How Much FPS Can We Expect Out of 7811?

If you play games on native such as UT3 or CoD4 or CS:Source or WoW?

 

my 5793 got 40fps for COD4 in 1920x1200, so for 7811 you should expect somewhere between 30-35fps.

 

.

 

35 fps make Panda sad>>

 

Spend more money and get a SLI 9800M GT/GTX rig?

 

Spend more money make Panda sad

 

You don't need to be in PC gaming if you are whining about that performance.

Do us, and yourself a favor, and go buy a console.

 

just lower the resolution and you'll be a happy panda.

 

You can't expect much performance boost from 8800m gts to 9800m gts, but if you have good finance, this one definitely is a worth upgrade.

 

who the hell is panda...? and if that makes him sad, do what KGann tells suggests

 

Seriously.

 

if you compare the 8800gts and 9800gts at same clocks there wont be a big difference and that's the reason why 9800gts has 100mhz faster gpu just to say that is faster and we made some improvements

When this notebook comes out we must open a topic to compare our benchmarks.

 

Console make panda sad.

 

warloque goes console make forum members happy pandas

 

if you compare 8800gts and 9800gts clock per clock you wont have big difference maybe 5 fps or less and for that nvidia decided to set higher clocks at 9800gts to make it a bit faster and to say that we made some progress.

that s the reason why 9800gts is clocked 100mhs faster tht 880gts

 

Alright, I was complaining that there was no Bluetooth since I use Bluetooth alot but this is ridiculous. You're complaining than a $1450 laptop can't play CoD4 in 1080p resolution at 60fps?

Maybe you should spend it on your schizophrenia. Just kidding.

Seriously though, this $1450 laptop can play Crysis at 1280x800 on High. If you want more performance, then go look at the Sager notebooks (NP8660).

 

if he wants more performance hes going to need more then the 8660 more like the 9262 with SLI [email protected] not to mention from the sound of it probably someone else just to carry it around for him cause it weighs about 12 pounds .

 

yea the 8660 is likely only marginally faster.

 

Wow i cant believe how many people are expecting this to be the messiah of computers. Its a great gaming rig, and about 1000 dollars cheaper than its next rival...but its only going to give you just a little better performance than the 6860. I would guess about 4% assuming the 6860 has a t8300. Just because the card says 9800 doesn't mean its "that" big of a deal. its just a die shrink with slightly faster clocks.

It is not a dual 9800gtx set up sager...but it is a really great rig for less than 1500 dollars.

What this computer will give you is a great rig that will run very cool and be able to game quite well for hours and hours and still stay really cool. It might not give you 100FPS in the most demanding games, but it WILL play those games (for relatively cheap) at good setting quite well

 

Those games will be nothing for the 7811, hell they are nothing for my dell with an 8600mGT. You saw me get 60+ FPS in WoW in another thread and this rig blows mine away.

 

The real difference will be the 1066 FSB, between that and higher clocks for the CPU/GPU and more cache will make it a lot more then 4% faster. But don't expect a huge difference, especially an upgraded CPU 6860 will be about on par with a standard 7811. Mostly just in cpu intensive tasks will there be any difference.

 

Thats basically what i was getting at. For the same price you can get the 6860 with a t8300 and basically have the same machine performance wise. The 7811 will still be a stronger machine...but not overly much (hence my guess of about 4%).

Its not a top of the line rig, but the 7811 "IS" i great rig at an amazing price. I just don't want everyone to get their hopes up that they will magically be able to play crysis at maxed settings with 100 FPS or anything like that.

 

To kind of give myself of an idea in the performance, I have been looking over the 8800m GTS Benchmarks topic with the 1.8GHz processor.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=217805

I have in my mind that it will probably be about 10 FPS faster than those benchmarks considering the .4GHz faster Processor, faster FSB, larger Cache, and slightly better video card. It could be more, and it could be less. I'm rather new to this sort of thing, but I think my estimate is a fair one.

EDIT: Also I forgot to mention that you should keep in mind the resolutions on those benchmarks are typically 1440x900.

 

i would say more like 5 for most first person shooting game, 10 FPS is like a 25% increase. even though the native resolution is 1920* eh i forgot, anyways, don't expect to run every game at that resolution and still get a decent FPS

 

But at least you can run WoW and CS:S at native all max and never dip below 50-60?

Also, what about UT3?

 

Go to the Gaming sub forum and ask that question.