The New Gateway Gaming Laptop is HERE ( P-7801u)

I see they already dropped the price $50.. it is $1599.00..... Still not received mine starting to get worried..

 

be patient man. I myself am excited as to how this game runs Dead Space and crysis.

Please do some benchmarks when you get it.

 

can I get it in canada? does newegg ship to canada?

 

Does Newegg.com ship internationally?
Newegg.com does not currently ship internationally; we only deliver to locations within the United States and to Puerto Rico.

Sorry man Got any American friends that live just across the border?

 

newegg.ca....

 

I believe someone has already posted that the newegg.ca site does not have this laptop listed..

 

oh that was me before too lol

yeah i was just throwing it out there, but newegg.ca has ****ty prices and less selection than its american counterpart, I doubt I will be using it until the selection increases and prices drop, NCIX is much better at this point

 

Finally arrived.. too late to start into testing it tonight but I will be giving it a run down tomorrow... Did check Bios and it has 9C.08.00

 

ok so I couldn't sleep and loaded up 3DMark06.. Straight out of the box the score was 8673..

http://service.futuremark.com/home.action;jsessionid=BF6FA11508DC48FFC3DECBF475742963

 

What driver version? Go into the NVidia Control Panel and click on System Information in the bottom left corner. Also, what are the stock clock setting on it? 8600s out of the box is better than my 7811 out of the box.

 

I would post a screenie of GPU-z but work locked all our USB drives so no way to easily transfer screen shot.. But here is the information:

Driver Version: nvlddmkm 7.15.11.7615 (Forceware 176.15)
GPU Bios Version: 62.94.48.00.08
GPU Clock: 600MHz / Memory: 799MHz / Shader: 1500MHz

Just did the registry editing to shut off the Powermizer while attached to power outlet.

Searched the board for updated video drivers and found some I want to move to.. I just can't get to any of the sites that have them from work Will have to download when I get off work in 8 more hours.

I need to get a key for 3dmark06... I know I purchased it for my desktop at home just have no idea where I put the key... hmm saved yahoo email maybe...

Soon as I find my key for 3dmark06 I will post some scores running at max resolution.. can't adjust anything with the basic edition I downloaded..

 

Actually, scores from the basic edition are best for comparisson in the forum, as that is what most of the results here are based on. If you post scores for max resolution (1920x1200), that really won't mean much to most of us here.

 

Yeah but people wanna see the difference in the 7811 at max resolution versus the P-7801u at max resolution... The extra 512MB of ram on the video card is suppose to improve higher resolution performance and people want to know by how much.

 

It comes stock with GPU BIOS 62.94.48.00.08, GPU Driver 176.15, Core 600MHz/Memory 799MHz/ Shader 1500MHz
System Bios 9C.08.00... not sure what else people wanted to know..

These scores are with out of the Box drivers and settings.

3dMark06 score of 8673 running the free basic edition with the standard resolution
3dMark06 score of an even 7000 running all basic settings but with the resolution setting at 1920x1200.

Ran it again at 1920x1200 but this time with the extra tests you get with the Advanced version and the score was: 6999

Still need to update my video drivers but I am pretty happy with it. The only games I have here with me are WoW, F.E.A.R., and Oblivion.

Loaded WoW onto it last night and of course it can run it max just fine.. I play PvP server so I only turn up the stuff needed to assist in PvP Survival like distance rendering.. not that it matters my 128kb connection kills me in PvP 9 times out of 10.

It will play FEAR fully maxed AA and everything at 1600x1200.. (highest resolution my non-updated copy of FEAR does) it runs very smooth too.. I am gonna DL the hardware monitor so that I can track temps while playing once I am done here at work.

Oblivion I figured would slow it way down, but again.. I pretty much MAXED out Oblivion settings AA, Shadows, water effect at full 1920x1200 and it ran just fine.. Only played it for about 15 mins running through open forest area outside Imperial City and then into a cave to see what it looked like with a torch and the lighting effects. Very impressive and smooth.

Does Oblivion have a Framerate monitor that you can pull up onscreen?

Any other tests or questions people have I will run/try to answer. Will post new scores once I update video drivers and such..

 

thanks for posting the 1920x1200 score.
can anyone with a 7811 run same test ? (rep is promised to first 3 posts )

 

Updated to the DOX 180.44 drivers and regular score was 8675... Thought it would increase it more than 2

 

i think people reported better results with the 180.43....
however, am not sure its worth the downgrade process, as synthetic benchmarks are only synthetic benchmarks...

 

Hmm... running Dox 178.24 at 1920x1200 I got 7079 on stock 7811 with no OC. I was rater surprised that it looked as good as it did at max resolution. The only real nasty spot was in the canyon. There is noticable stuttering in that area too. I should say I have always noticed stuttering in that segment, but it was more noticeable at max res.

 

Very interesting.. regardless of the scores I am happy with my new laptop Price and availabilty were right for me and it plays all the games I want to play at Max Resolution of 1920x1200

 

No doubt there. Aside from Crysis, I have been able to max out every game I have tried.

For reference, my standard 3DMark06 score is 8796 with no overclocking. So my 1920x1200 score of 7079 is a drop of 1717 points, or slightly less than a 20% drop for 75% more pixels. That's pretty impressive.

 

thanks for the interesting info.
sorry cant rep at the moment (spread love thing) i o u 1

it seems performance is identical all the way...

 

Yeah that pretty much settles it then.

Even on laptops a 256bit card cant use the 1gb of vRAM. I didnt think it could, but i was holding out hope

 

Not at all. All it means is that the 3DMark06 benchmark does not require more than 512MB of video memory. In fact most, if not all, of todays games don't need or use more than 512MB of video memory. That's not to say it won't happen in the future. There was a nice article comparing a 256MB, 512MB and 1GB version of an NVidia card that was close to on the mark. I tried googling it but didn't come up with it. Basically, they saw a decrease in performance due to memory requirements in the 256MB card in several game benchmarks, but no difference between the 512MB and 1024MB cards (except one instance where the 1024MB card was worse, maybe in SLI, I forget).

"256bit" has nothing to do with the amount of memory a card can use. It is the bandwidth of the memory bus, or how much data can be transmitted through the bus in one clock strobe. 256bits means that the bus can transfer data from memory to the GPU 32 bytes at a time. But you are still limited by how fast you can get the data out of the video memory.

The great thing about PCI Express is that while our video cards have 512MB of video memory (or 1GB in the 7801's case), we are not limited to just 512MB. If you look in the NVidia control panel, you'll see that it reports a lot more memory than we have on the card. That's because we have access to system memory to be used as video memory. And with PCI Express, we can get at that memory faster than with AGP, but still not as fast as the onboard memory. In the future, with some new game that requires it, when we have to dip into the memory space beyond 512MB, we'll notice the drop in framerate going to slower system memory, but Anderj will not. How much of a hit will that be, I'm not sure.

For now, they are pretty much equal. One or two years from now, Anderj will very likely be better off. Me, I'm not bothered. There's three years worth of games I have to catch up on

 

i think you misread kamin, by cant use he presumably meant cant utilize to full potential. which seems to be the case as there is no benefit over reading from the "slower ram", as to future games...i say lets stay here for now.

 

At least you still understand my mad ramblings

But i'm almost of the opinion that it actually just can't really even use the RAM. Not like we normally consider "use" in any case.

@fisiks
The 256bit band width is exactly what i'm talking about. Maybe when cards are faster the limit on cards will be removed... But right now i think its just a nice gimik for nVidia to use.

I will be the first to state that i dont know the technical aspects of it. But i think the problem (and this is only my rough deciphering of the issue) is the cards simply arent fast enough to use 1gb of vRAM. Thats why nVidia had to make a 512bit card, to make up for the limited speed with more throughput.

If our cards grab data at 32bytes at a time it takes 1,387,837 strobes to clear out 512MB of data. So double that for 1gb of data.

I think nVidia realized they couldnt make a card that fast(either because it would lag or like the 1gb gts just wouldnt ever really use the extra 512mb of memory), so they increased the amoung of data transfered each time with the 512bit cards. And with the Hugely increased bandwidth you can now make use of more video memory. Its not actually any faster its just being able to be accessed more readily due to more of it coming through the pipeline at a time.

Again this is a rough guess at the issues of the cards so i might be wrong, but in my odd ball mind it seems to make sense

 

I certainly see how you reasoned that out. But you are making some pretty big assumptions and, to be polite, they are a bit off base. Bandwidth has nothing to do with the AMOUNT of memory, only how fast it can be moved.

But you are correct that clearing out 512MB or loading 512MB would take a long time, almost 2.1 hundreths of a second. Remember the memory bus clock on these things is running at 800MHz. And it would actually take over 16 million strobes to read out a full 512MB of memory. 512MB / 32 bytes a strobe = 16,777,216 strobes. 16,777,216 strobes / 800,000,000 strobes a second = .021 seconds. Now there is also memory latency. So if it takes 5 strobes to read out memory, then we are already over a tenth of a second.

Fortunately, you don't have to move all that data everytime you want to update the screen. Each 1920x1200 image takes up slightly less than 9MB. The card has on it a minimum of two screen buffers (one where the final image is assembled, and the other is the image that is actually being displayed - assuming buffer A is currently being displayed, and buffer B is where the next frame is being assembled, then once the image in buffer B is finished, the display readout is switched from buffer A to buffer B and buffer A is where the next frame is assembled), for a total of 18MB. And you could also have shader buffers and texture buffers and clipping buffers and Z buffers. All that takes space as well. But what consumes MOST of that 512MB of data is the actual texture maps for different surfaces. Texture maps (bitmaps really) can be large or small, depending on how often the texture repeats on the surface and the level of detail. So, the texturemap for a section of wall could be a small bitmap that is repeated (which was quite obvious in the original DOOM) and the pixels get quite large when you get really close to the wall (also quite obvious in the original DOOM). Or the texturemap could cover the entire wall in high detail even when you are close (like in Crysis and Farcry), requiring very large texturemaps. Texturemaps in video memory can be applied quicker than texturemaps in system memory. Many games use different sets of texturemaps based on the resolution used for gameplay. Lower resolutions use smaller texturemaps with less detail and take up less space. Crysis is one of those games where in some areas you see framerates drop because even with 512MB of video memory, at 1920x1200 resolution some of those texturemaps end up in system memory. So a card with 1GB of memory will see less of a hit than a card with 512MB of memory. This is just one of the things that affect video performance.

Video memory itself is usually faster than system memory and so it is more expensive, so more memory would increase the cost of the card. But some manufacturers have sacrificed memory speed for memory quantity just to be able to put a bigger number on the packaging. That's why you see some 512MB cards outperform some 1GB cards. Remember NVidia just suppies the graphics chips, the memory could come from anywhere.

 

well if you want to get technical I guess your post "could" be true

Yeah I suppose that does make since, and its good because I got to learn something new today.

But its odd that so far a 1gb card shows no improvement over a 512 card (in the 256bit versions). If the card can use it then how come it doesnt? Even in the high end game like crysis the 1gb card didnt dominate (or even out perform) the 512mb card.

And in the 7811 vs 7801 the vRAM is the same caliber (ddr3)

 

Like I said, it is only one aspect of performance. And it certainly explains why the results were nearly identical for the 3DMark06 scores. As for Crysis, I haven't seen a benchmark comparing the 7801 and 7811 in Crysis. I'd appreciate a link if you've got one. Crysis, from what I understand, doesn't make the most efficient use of it's resources. It is quite possible that it just assumes that you don't have any more than 512MB and directs the GPU to put certain texturemaps in the system memory region. Or perhaps it doesn't use more than 512MB of video memory and it is just written poorly

 

What it comes down to, is that in most cases, even the best games with all of the features will not quite fill a 512MB card (with fiziks' exception in Crysis).

Performance is lost when the buffers are filled and swapping must occur. Because of the fact that the system bus is nowhere near as fast as the onboard memory bus, the card may wind up waiting a long time for the operations to complete. Now, to be fair, every card has to swap data sometime, and it is something we see everyday. But the killer comes when the card is constantly doing it.

Now, here is the conundrum (playing devil's advocate) - there will be a time where a game, with the right settings, will use more than 512 constantly. The question comes now, will the rest of the card be up to snuff? I will say its a fair bet that memory bandwidth is no issue right now (remember, it is 800Mhz DDR - so effectively 1.6Ghz clockspeed. There is plenty of bandwitdh). But given the more complex game, can the card actually render fast enough that the extra memory will be used...?

 

Most games I play pop up a little "LOADING..." in between scenes. Among other things, this is where new textures are loaded into video memory. Crysis goes hogwild on textures. Even the sand is gorgeous. They could go without half of them and not lose much from the artism or gameplay.

 

Got my 7801.
The display has an area about 1/4 across screen and a couple of inches in diameter that has a "faded" area. Notice it when the screen is black/dark, when my background is colourful it doesn't show. Is it a lighting issue on it or what?
Sorry for being a noob, but my other laptops don't have this problem. Is it something I need to talk to Gateway about or what? I bought it from newegg a couple of weeks ago.

 

agreed. Reality is 512MB more of GPU RAM just isn't worth $400, that's a fact.

 

I didn't notice that on my laptop but can look later tonight and see. The screen is one of the things I really like about the laptop. It looks much more crisper and clearer than my old HP Screen.

 

It looks great with a normal colourful desktop, but when the screen goes black it has that faded area, like a the light,etc. is messed up.

 

have you tried gently massaging the area with a lint free cloth? sometimes the two layers of the LCD get stuck together like when u push your finger on the screen and others have said it helps...

 

May give that a try. thanks
I'll be gentle. haha. That seems like exactly what it is. It looks beautiful but when it loads a game or something and the black screen pops up it sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

And newegg has just bumped the price to $1749...

@Anderj - I read your review- you can turn off the touchpad. But if you want to disable it when you plug in a mouse... Here is something from Eurasianman that might work for you-> http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=3913827#post3913827

 

I orderd mine about 5 hours before they bumped the price.

 

Just in time

 

Thanks for the link Fiziks... Gonna download the new Synaptics drivers and see how they work... I use the WASD keys to move and my thumb always wanders down and hits the touchpad at the worst times..

 

Yeah, you spend all that effort sneaking past half a dozen guards and then accidentally fire off a couple rounds and alert them to your presence.

The other thing I hate is that I'll be typing something up and suddenly the cursor is in a different part of the window and I'm suddenly typing in the wrong spot.

I think the only thing you lose with the dell driver is the scroll region on the right side of the touchpad. I could be wrong though, I almost always have the mouse plugged in.

 

Does anyone know if any other retailers besides Newegg sell this laptop? Preferably a Physical retailer like best buy or circuit city. Coz if I find someting wrong with it I would like to get it exchanged on the spot instead of waiting on shipment dates.

Cheers

-Z

 

Nope. Mine still works!

AFAIK, this is a "newegg" exclusive.

 

Bummer. I'm currently living outside the US(no new egg deliveries). So I guess I'm gonna have to have my brother order it and test it and deal with any potential returns. I'm seeing my family for Xmas so I want to have it ready and without problems by that time, though I'm gonna forfeit the right to unbox it . O well.

Off topic: Is there a similar machine for the same price tag?

 

you can buy my 6831! lol...

no there isnt, unless you ebay

 

Can any of the users expand on any problems they might be having with the Laptop. I really want to buy it, but since I'm not gonna receive it physically then I want to make sure that most of them are coming out ok.. I don't want to get the broken egg out of the dozen. Plus Andrej said he apparently had a lighting issue. I'm sure my bro wont notice things like that so I'll have to tell him what to look out for.

Cheers

-Z

 

I know this is off topic but can someone tell me how this laptop compares to the ACER Aspire AS8930-6448 or the AS8930-6306(Which I think will work as a gaming laptop). Or if you can point me to the right forum. I need to decide which laptop to get by Thursday.

Thanks

-Z

 

They are both for sale at newegg.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...Froogle-_-Notebooks-_-Acer+America-_-34115503

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...Froogle-_-Notebooks-_-Acer+America-_-34115507

Compared to 7811 -
both have slower GPUs (9700M GT and 9600M - one could speculate that they might use MXM cards), 6448 has faster cpu, both have 18.4" screen, but the 6306 has lower resolution (1680x945), better sound, both have 320GB 7200RPM hard drives (7811 has 200GB, 7801u has 320GB). Both have a fingerprint reader (oo la la). If you think the 7811 is big...

I was considering both of these when I bought my 7811. I felt the resolution was too low for a 18.4" screen (or a 17" screen) on the 6306 and only a 9600M compared to the 9800M in the 7811, made the 7811 the better buy over the 6306 and I was going to have a hard enough time finding a bag even for the 7811's dimensions. I got my 7811 for $1249, so the $500 difference between the 7811 and the 6448 took me to Best Buy. I could easily upgrade the 7811 to a T9400 for under $500 if I felt the P8400 wasn't up to snuff. So that and the better GPU in the 7811 made the 7811 the choice for me. (Others I considered were the Toshiba Qosmio, and Lenovo Y710 and Y730)

As for reliability, you'll have to check the ACER forum for that... http://forum.notebookreview.com/forumdisplay.php?f=22

P.S. Love the avatar

 

Thanks for the Reply it is very informative. So you think the P-7801u is the best choice. Funny I'm also considering the Qosmio X305. Also, how easy is it to upgrade the CPU on a laptop i.e. to upgrade to the T9400. I might want a bigger CPU and get also a blue ray disk drive if possible.

Thanks a Mil.

-Z

P.S. The avatar is my kid playing COD W@W. J/K

 

It's cake. Normally the CPU is made to be user accessible in case he/she wants to upgrade. Gateway laptops are especially easy on CPU upgrades. Mind you it will technically void your warranty, but I haven't seen anyone with an upgraded CPU have a problem getting warranty work done. Gateway and probably all other manufacturers really don't care or don't notice if you voided your warranty with a CPU upgrade. But to stay on point, it's easy, just read a few online tutorials to get the jist of it first.