6860 Replacement due within 3-4 weeks

holy cow 2k more than the 8800gts? thats a big margin to think of it. well.....better wait for those reviews just to be sure!

 

Here it is:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

 

That cannot be accurate. I have never once trusted Notebookcheck, as most on this forum will tell you, they tend to be "off" with most of their scores.

Not saying the 9800m GTS isn't better, but 2,000 points... there's no way. That would put it up to par with the 8800m GTX, and with 64 US's... it just can't happen.

 

hmmm i wonder what drivers theyre using on those. 76++ on the 8800 gts. max i got is 7211. all stock.

 

Our T5550 crimps our 3DMark score.

 

lol i guess s..time to think about that T9300 upgrade

 

i think 2k+ 3dmark is over optimistic they have only 1 test run which sounds suspicions.

since both the 8800gts and the 9800gts share same numbers of shaders and differ very slightly in clocking 500/600 core 1250/1500 shaders, it may be that they got this score on a 1gb board (if at all).

they say the 9800gts should compare with a 880gtx which is not bad.

last point note the 1gb is max spec not only :

(from german by google translate)

 

Again, being a 256bit card, it's not going to matter. If the 9800m GTS was 512bit, it could use the 1Gb of VRam.

 

Well now that we know whats going on with the machine... i'm kind of curious about things.

Will there be two hard drive slots? Because with a 75watt GPU it would seem logical that the fan(s) and heatsink for that unit would have to take up ALOT more space than with our current 8800gts. And as much as the new chipset and GPU impress me i really need the internal storage because i carry around everything and i'm limited in the size of baggage i can carry and externals (except very small ones) dont fit into my bag. So i've stretched the 640gb that i have now as far as they would go to cram everything into them that i need/want. and even my slim 320 external is 3/4's full

I wonder how this is going to change the bottom of the case? because its great to have a 9800 in the machine... but unless it magically runs at artic temps the single small fan in the FX isnt going to be able to cool a 75watt card (as far as i know and i could be entirely wrong)

 

So... It's true this is a 75 Watt card then?
Thats... Horrible... :|

How do you think the battery life will compare?

 

I dont know honestly... but it does seem to be a prevasive rumor around here. I really dont see how though its comprable to the 8800gtx and that was only a 35watt card.

What i'm hoping is that everyones getting it confused with the 9800 1gig card (which probably is a 70/75watt card) I simply hope that a single (die shrunk) 9800gts isnt going to take more power than dual 8800gtx's in SLI...because if thats truely the case its the most inefficant notebook card ever created. And i would much rather have 2 of the 8800gtx's if thats the case.

Just dont know yet until we get an actual tech sheet for the cards or the computer i guess.

Sager didnt look like they upgraded their PSU's in the new 9262's though so i'm hoping that they are all still 30/40 watt cards

 

Hmm I'm not sure if it will be 75. On notebookcheck.net you have 65W for 9800GT which is higher model, and 75W for 9800GTX. On their web page 9800GTS is rated as 75W which is incorrect I think.

 

I think I should say that Notebookcheck.com is COMPLETELY unreliable.
I was the one who gave the link and I think the numbers are completely wrong.

 

I wouldn't say it's completely unreliable. Quite often though. Look at the information provided, take it with a pinch of salt and make your own conclusion. Don't let notebookcheck make it for you. They can be right sometimes, but don't go all bwah-wah-wah over it. Seriously, save yourself some grief.

As for 2K more than the 8800M GTS, you could get around 2K more than the default config for the 6860FX with a T9300. My point is, 3dmark06 scores are also processor dependent, among other things.

 

Yeah thats right, just a litlle detail thats is not so clear, the 9800gts is runing on a Q6600 and the 8800gts on a T8100, on the 6831FX with 7500 it bench 8211... see for yourself in more details test


http://www.notebookcheck.com/NVIDIA-GeForce-9800M-GTS.9893.0.html
Standard 1280x1024) Q6600 2048 MB 600 / 800MHz 512MB GDDR3 177.39 9683

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8800M-GTS.6934.0.html
Pavilion HDX9320EG (Standard 1280x1024) T8100 3072 MB 500 / 800MHz 512MB GDDR3 Forceware 167.53, 7.15.11. 6753

P-6831FX ( 1280x800) T7500 3072 MB 512MB 8211

 

Hmm there's also resolution. The T8100 and Q6600 are running on 1280 x 1024. Since it's a Q6600, I assume it's a clevo 9262. In case you didn't know, that's a quad core DESKTOP processor. That will definitely outscore the most mobile chips.

 

P-7811FX vs P-6860 FX

$1450 - $1350 (but will go on sale for clearance )
9800m GTS - 8800m GTS
200GB - 320GB
4GB DDR3 - 4GB DDR2
Better CPU - Weaker CPU
1920x1200 - 1440x900

I really hope the new refresh will have built in bluetooth. Apart from that, I guess that's the end of the speculation.

 

Im actually watching newegg to put onsale the t9500 or p8600.

 

Yep. This thing looks fantastic and I can't wait.

Pardon my cluelessness, but the new resolution (1920x1200) is superior to the old one right? So that means the screen was upgraded?

 

Way superior.

From worst to best (16:10 ratio):
1280x800 -> 1440x900 -> 1680x1050 -> 1920x1200.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WUXGA

 

Correct. Basically, it means higher detail.

 

Here are benchmarks of the 8800gtx vs the 9800gt which is just the 8800gtx basically die shrunk so the new card in the 7811 will score abit lower , by how much im not sure cause its clocked higher on the core and the shaders then our 8800gts`s are . http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=272659&page=17

Scroll about halfway down and you will see paladins post from sager who benchmarked both cards with the same equipment aside from the cards but i think it will give a general idea for people thinking that maybe the new 9800s are that much faster then the last gen cards.

 

I don't understand why everyone compares the 8800m GTX and the 9800m GTS. They aren't direct replacements of each other. Wouldn't it make more sense to compare the 8800m GTX with the 9800m GTX?

I'm FAR more curious to know how the 8800m GTS stacks up against the 9800m GTS.

Considering that's the upgrade from the P-6860 to the 7811...

 

Whos everyone ? this is showing a apples to apples comparison of the new cards .
for all the speculation going around here its giving a general idea of what to expect since we all know the scores of the 8800gts already which means we basically already know the scores of the 9800gts as well cause its the SAME cards except clocked slightly higher on the core and shader which i can already do to get and approximate idea of what the new card will score minus maybe 100 points in say 3dmark..

oh and the thread i linked to is the 9800gt vs 8800gtx no where in that thread is the 9800gts but you would have to read it to know .

 

Me:
"I'm FAR more curious to know how the 8800m GTS stacks up against the 9800m GTS. "

You:
"oh and the thread i linked to is the 9800gt vs 8800gtx no where in that thread is the 9800gts but you would have to read it to know ."


I said I'd rather learn about the 9800m GTS V.S the 8800m GTS.
But You would have to read my post to know.

 

The thread is telling you how there going to stack up against one another Why ?
because the 9800gt is the 8800gtx just dieshrunk . The 9800gts is the 8800gts die shrunk both the 9800gts and 8800gts have 64 shader pipes the only difference between the 9800gts and 8800gts is that the 9800 is clocked slightly higher which if you do the math will tell you that the numbers are going to very similar between the two cards aside from a few hundred points on say 3dmark or in a game it will be a 2 or 3 fps more .

The cards line up with specs as follows:

9700M GT
32 shaders
625MHz core clock
1,550MHz shader clock
128-bit Memory interface
800MHz memory clock

9700M GTS
48shaders
530MHz core clock
1,325MHz shader clock
256-bit Memory interface
800MHz memory clock

9800M GTS
64 shaders
600MHz core clock
1,500MHz shader clock
256-bit Memory interface
800MHz memory clock

9800M GT
96 shaders
500MHz core clock
1,250MHz shader clock
256-bit Memory interface
800MHz memory clock

9800M GTX
112 shaders
500MHz core clock
1,250MHz shader clock
256-bit Memory interface
800MHz memory clock

i copy pasted that from johnkss post in another thread.

 

actually since i read the 9800gts spec few days ago, i immediately oc my gpu to same clocks - very stable no big numbers though.

so you think the move to g94 from g92 have zero performance gain ??

as it is a die shrunk, the 75w info seems completely silly, imagine intel releasing a 35nm cpu with 70w tdp, that wouldn't do even for April's fool's day.

 

I wouldnt say 0 performance gain , im sure there will be something gained and more so im thinking because you can maybe OC the new one and who knows how much headroom the new card will have for overclocking, but in the end the difference wont be Alot like maybe others are thinking or are hoping it will be . i was just putting some info out there more for people that were on the fence about getting a 6860 and if they can find one on the Cheap then they may want to grab that instead of holding out for something that isnt going to be alot more powerful then whats already available.

 

^ Well, the 1920x1200 LCD, better CPU and an updated GPU that can be overclocked for only $100 more is worth the wait in my opinion. It would be even sweeter if Best Buy offers it up on a sale in September.

 

What did you use to oc? What are your current clocks? I use rivatuner and have a core of 430, shader of 861 and memory of 340. The max it will let me go to is 575/1150/455

Is there something I can use to clock higher, and what drivers would you suggest?

 

core 430 means you are underclocking
deafult is 500/799/1250
i use 600/800/1500 same like the 9800 clocks
just use ntune nothing else is needed

as to drivers i just updated to the most recent(177.72), i have no numbers to show if they are better/worse than other. the 177.41 i used before had zero issues as well.

 

Gotcha!

Actually, I forgot which drivers I just installed. Where can I look and see?

This is my first nvidia pc, can't you tell?

 

Oh for sure if your talking about paying regular retail then no question the new model hands down . I was speaking more like if you found one at a bestbuy for say 7 or 8hundred dollars which they have been clearanced out that low before at certain stores.

 

download cpuid gpuz it is very useful tool for gpu monitoring
in the main window it will say which one you use.
or in ntune / view system info
or device manager / display adapter/...

 

You guys have any suggestions on a good looking game? I love crysis, but want to run and go get another game that would look great on the 6860.

Any suggestions?

 

games thread :

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=271735

 

I wouldn't go so far as to call it superior. Only higher or lower resolutions. Gaming on native resolution tends to look better as your screen doesn't have to adjust for the lower resolution, however it also means more work on your GPU, which may result in a slowdown. That said, higher resolution screens can work on lower resolutions, but not vice versa.

More importantly though, higher resolutions are not necessarily better. It also depends on what you're comfortable with. If you don't like small icons/characters or have poor eyesight , the 1920 x 1200 might not be the best screen for you. You can certainly increase the dpi or size, but why bother if you prefer a lower resolution?

Also, the 8800M GTS in the P6860FX can be overclocked just as well, it's not limited to the 9800M GTS.

 

What are suitable oc speeds for the 8800?

 

That actually depends on individual cards. You might want to test out and fine-tune it to speeds that work for you.

Speeds that work for one person may cause artifacts to happen in another.

 

What you said is true but I find that 1920x1200 on a 17'' looks crisp. You can increase the font size accordingly. If the 8800m GTS needs to be overclocked to match the 9800m GTS then what happens if you overclock the 9800m GTS?

 

Yes, but my point is that resolutions are very much a personal thing. Like I said, increasing font size is one way to deal with it, but then what would be the point of getting a high resolution screen in the first place? In this case, you don't really have a choice short of putting your own screen in. Additionally, as pointed out earlier, 1920 x 1200 on Crysis on your 9800M GTS or 8800M GTS isn't probably going to look crisp. Or it might look crisp and be unplayable. A lower resolution user running on native settings would be able to get better settings and smoother gameplay. Give and take.

Secondly, I'm just pointing out that you mentioned that the 9800M GTS can be overclocked, but so can the 8800M GTS. Right now, the 9800M GT and 8800M GTX have basically the same performance. The odds are that the 9800M GTS will have similar performance to the 8800M GTS. You might get a 5-10% improvement (probably more towards 5), or you might see a statistically insignificant increase. However, since the 9800M GTS runs cooler, you will probably be able to overclock it higher.

 

So far this forum has been really helpful, and I'm excited to snipe the new P-7811FX. I was wondering if any one was planning on/or had any ideas of putting a blue ray drive in the thing?

 

HD Downloads > Physical Blu Ray disc.

 

The high res is what sold me truly. It's the only 17'' notebook under $2000 that i can get with that res, a good graphics card and a good CPU. The fact that the people in this forum are much more helpful then the people on the dell one also doesn't hurt at all either .

 

I dont understand something about the last round of laptops that was released by the big companies (Toshiba, Dell, HP, Gateway)

A while back, the commom processor was the T7*** that clocked at over 2ghz.

Was there a performance suffice made when they started dumping the t5*** in (especially in the 6860)

I will say that the 5550 seemed to hold it's own, but really, would it of hurt to up the price 25 or so bucks for a 2.0 or 2.2 Centrino?

 

imo the biggest problem with the T5550 is that it doesn't allow for virtulization. Which is important to me personally.

 

Now to convince the wife I need to upgrade after just purchasing my laptop in febuary...

 

Well, retail prices for the T5550 and the T7500 (even OEM) is the tune of almost $200 difference. Even in bulk, I would imagine it would cost them more than $25. Still, it's one of the easiest things to downgrade, as a T5XXX would still be sufficient for most users without a serious loss in performance.

 

Tell me about it, i got an HP lappy a month before i saw the 6860... that was a hard sell to the misses. But in the end i won out and walked away with my shiney new game box and she got a really nice entertainment HP out of the deal.


hrm... i hate making choices. As nice as this new system is(and i really want it) i'm kinda torn between it and going back to the 6860. The only thing i really want from the new machine is the 1920x1200 screen (as i just found CAS3 ram for the 6860) Which should more than make up for the diffrences in FSB in the new system And i have a feeling that DDR3 thats going to be in the 7811 is going to be CAS6 or CAS7 to save Gateway money (hey the cost savings have to come somewhere so i understand)

If DDR2 and DDR3 were interchangeable i would love it... but as it is they are not so i dont know if the 7811 is really going to be an improvement to the 6860...except the obvious CPU upgrade

And the 9800 will run a bit cooler (assuming its a normal 30/35 watt card) but i dont know if its going to be that big of a diffrence.

Sorry for the rambling, i guess i'm just writing out my thoughts

 

The bottom line is that we're getting a better screen, slightly (?) better RAM, a marginaly better or at least cooler running GPU, and a better more energy efficient processor for $100 more.

Im In.

Counting down the days...

Anyone have a battery life estimate for this thing?
Or is it too hard to make a prediction like that?