lower from 3K you end up with 85% the FPS of a 970m at 1080p. I suspect games will vary from 70% to 100% the speed, so you will have a loss in FPS, but in games already over 70 FPS on a 970m at 1080p, a 980m at 3K may be very nice.

 

I have been very tempted by 3K but in the end I've opted for 1080p + 980M combo because it'll mean I'll be able to max out games for ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever... until 2016

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

Do you guys think a 970M will be enough to play games like Dota 2 and the upcoming Heroes of the Storm maxed out at 1440p?

 

How much difference will it make visually on native 15.6" 1080p display vs 1080p downscaled for 15.6" 3k display?

On on my 15.6" 1080p laptop TN panel, dropping down to 900p is not too noticeable, but on 46" external 1080p LCD display, 1600x900 looks a bit blurry.

I think it's not so much due to upscaling pixels rather than just being accustomed to higher DPI at 1080p. With this large external display sitting on my desk a few feet from my eyes, 900p is pretty low DPI.

 

I've seen quite a few Asus laptop screens getting to 100Hz, might be the one to get - G751! Looks like a good laptop!

 

LOL why do you make up numbers? This is 1080p vs. 3K on the Maingear Pulse 15 (MSI GS60) and MSI GT60:

Spoiler

3K (2880x1620) has around 1/2 to 1/3 the frame rate of 1080p, making the performance loss about 50-67%. Somehow, that's even greater than the expected 56% loss if we just calculated linearly from the pixel differential since 3K is 2.25x 1080p.

Also, my laptop only has 1080p, but when I run Sleeping Dogs benchmark with Normal AA I get 90 FPS and with Extreme AA (2x2 OGSSAA or 4K) I get 25 FPS. That's a 72% performance loss going from 1080p to 4K, which is very close to 3/4 or 75%.

 

Yeah, stick with 1080p, don't dare get the 3K - just take a look at the performance hit in the charts that octiceps posted in post #971!

 

This is most of the reason for the epic performance drop Here's another reason the GeForce GTX 970 is slower than the GTX 980 - The Tech Report
The difference I expect would be especially large for the 970m vs the 980m since for the GM204, the disabled shaders have a large role in the final raster output potential (i.e. one of the two biggest factors affecting high resolution scaling) despite the 64ROPs being retained.
The second reason for the massive performance drop is the VRAM bandwidth, less bandwidth=less raster output=poor high resolution scaling.
For comparison, the AMD 290 has 1 CU disabled per shader engine compared to the 290X yet the Raster output (aka Pixel output) is the same as the full implementation. Theoretical numbers only say so much about an architecture.

For now I agree, 1080p is the way to go for good performance.

 

One thing i'm trying to understand is if there is a shared vram which ram can be used as vram, why people talking about vram problem anymore since we can share abit of our 16gb ram? Did i understand it wrong? Need a proper answer before pressing the order button.

 

3k is bad depending on the games you play. I play more older games so if i had 980m sli i get most if not all the games i play would run like butter. The games i can't play right now i am just waiting for a desktop with 4k. I might not see the sun for a good couple weeks when i build that desktop. The list is building and 4k is a requirement for that list.

speed??? Ram is crap compared to graphics ram. When DDR4 comes around that might be useful.

 

Got it, thanks. Damn Asus, leaving me no choice.

 

RAM is not nearly as fast as vRAM, and it needs to cache into the vRAM to be used by the GPU. This is where you get the stutters, from the data being swapped in and out of the different RAM. Faster system RAM could help, but even 2133MHz still won't eliminate the stutters or micro-pauses.

 

New benchmarks from the upcoming MSI machine with GTX 980M SLI

http://forum.notebookreview.com/msi/763082-omg-msi-coming-gtx-980m-sli-notebook-2.html#post9800168

 

I can't believe we're getting news of the MSi 980M SLI before the Alienware with the single 980M... Ugh.

 

I can. It's not surprising.

 

But its extremely surprising that they make an SLI machine.
I hope its an 18" with the cooling you find on GT72. That will be a winner

 

Uh, easily. I can almost do that now with my 880m and the 970m is faster.

 

I played over 2 hours at 3k, totally maxed settings and it never creeped below 60 fps. My temps were tolerable for the lap too. Was using a 970M on the gs60. I'll probably turn AA off for 3k from now on since I doubt I could see the difference at that res.

 

I did not make up numbers, I used information from a variety of sources, and I checked to see it wasn't inherently flawed, unlike yours. Both those laptops are known to throttle from overheating when at maximum load.

On the other hand from Maxwell Goes Mobile: First GeForce GTX 970M Benchmarks
we get some results on the 970m at 4800x900 (4.32mp) resolution, 3k is 2880×1620 (4.67mp) so very they should be very similar.
Arma3
970m SLI = 79.5 to 44.6 = 44% lower
970m = 43.5 to 23.1 = 47% lower
870m = 32.8 to 19.4 = 41% lower
Battlefield 4
970m SLI = 104.1 to 57.9 = 44% lower
970m = 52.8 to 28.9 = 45% lower
870m = 41.7 to 19.6 = 53% lower
Farcry 3
970m SLI = 74 to 42.1 = 43% lower
970m = 38.3 to 21.9 = 43% lower
870m = 26.8 to 21 = 22% lower
Grid 2
970m SLI = 131.2 to 80.4 = 39% lower
970m = 77.8 to 48.8 = 37% lower
870m = 44.1 to 27.7 = 37% lower

Looked for my information on many different sites there was some 3K 870m info on a notebook check review, some ah heres another site with 970m didn't give much useful for this, but shows at least Skyrim is fine at 3k MSI GS60 Ghost Pro 3K review - Nvidia GTX 970M & 870M versions

Not going to go find every benchmark I used, but I think the set you found are distinct outliers.

 

Are shortages of new models likely? I am inclined to preorder from my reseller within the next few days to guarantee delivery as soon as possible by the ETA for the Gigabyte P35X v3 (ETA 31/10). I can wait until that date happily, but if there are further delays of many more weeks due to me not acting quickly enough to reserve a model it would kill me. I have checked and found that Overclockers UK have a return window of 14 days after delivery if the item is unwanted. There have been no reviews of the P35X v3 as of yet, and probably won't be for a few more weeks - by then it may be too late and shortages could be rampant. Especially concerning as I live in UK and seeing how we are a much smaller market, shipments might be prioritised for the US market in the case of shortages.

I've been looking at countless P35W v2 reviews, which utilises the same chassis as the upcoming P35X v3 and have liked what I've seen. Sure, there are some sacrifices to be made for such power in such a slim chassis (I doubt I'll have any thermal headroom to be able to overclock at all, some keyboard flex, sacrificing the number of USB 3.0 ports, relatively thick bezels around display etc.), but I think I can live with those compromises for the greater good. I have ruled out, one-by-one, the MSI GT72, ASUS G751, MSI GS60, MSI GS70, all the Clevo models (and can preemptively rule out whatever Alienware have up their sleeve) for various reasons. Doesn't seem to be any suitable alternatives left that will be launching this year, by November. Anything major that I'm missing? Any reason not to preorder? I should confirm with Overclockers UK whether I can cancel a preorder before dispatch beforehand in the (hopefully unlikely) event of abysmal reviews, but other than that - I don't see any real reason to not go ahead and be safe in the knowledge that my order is secure?

 

If you can return it, there's nothing to lose except the hassle, and maybe you have to pay for postage? Go for it if the worse case scenario is returning it I reckon.

 

4.67 MP is 8% more pixels than 4.32 MP, which basically proves my point regarding the 50% drop. /facepalm

What was it you said earlier, that 3K reduces performance by 35% compared to 1080p? Well, the Tom's numbers you yourself cited say it's much greater than that even at the sub-3K resolution they tested.

 

Good info, I'm quite inclined to trust Toms Hardware results, looks like the 3K hit is not quite as much as I had thought, but it's still a big performance hit. I'd still stay with 1080p for single GPU gaming though.

 

Would you share with us why you've eliminated those others? I'm curious as I'm going down the same path but have settled on the GS70.

 

Awesome! Thanks for the help guys Looking forward for a 970M 14" machine (hopefully AW does not take a lifetime to come up with their new ones...)

 

Why on earth would you not go 3K if possible, now that we have GPUs (even single) powerful enough to play 3K resolutions?

I have yet to see anyone here, come with concrete evidence that even using less resolution if needed on a 3K display, makes the image quality worse than 1080p. You don't have to go further than the MSI subforum where they have been using 3K displays for both the GT60 and GS60 for a year now, and you see ZERO complaints. None.

Yet people here who don't own these laptops, are all doom. Wonder who I should trust...

 

I excluded those results from my sources solely due to them being run on laptops known to throttle the GPU when maxed out in games. The review itself even said they had to throw out some results from massive overheating and throttling. It is possible they only kept results with no throttling at all, their write up on methods was not detailed enough to be certain. Even if they are accurate though, they are for 870m anyway so they are at most barely relevant.

Fair enough, my estimate of 35% average FPS decrease was after figuring dropping the AA though, my base estimate was 33-50% depending on the game. You are correct though in that I was not accounting for that 8%. I had calculated the 4800x900 resolution to be just over 2x the pixels of 1080p, and was going by my memory of 3k being just over 2x the pixels, I did not realize there was that big of a gap till now though.

That probably does throw my estimate off by a little, and we will need to wait for good 980m benchmarks to come out. I still suspect however that most games getting over 70-80 FPS on a 970m at 1080p will be fine to play at 3k on a 980m.

 

I really hate the bezels of the P35W/X tbh. For the GS60/70 are you simply just not taking the risk in terms of thermals? I'd like an Aorus X5 970m if such a thing exists soon, preferably with 980m if it'd be thermally efficient enough! In terms what what's actually available, I don't really like anything on offer 100%. I would love to see a Lenovo Y50-70 with a 970m. That'd probably interest me the most at this point.

 

Well cloud, feel free to grab one of the SLI MSI models and get a 3K screen and let us know XD.

That being said, I wouldn't want to go as high as 3K as I said. I rather run native and max, and for me that's 1440p 120Hz being the highest I'll go.

 

Yeah, that's fine, I'm just going off my own experiences with running non-native resolutions (not 3K screens), and from what other's have said - combined with the big performance hit of 3K, I just don't think 3K is worth the performance hit, and nor do I think a single 980M is enough to feel like an upgrade if you run it at 3K.

(Also, I'd rather use the horsepower for 120hz/120fps at 1080p).

 

There will be also 14" Gigabyte P34W v3 (with GTX 970M), coming to Europe sometimes in December, earlier in US.

Would you mind expanding on your elimination reasons for those other models you mentioned?

I'm going through similar list and kinda eliminated mostly the same models, but I'm left with MSI GS60, Gigabyte P34W v3 and maybe also Gigabyte P35W v3, though I found it less desirable than new MSI GS60.

 

Ah, 1440p that wondrous near perfect laptop resolution that NO-ONE makes a display panel at. I am actually fine with the idea of 3k since no-one seems to have 120hz display options , 1440p 120hz on an Alienware 18 or such would be an instant sale for me though, I might forget to even look at the price.

 

I know right? >_>. Personally I'm more and more wishing I could get 980Ms for this P370SM3 shell. They're so cool I'll be able to play the more heating games in the daytime (like Crysis 3 which I just borrowed, or BF4 with my friend) and I'll be able to sacrifice slave GPU cooling for CPU cooling... which means my entire system on the whole will run a lot cooler. Which is great for me. But that $2000 USD price tag huh. Even if I sold my 780Ms for $700 for the pair or something, it's still plenty.

 

I absolutely will if possible. Oh, I will

I'd love 1440p displays too mate, but what are the odds of they creating one that also have 120Hz? One can always dream

What will be more demanding, 1080p and 8xAA 120FPS or 3K and 4xAA 60FPS?
I don't have any evidence to back it up, but I think the 3K/4xAA will look significant better.

 

Well, the ROG Swift is 1440p and 144Hz and G-Sync and 8-bit TN, so we know the panels are out there.

 

Well, I don't know, but I know I wouldn't use 8xMSAA at 1080p in a bid to get to 120fps, I'd use 2 or 4xMSAA - jaggies don't bother me much, and if you really want to use the speed of 120fps/120Hz then you're not really hanging around looking for jaggies either.

 

Guys, i dont know which to buy.
gs70 or gs60.
I like both but cant chose which one to buy

 

First of all, neither will be getting 120 FPS (or likely even 60 FPS at times for that matter) at max settings in modern games, even on 980M SLI. Second, most deferred engines nowadays don't support MSAA or have terrible performance hit and image quality with it enabled. You'd want to combine some form of post AA with SSAA for best results. FXAA thru the Nvidia Control Panel is surprisingly non-blurry at extremely high resolutions and more temporally stable than other forms of post AA. Nvidia has probably improved its algorithm over the years.

 

I thought manufacturers were a little hasty releasing 3k panels with the 800M series and just outright wrong for releasing the 4k with that series. I've had the 870M with 3k for a month now and I was content with it but I certainly wished it could do more. The 970M is much more satisfying now and whenever I'm not getting 50+ fps, I swap to 1080p and I'm perfectly fine. I still think 4k is too early even for the 900M series though. 3k is probably going to be a personal preference thing until at least the next gen of GPUs come out. I'm definitely an early adopter so I'm used to hearing people claim the old stuff is better and I totally get and respect their reasoning. If given the choice, I still would take a 96Hz+ FHD panel over a 3k panel with this gen of GPUs and I think that's a valid argument to not get 3k. I, for one, do not see any distortions or blurring from the downscaling, so it does not bother me to have to switch to that when needed. I'm sure there are people who really can see differences though. For those that Next year, I would expect most people to move onto better resolutions(especially with more games being made for those resolutions). I hope(really hope) that we move on from TN panels though... Sick of seeing those things.

 

Is anyone thinking of getting the GT70 with 970m? The base model is looking pretty good for its price. i7 4710 + 970M combo for 1499.?