What is the worlds most powerful gaming PC / Laptop??

I'm just being bored and curious so I wouldn't mind hearing from the experts on NBR.

 

I saw a quad core notebook on tigerblog...

 

What's the worlds most powerful mobile graphics solution and processor?

 

Google search could also be your friend in need.

 

Um... Clevo D900F.

 

This, Core i7, 8GB of ram, Nivida G280 and it lasts a full hour on battery!

 

whats corei7?

 

Has only one gtx280m ?

 

the Clevo D900F is the most powerful system in terms of processing power... no doubt
- Core i7 processor support
- tri-channel memory
- three internal HDDs
- high-end MXM 3.0 videocard (launched with Nvidia GTX 280M)

 

But thread was most powerfull GAMING PC / Laptop the D900F is most definitively not.

That honor goes too...

Asus W90 right now

and soon will have the Dellienware M17X and Sager 9850 to compete with it.

W90 has 4870 Crossfire and the other two have GTX280 SLI, the D900F only has one card thus why even with the better cpu it cant compete in gaming.

Here is a Vantage run on my W90



Thats definitely in desktop league, if it was not for the cpu maxing out @ 2.8ghz the overall score would be much higher, but the GPU score of 11,000 is what is important to look at there.

 

As a notebook I think it's either W90 or M17X (Both use mobile computing hardware, not like desktop CPU and mobile stuff hybrid)

 

ASUS W90 and Alienware M17x at present ---- I think

 

the top of the top are:

for 17"
- Alienware M17x "refresh".... with dual Nvidia GTX 280M (in SLI)

for 18.4"
- Clevo M980NU (aka. Sager 9850).... with dual Nvidia GTX 280M (in SLI)
- ASUS W90..... with dual ATI 4870 (in crossfire)

the AW M17x and Clevo M980NU have exactly the same specifications (chipset, platform, etc.) for hardware support.

 

Sager has i7 too in their 9280 I dont know about any of their others

 

The most powerful laptop in the world at the moment is the ASUS W90, as previously mentioned by other fellow members of the forum in this thread, however, the back and reloaded M17X by Dell and Alienware, and the Clevo M980NU are going to surpass that title I presume.

The both of them have very equal specs (both can use up to a QX9300 Core 2 Quad Mobile Processor and 2 Nvidia GeForce GTX 280m's on SLi), the differences will be minimal, and my guess is that battery life and cooling capabilities will be the biggest differences.

The Clevo D900F is not aimed towards the Extreme Game Performance market, unlike its predecessor, the Clevo D900C, just because it sports only 1 Nvidia GeForce GTX 280m Graphics Card, the thermal design does not allow for a second card because of the Core i7 processor's TDP.

For comparison's sake, my Sager NP9262 (Clevo D901C):

Sager NP9262 / 8800m GTX's @ Stock

Sager NP9262 / 8800m GTX's @ 650 MHz Core / 1,650 MHz Shader / 1,050 MHz Memory (Highest Overclock for 8800m GTX's in a Sager NP9262) Stable.

My Sager NP9262 is still ranking high and within the Top Five (M980NU, M17X, W90, NP9262, Whitebook), and I have had it for one year already, still working like new.

 

Wow thats a great OC, your almost up to my W90 score with it.

 

isn;t it the AVADirect D900F which is the fastest in todays market?

 

we went over this.... that is just a re-branded Clevo D900F.

its the fastest for raw processing power... murders all mobile CPUs for sure.

its only got a single high-end videocard, so its not the fastest in mobile gaming.

 

What is the best Gaming Desktop that is out there?

 

Since when did the Asus w90 pass the 9262 in performance? I could have swore johnksss's scores were higher than any w90 owners in vantage.

 

I hate to break your heart, because obviously you are very into your W90. But my Sager NP9262 D901C with Q9650,4 GB of RAM, 9800M GTX SLi 1GB, and Vista 64, outperforms your system on Vantage and 3DMark.

The W90 is a good system, but I dont see it being even close to "the most powerful laptop in the world." If your 4870's used GDDR5 and were the same exact cards as the desktop, and you had a better processor, that might be the case. But for now, the only system outperforming 9262's with dual 9800M GTX's and high-end quad core CPU's are the NEW Sager / Clevos with quad cores and dual 280M's. And even then, the 3dMark06 scores are only marginally better, whereas the W90 getting 13k in 3dMark06 is laughable compared to un-overclocked 9262's messing all over 15k. And oh yeah btw, I havent played a game besides Crysis I cant max out and get under 60FPS.

I just had to register and post just because of all this slander about the W90 being a better laptop than the 9262 with 9800M GTX's in SLi and quad core loveliness. That's just pure foolishness.

Sager 9280 with Q9650's and dual 280M's, are the only system better than the 9262's with top specs. Where are you getting these numbers that the W90 is better than the 9262? It doesnt get higher Vantage scores, it doesnt get higher 3dmark06 scores, and the gaming performance is about the same, and worse in CPU-intensive games, because the Sagers can hold better CPUs. Soooo...

 

I concur with the above poster. If the w90 had a qx9300 then things would probably be different, but with either the weaker 2.8 c2d or the 2.0 quad the cpu becomes the bottleneck in some games, meaning that the CPU score in 06 and vantage actually DOES matter because it affects in game performance.

 

Ask that question at the DesktopReview forum, that's what it's for.

You should have seen enough replies to answer your original question.

 

The stock W90 with dual core 2.8ghz gets over 15k in 3dmark06. The highest I have seen for W90 is near 18k using the QX9300 OC to 3.3ghz or something like that.

3dmark06 is heavily influenced by CPU, which is why it is not used much longer, and now resort to vantage. We are measuring the pure GPU, not total vantage score nor CPU score. There is no point in measuring CPU scores since we already know them.

For GPU score, the highest I have seen for W90 is 11k, that is a bit higher than what I have seen in 9800M GTX SLI, but there is not much of a difference anyways.

I don't think the HD4870 GDDR3 is stronger than 9800M GTX single cards, both on stock, but since everyone OCs around here, who knows? I bet there are 9800M GTX much faster than stock 280M because of that

 

Why does everyone imply that CPU score doesn't matter though. A q9650 will outperform a q9000 and a qx9300 (not oc to 3.0 or higher) in games that support multicores, so why is cpu score irrelevant in determining the better notebook when there's an obvious performance difference.

Edit: The highest vantage score from a 9262 is currently |Vantage P13,048/GPU11,016

 

Well for starters, an NP9280 doesn't have a Q9650 nor dual GTX 280Ms.

And currently the W90 has the highest scores in 3d06 and Vantage GPU scores (performance mode). I'm sure in High and Extreme modes it can do well there too since there is a way to actually OC the GPUs in crossfire now.

But as some mentioned, the M17x and the NP9850 could probably challenge the W90 and take those titles away.

Probably due to PhysX. It would be a better assessment if PhysX were turned off, but a good number of runs are done with PhysX on with nVidia based systems. But even in that context the W90 would be better machine seeing as it can take a QX9300 to 3.33ghz (and 4.0ghz if you're an Asus insider). You can take an X9100/E8435/T9900 to 4.0ghz with little issue, which would help the GPUs a lot seeing as they're bottlenecked by the CPU's clock speed. Now if Asus weren't so coy, we'd probably be seeing numbers higher than that.

 

To be fair, if the W90 is ousted by sli 280M, it won't be by much. 3dmark stresses the shaders the fullest and the 4870 has a lot of shaders. It's naturally a very good vantage bencher compared to G92.

 

You guys are wrong a 2.8ghz cpu on the W90 is enough to max out any game period, infact the stock 2ghz is enough for most games.

The total score of a 3dmark bench is not a number to be taken with so much weight on it, as it adds CPU score points, the faster you can get the CPU the higher than number gets. But in gaming once your gpu is maxed out or your past 60fps the gaming doesnt get better/faster.

Look at the W90 review, I tested many games at 2.0ghz then retested at 2.3ghz not a single game gained any fps because 2.0ghz was already enough to max out the game.

Just imagine how much a boost I have @ 2.8ghz for cpu power.

 

Give me game benchmarks, I'll eat you alive I promise

I already know 2.8ghz on my Q9000 (quad core) is maxing out any game easy with room to spare. Its all about GPU power and the 4870's are stronger than your cards.

 

That's flat wrong Vicious. I guarentee you'll see a noticeable game difference when playing games such as Supreme commander, GTA IV, and maybe WoW on max settings, detail, shadows, and throw in some AA between a 2.0 c2d and a 3.0 c2q.

 

Yeah you just picked out 2 games that are well known to be cpu bound and need a quad core to play. That accounts for .00001% of the game market. So as a whole it has no effect on "best gaming laptop" and I can OC to 2.8ghz remember?

 

Notice how you said "any game". I was simply pulling a few games to disprove you. I tend to play games with a lot of crap going on, on the screen at any given time. I enjoy complicated games that require cpu strength. However, most FPS's are rather simple, for what's on the screen, and can be easily maxed out with a mid c2d.

That's why even though I seriously looked at the W90, I went with the 9262 because it has no weakness in any game, where there may be only a few, but there are games that can break the w90.

 

Actually more and more games are becoming multithreaded, or have a patch that allows for multithreading. So it's not about the game requiring 4 cores to play, but rather making use of the cores available

If there is one potential issue with the 4870s it's that it requires a beefy CPU in order to get more out of it. Not so much with the nVidia cards, which is a good thing because you can just focus on working on one aspect of the machine to get the most out of it (the GPUs).

However, it's a double edge sword; though the ATi cards get weaker with a slower GPU, it also gets stronger with a faster one, which is why the Vantage GPU score and game performance fluctuate based on the CPU clock frequency (even though the GPU score is supposed to assess how the GPUs perform without influence of the CPU). Kinda like the whole thing with the Hulk getting stronger when he gets angrier. That said, I would love to see a W90 running Vantage and games at 4ghz (and maybe with a GPU OC too).

Also, I can name a couple of games where both systems would fall flat on their faces

 

that is extremely debatable

..you can build

a i7 extreme

with 4 GTX 295's in SLI

since 4 is the most in SLI if i remember

 

It's really two GTX 295s = 4 cores in SLi. Unfortunately, you can't get Three GTX 295s in Tri SLi.

But if you have two Asus Mars cards, then that would be as powerful as you can get.

 

Well despite the debate, I have a W90 and am ready to bench games for a competition at any time.

The vast majority of games are gpu bound not cpu bound and other than the new GTX280 machines, nothing will stand up to the dual 4870's.

 

Prototype and Sins of a Solar Empire arrive this week, I'll compare benches with you if you're game.

 

Heh, this is getting even more interesting than before, I am anxious to see what is better, two 9800m GTX's on SLi, 2 GTX 280m's on SLi, or 2 Mobility Radeon 4870's on Crossfire.

Anyway, for comparative purposes:

Far Cry 2 - Ultra High - DirectX 10 - 1920x1200 - 8800m GTX SLi @ Stock

The framerate should be 5 frames higher than that, I forgot to uninstall Windows Blinds completely, I did another benchmark run after than I uninstalled it completely, and the framerate increased by 5 frames.

3DMark 2006 - 8800m GTX SLi @ 650 MHz Core, 1,650 MHz Shader and 1,050 MHz Memory, stable

Devil May Cry 4 - Super High - 1920x1200, 8800m GTX SLi @ Stock

Anyone up for FurMark?, it is a balanced test, actually, and the CPU does not really matter that much:

FurMark - Dox 185.85 - 1920x1200 - Benchmarking Mode - 60000 MS - 8800m GTX SLi @ Stock

 

I have prototype, so we can do that one. No built in bench though so we would have to fraps bench and esp in that game since its so big I would imagine where your at in the game (and even the time line of the game) will vastly change the fps.

If I can find a way to share saved games i can toss you a few save files and we can just load them and read the fps layout at load so we know we are rendering the same thing.

 

Anybody feeling that Hardware is surpassing the games right now?
Feels like 2007... (8800 baby!)

I can't wait to see 300 series desktop, and then laptop gpu versions!
They will rape my eyes!

 

A Nvidia 8800 still can game quite well.

developers are making sure to get as much of the gaming systems out there to be able to play... or they will just lose money.

for high-end games, range is usually from minimal DX9 card with 128MB.

for low-end to mid-end games, range can be as low as integrated DX9 card.

 

I have had an 8800m GTS right around when they hit the mobile market

I really hope Windows 7 will sport some nice performance enhancing stuff
I will probably build my own Windows 7 nvidia 400 Core i8? Comp. sometimes on the summer or for christmas next year


And hopefully get a 15" MacBook Pro (non-gimped like the current one...)
If it sports 75% real world performance compared to a PC for gaming I'll be in!

As in Crysis High = 40FPS on a PC with same specs vs Bootcamp/Virtualization Crysis High = 30FPS

 

I might not know what i'm talking about but if you just took a D901C w/ a Q9770 extreme and upgraded to two GTX 280Ms in SLI wouldn't it destroy everything else in terms of overall combined GPU/CPU power?

Does the D901C board even support 280s in SLI?

 

I don't think a macbook will ever sport 40 fps in crysis on high.

@Viscious, that might work. My main problem is my selection of games is very limited because of my location, and I don't have a personal internet connection so I can't download any additional benchmarks at the moment. We're supposed to be getting a chance for a hardline internet connection sometime this month, and if the price is reasonable I might pick it up and start dling the more standard gaming benchmarks.

@Beersentes, unfortunately the mxm port that the d901c uses doesn't offer 280m's in SLI. They don't have the hardware, where as the mxm 3.0 do. Making it impossible to run 280m's in SLI in the d901c without a mobo upgrade.

 

Ok, does a D90XX mobo even exist that supports LGA 775 and MXM 3.0? If Clevo doesn't soon figure out how to support i7s and 2 x GPUs they might as well start supporting C2Qs and 2XX (and even 3XX) series GPUs in SLI. Since that would take the cake afterall

@GamingACU, are you talking about hardlines @ Caldwell? I might have to move again if that's true!

 

Yes, I am, but it's still only Rumint...I heard the Wifi up here's worthless and way too expensive.

There's no current d90xx board that supports mxm 3.0 in SLI, and I doubt there will be, or at least one for the d901c. That'd be like clevo releasing a new bios for it that allows cpu OCing....they won't because it'd hurt their profit on the i7.