***Aorus X7 Pro owner's lounge***

Hey everyone , the new X7 pro V5 has 6-GB 970m's correct ? Online specs are all mixed and every review shows gpuz reporting 6GB each card. The model I want to buy is the X7 Pro v5 SL2. I believe they are 6gb each but many sites , even aorus, is incorrect stating 3gb each. Gentechs review on YouTube shows a screen shot with 6gb each in gpuz

 

They're 3GB each, therefore 6GB total (both GTX 970M cards combined).

Anywhere on the Internet mentioning the 970M's in the X7 Pro are 6GB each is wrong and is giving misleading information (wether it be the v3 - v5 X7 Pro). I've personally not seen GTX 970M GPU's higher than 3GB each and I think that may be the only option that NVIDIA manufacture.

The GTX 980M GPU's on the other hand do appear to come in two video RAM options '6GB each and 8GB each. The 980M's are incredibly expensive and gaming laptops containing these are very expensive, often a grand more upwards. They're bigger and make the laptop very fat and require way more cooling. Some gaming laptops come fitted with one or two 980M.

The Aorus X7 Pro v3+ are fantastic machines which manage to find the perfect sweet spot in balancing innovation, value for money, surprising gaming performance, Physics defying slim size and drop-dead gorgeous looks with build quality to match (metal display lid and surrounding keyboard top-panel).

Most amazingly; in a test, the X7 Pro's dual GTX 970M's in SLI 'beat' a Sager gaming notebook in graphical performance where the more expensive Sager (version tested) had an actual single 'desktop' version GTX 980 GPU and a 'desktop' version Intel core i7 CPU (yes you read correctly)... and the dual GTX 979M's in the Airus X7 Pro performed better at graphics and frames per second (tested on Crisis 3). How about that. The Sager's desktop CPU naturally fared slightly better on CPU only software such as business tasks - but we're talking gaming here.

I'll try and post the link here to that test later (it's on YouTube).

 

The X7 Pro SL2 model V5 I ordered does have 6GB each! And yes , nvidia has made 6GB models ever since the launch of the 970M. Even the new razor blade 2016 has a 6GB 970m.

This review says its 6GB each, check under performance and graphics section of review

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Aorus-X7-Pro-v5-Notebook-Review.161744.0.html

Also this review shows screenshot of 6GB each, look at 12:30 in the video and u will see.

 

Anyone actually picked up a new v5 yet with the 6820? I need real world temps playing games like BF4 and some other FPS's. I swear the lmited edition camp is making me happy happy happy. I am just scared s&^tless about the heat i keep hearing about.

 

Look at the reviews I posted , temps are actually very good for this laptop and nothing that caused anything to throttle. If you overclock, just get a cooling pad

 

I see a lot of misinformation in this post.

The 970M's are available with 3 and 6gb of ram options for a lot of brands such as the Razer and Alienwares.

4 or 8gb on the 980M by the way.

No the extra memory doesnt require more cooling and the laptops containing these arent in fact much more expensive as well.

SLI is a ***** though these days, half of the games cannot use it anymore. I would always recommend the highest performing single GPU.

 

If Aorus did make an X7 Pro with 6GB for each 970M card for 12GB total, then I will upgrade and get one myself for this is what I had asked Aorus for some time back and they said they units would not have above 3GB.

I am a bit weary from the video; for the Name entry field in the NVIDIA panel it says "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M" and not 'NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M - 1' nor 'NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M - 2' as is usually the case when any utility is referencing a GPU, also at the bottom the NVIDIA SLI entry field shows "Enabled (2GPUs)" which gives rise to the possibility that it's analysing both GPU's as a cumulative overall total of GPU capability stats and maybe adding the 3GB + 3GB graphics memory. Plus Aorus still clearly indicate on their website specifications page for the X7 Pro v5 product that it's "Dual NVIDIA® GeForce GTX 970M graphics with 6GB total (3GBx2) GDDR5 in NVIDIA® SLI" - but hey I really, really hope I'm wrong as this would be sweet music to my ears and only second in-line to my ultimate whish of an eventual X7 Pro with dual GTX980M 8GB GPU's in SLI (or dual GTX 980 SLI desktop versions and why not, Sager have pioneered with a desktop CPU & 980 GPU in their unit - now Aorus can pioneer a radical new X7 Pro X with dual desktop 980 SLI's, albeit in a slightly beefier/fatter X7 Pro).

Oops, I agree with the 4 & 8 instead of 6GB option for 980 and don't know what happened there. I think 6 was constantly in my mind from what HaloGod2012 was saying and although I believe there not to be an X7 Pro unit with 2x 6GB video RAM, it was still playing on my mind if it could be possibly be remotely true as this is what I've wanted for so long. I see many of the most recent gaming titles like The Division, AC Syndicate, Rise Of The Tomb Raider, etc maxing out the VRAM for each 970M GPU (seen on my live system stats utility monitor) way before the GPU processor load goes high or anything else goes high when those games settings are set on high so I know the cards are capable of much more providing they have more memory RAM. This implies that potentially there's a slight bottleneck point to the cards true potential. Don't misunderstand me though, the 970M's performance 'even' with 3GB each is still phenomenal and a revelation to behold having often to tame the beasts by capping frame rates to 60 for slightly less newer titles as the fps can go extreme well over 100 (sometimes even 150+ for older titles).

Regarding the 6GB 970's available on some other laptops, I stand corrected - however I'm not surprised as I wouldn't look up Razer or Alienware anyhow when there are infinitely better manufacturer laptops out there. I will say though Razer do make the excellent Chroma Orbweaver which I wouldn't be without for WASD gaming.

I will say though that most of my games new and old in my gaming library (119 in Steam, 28 in Origin plus other boxed ones) appear to work well with SLI. To my utter surprise Flight Simulator X traditionally is a CPU monster and only utilizes one GPU, but still mostly CPU intensive; the optimised FSX Steam Edition however runs great and appears to be using both GPU's in SLI (seen on my live system stats utility monitor), it still is a CPU chomper but appears to be offloading some/more graphical processes to both GPU's.

Regarding what you said - "I would always recommend the highest performing single GPU", check out the video at 4:11 where the dual 970M SLI's in the Aorus X7 Pro destroys the single desktop version (yes desktop version) GTX 980 in the Sager NP987OU2G that's also fitted with a desktop Intel CPU, with slightly higher frame rates.

 

All reviews of the x7 sl2 say 6gb each and show screenshots . I'll find out when mine comes Wednesday

 

Why don't or didn't you shoot Aorus an email and ask them directly? That way you'll have an answer straight from the horses mouth so to speak and what they say will be set in stone for sure. They're very quick in replying and if I was spending approx. £2,300 over here in the UK, I would have to email them first and not wait fingers crossed hoping it's the 6GB cards each. But then again if you don't have an X7 Pro already then don't hesitate as you can't go wrong, whether it's the version 3, 4 or 5 of the X7 Pro. And if there's a version with 970m's having 6GB each then they really need to put that on there website.

Once I have the money to upgrade, then I'll email them first myself before parting with the cash. I'm in no rush though as I'm still happy with the performance of my current X7 Pro.

I'm puzzled though; you have an MSI GT80S Titan listed below as your setup. One would assume that 2x desktop 980's in SLI is more than powerful compared to the 2x 970 SLI's in the X7 Pro. Would it be for the X7 Pro's sleeker slimmer profile?

 

I returned the gt80s because it was way too big and I now find myself moving around a lot for work. I asked Aorus and even they are puzzled !! They think that the spec was switched to the 6GB version during the manufacturing process and no one was notified . I believe I may have uncovered a nice little fiasco at Aorus . All V5 models , even the X3 and X5 have 6GB 970m in all reviews and user videos. Any Aorus with sky lake has the 6GB version. Here is a review of sky lake X3 V5 , also has 6GB 970m.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Aorus-X3-Plus-v5-Notebook-Review.156356.0.html

 

CONFIRMED ! My model arrived with 6GB on each of the 970m's.

 

The specification is wrong , every user of the V5 has confirmed its 6GB each. Look at my screen shot. I also confirmed in afterburner and in games that display available vram

 

As much as I want to believe this to be true HaloGod2012, I have it on good word from Aorus that it is most definately 2x 3GB each per 970M card.

Myself, I'm becoming more and more discouraged with regards to considering upgrading to the X7 v5 from my current X7 Pro v3, because they should have used 970M's with 6GB each and the CPU performance is not as a big improvement as one would have hoped for.

Slightly troubling is that in some (not all) ascpects/applications, the Aorus X7 v5 gets slightly outperformed by the X7 v4/*v3... seriously?



Furthermore, the X7 v5 is worryingly slightly underpowered against the X7 v4/*v3 'unless' it is perpetually in overclock mode.



Lastly the X7 v5 when tested, outputs both minimum and on average only 1 frame per second more on Crysis 3 when compared to X7 v4.



In all fairness; although the X7 v5 had a similar story with outputing 1 fps more in Battlefield 4 for the 'minimum' frame rate against the X7 v4, it did however output 3 fps more in Battlefiled 4 for 'average' frame rate (but not for Crysis 3).



Needless to say I'm personally finding these results somewhat disappointing for the new X7 v5 with regards to upgrading. My current assumption is that if your buying an X7 Pro for the first time, then do not hesitate as they are formidable fantastic gaming machines packing a powerful punch in a phenomenal form-factor and design with Physics defying slender-slim size. But with regards to upgrading from an X7 v4 or v3, then it might not be such an improvement with performance and in fact there are some performance loss as seen in one example - add to that the prospect of being stuck with Windows 10 only on the X7 v5 and not having the option for switching between WIndows 8.1 and 10 when desired (with full driver support for either from Aorus) as is with the X7 v4 and v3, then it makes one think.

--------------------------------------------
* v3 X7 Pro has intel CPU that can intel speed boost/clock 100,000,000 Hz more than the v4 X7 Pro-Sync without unlocked overclocking...

 

Out of curiosity, could someone post a GPU-Z screenshot from an older, pre V5 970m-equipped X7 to see how it compares video memory-wise?

 

Ok, pasted below "GPU-Z_output_Aorus_X7_Pro_V3_CF1__21.Apr.2016".

This is my current Aorus X7 Pro V3 CF1 and as you can see the 970M's are as per Aorus have stated for v3, v4 and v5 of the X7 Pro. I am only re-iterating what they have assured me and therefore that is straight from the 'horse's mouth' so to speak and from the people that build them. Yet HaloGod2012's results show 6GB 970M's, strange... Stranger still is that if I click on the 'Lookup' button, it then takes me straight to the NVIDIA specs page for that GPU chip and there it shows 6GB for my 970M chip which makes me confused.

But even more interesting/perplexing is if you compare the GPU Clock, Pixel Fillrate and Texture Fillrate between that on HaloGod2012's V5 of the Aorus X7 results and my V3 of the Aorus X7 Pro results.

 

Thanks Star1child, based on your screenshot as well as this one, it appears that clock and fillrate are interrelated in GPU-Z, and all these screenshots were taken during varying gpu p-states. I was initially on the fence about this 3/6 GB debate but it now looks that the V5 indeed comes with 6GB gpus.

 

Mmm... I'm still pondering over wether or not to upgrade to the V5 and some issues around it are making me a little hesitant with the 2K+ price tag.

1. Aorus categorically assured me that the v5 has 3GB GPU chips when putting the question again to them.

2. If I click on the 'Lookup' button on the GPU-Z utility for my V3 X7 Pro, it then links straight to the GPU's chip ID page on TechPowerUp site which lists it as a 6GB GPU chip. Could Aorus be restricting the memory size on previous modelsis indeed fitted with 6GB GPU's then why O why hide or deny the fact when it is a major selling point?

3. The indepth review and testing done by 'bit-tech.net' showed some rather uninspiring results regarding the V5. It showed that on some testing routines the V5 X7 was outperformed by the V4 X7 G-Sync model (example Unigine Valley 1.0) when both were running in their normal Intel turbo boost state... with the V5 only improving on the V4 if in it's overclock state which makes me wonder if kept in this overclocking state then a). how long can it maintain this before overheating and/or CPU throttling, i.e. can it remain in this constant state during heavy gaming sessions lasting a good part of the day or all day for that matter and b). will CPU or other component lifespan be affected. I know the fans will work harder and be louder, but the fan noise don't bother me and in fact I like the affirmation of raw power from the sound of the fans.

4. Unless my eyes are deceiving me; the V5 X7 with its overclocking CPU's to 4GHz, faster DDR4 2133MHz RAM, very fast PCIe SSD's in RAID stripe and alleged 970M GPU's at 6GB instead of 3GB... would surely translate to some marked improvements in gaming right? Yet Crysis 3 and Battlefiled 4 performance tests on the V5 appear rather uninspiring compared to the V4 G-Sync model, with the V5 gaining 1 frame per second more on Crysis 3 over the V4 G-Sync and between 1 - 3 frames per second more on Battlefield 4.

It's making me wonder if I should hold back for some time for an Aorus X7 Pro version to be released with upgraded specs that translate to significant performance hikes. I know that 'Sager' gaming laptops and others are starting to throw in desktop i7 CPU's and desktop 980 cards, therefore as completion and pace picks up I'm sure Aorus will try and match that at some point with a flagship model.

Below is a screen capture for the 'Lookup' results I mentioned earlier.

 

The same page mentions MXM module even though the gpus are clearly on board. I have a feeling that either GPU-Z brings up the wrong techpowerup information page, or the page itself is generic as opposed to specific, perhaps referring to the Nvidia's reference design.

I agree with your assessment, I don't think I would want to drop 2k+ on an upgrade that's at best incremental just for the sake of 'new'. Gpu tech hasn't changed much since 2014, so the V3 is still essentially top of the line. Perhaps consider waiting for a Pascal-based revision (inevitable), until then you're unlikely to get your money's worth.

 

Could you possibly run a test with Nvidia Inspector (v1.9.7.6 appears to be latest version which I've used).

Interesting no matter at what point I run GPU-Z and/or Nvidia Inspector (with varying GPU states), they always report between them the 'GPU Clock' on my V3 X7 Pro as being 924MHz with Default Clock in agreeance between X7 V3 & V5 units in GPU-Z but not between GPU-Z and Nvidia Inspector as with Memory stat.

I ran both side by side below:-



All this is not too important though as the performance from the V3 is exceptional with most games new and old, in fact it's often a joy just to wack all setting on Ultra except for some of the very recent games breaking new grounds for pwer and GPU RAM which I've seen for myself with the 970M' memory being continuously maxed out on my GPU live stats monitoring utility with games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Division, AC Syndicate and others in which I have to lower setting 2 levels lower from Ultra through Very High down to 'High' otherwise the frame rate hit is severe, but all still looks and plays well after lowering settings. This is why I'm shocked that the new V5 X7 with it's apparent (from above results) 6GB per GPU versions of 970M's is in the case of Crysis 3 and Battlefiled 4 tests run by TechPowerUp only 1 frame per second more for Crysis 3 and 1 to 3 more for Battlefield 4 and I bet that is as a direct result from the upgraded faster main system RAM at 2133MHz on the V5 as apposed to the 1866MHz on the V3 - but one thing in V3' favour of the X7 Pro line is that it's CPU's run intel's standard overclock Turbo/Speed Boost slightly above the V4 G-Sync model (by 100,000,000 MHz more).

If I do still go ahead and upgrade, I guess it's primarily going to be for getting back the 2 Years Aorus warranty cover for peace of mind and maybe for the fact that the PCIe SSD's will load up FSX SE with numerous add-ons much faster. FS Global Ultimate global terrain mesh add-on weighs in at over 100GB alone and detrimentally slows down FSX's scenery load times before simulation start.

(ok, it kind 'a turns into a feature wish/request from here on - sorry).

Two reasons are making me consider waiting longer for a vastly upgraded version of gaming laptop, that being a). the ability to output 4K @ 60HZ with a 'maintained' smooth frame rate of at least 60 fps which may require at least two desktop versions GTX 980 ti in SLI and an unlocked version of desktop class overclock'able CPU for software and simulations that are slightly more dependant on raw CPU power such as Flight Simulator X with numerous add-ons. Currently Sager, MSI and others are now configuring gaming laptops with desktop CPU's and GPU's in there latest offerings therefore I hope Aorus don't sit idly by and may consider possibly producing a few 'Flagship' versions of the X7 Pro Line (or maybe an X8 Elite 18") in which maybe desktop versions of i7 CPU's and GTX 980ti SLI components are utilised.

Naturally these new 'flagship' units would be slightly or much bigger/fatter, but still with the legendary Aorus styling and design. Those that dislike large laptops can still look into the X7/X5 range for satisfaction and those requiring highly portable units would be more than pleased with the X3 line up, while demanding, discerning, hard-core gaming users would have a flagship version of laptop that will perform to that level. I believe a flagship model doesn't have to be a flip under the arm job for carrying around all day from place to place with good battery life; that's a job for the X3 and X5 units.. rather the need for a flagship gaming laptop is merely the ability to move it from room to room, maybe one place/house to another and home to holiday destination and back - therefore always plugged in for raw power and not on your lap on a lunch break.

Aorus! please give us a new 'flagship' small line-up of X7 Elite/Extreme or a new X8 Elite/Extreme... Oh and I know Aorus representatives occasionally look at this thread (see some pages back) and keep up the legendary designing.

You'll thank me one day if it means a possible new flagship desktop matching unit

 

The confusion was cause by Gigabyte's typo on the price list provided to resellers:



However, we were able to find out it was actually 6GB per GPU on our review.

 

All corrected!

Specification for the Aorus v5 X7 on the Aorus website today now reads ... "Dual NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 970M graphics with 12GB total (6GBx2) GDDR5 in NVIDIA® SLI" (this was copied and pasted directly from the webpage)!

 

I've seen the gtx1080 announcement and i'm still in shock how ridiculously powerful it will be in current gaming and i'm excited in laptop version if they can make 1080 desktop grade like the latest 980 in laptop.

 

I agree. The power efficiency will mean less heat, and that means more headroom for overclocking and greater frame rates. I was stunned at how low this flagship product will be introduced at. I'm almost considering building a desktop system again. My X7 Pro is plenty fast for 2k gaming for everything I play, but that GTX 1080 is tempting.

 

Its using as much power as a single 980. So you get a bit more than titan X performance it is sitll a 200+ watt card. THis is because they clock it very high to reach those speeds.

 

if Aorus can manage a GTX 1070m SLI then I am in.

 

Eventually yes, all manufacturers will have no choice but to use the new GPU on their product lineup.

 

its better they use full desktop gtx1080 instead of 1070m SLI to avoid sli problems like stuttering or unsupported in some game engines.

 

I wonder, does Aorus still offer those paid upgrade programs?
If so, I'm thinking about upgrading to 2x GTX M970 3GB to the 6GB models.

 

Not sure if they are willing to do so and if even the GTX1080 desktop version will be available for laptop anytime soon.

 

Aorus got back to me, they do not support paid upgrades for the Aorus X7 Pro-Sync.
Ah well, not really needed, but if I was able to upgrade for a reasonable price I would have done it.

 

Anyone try the new Nvidia Drivers version 365.19? These are needed for DOOM. I tried installing them today and it hosed my display port output. I couldn't get my monitor to sync at native resolution 2560x1440. Anyone else have success?

 

downloading now. I'll let you know in a bit

 

FYI... The new nVidia drivers 368.22 work just fine. Finished installing them and everything works without issues.

 

Is there a solution to the problem with letters appearing double on the Auros X7 Pro (that seem to be a common problem)? Does it require sending in the computer for service?

IIf you donnt know wwhat I mean it loooks kindd of like thhis and itt is nott typoos

 

Appears to be delays for X7 DT release. Anyone considering this?

I'm interested, but higher price tag and lack of full/testing reviews are making me wary.

Can't help but think why didn't Aorus delay slightly to opt for the GTX1080 Pascal DT card being more efficient, considerably more powerful and allegedly cheaper. I'm sure Aorus being an industry insider to some degree as a component purchasing manufacturer, may have got wind of this some time ago - coupled with the fact other gaming laptop manufacturers have been intergrating GTX 980 DT card('s) in their gaming laptops for some months now, maybe it would've been the natural route to go.

 

I'm in the same boat and this is exactly what I've been thinking, get out of my head!

Aorus may well be timing DT's release with Pascal and the subsequent gpu pricing advantage over say, a few months ago. But we may also have to consider that they might have had engineering difficulties getting the non-m 980 working reliably in such a thin chassis. Just speculation of course but based on the fact that no other 980 equipped lappy is this thin. Not trying to be negative here, just realistic and very much hope to be off base on this one.

 

I agree regarding the engineering issues when integrating a desktop version card within the X7's slim chassis.

[additional post info removed due to incorrect information previously referenced from other website source]

 

Not really true what you are typing here.

It is true that the 1080 uses less power than a 980TI and almost about the same as a 980 (165watt tdp), dont mix the 980TI and the 980 up. Only the 980 is available as a desktop chip for laptops. the 980ti is a 225w tdp card that has never been released for a laptop because it is too difficult to place all those vrm's on a small pcb.

Why it isnt easy to fit a 1080 in a laptop is because of a smaller die which means it is more difficult to move that heat away from the source. Intel had various production node jumps already but the 14nm chips arent much cooler and in some cases even more hot than their predecessors.

 

I did some quick test of the Aorus X7 DT:

FireStrike:



FireStrike Extreme:

 

Appears source website's info I used for reading up on 1080 vs 980 wrongly quoted Ti versn TDP power spec. I was actually referring to a 980 comparison (so wasn't wrong there) because Aorus don't have an X7 unit with a Ti version of 980, therefore was not searching for a Ti comparison, but didn't account for website review getting it mixed-up.. my bad for not realising that at the time, fortunately forum police pickup on small detail so I will correct/remove info from previous post so as not to confuse matter relating to 980 power usage. Will try post link of offending site if re-located again, as since then there's been many more reviews being more accurate on the power and coul'dnt locate from a quick search earlier. Am glad you pointed out the correct 165W TDP of the 980 to what I previously had read it to be on the site, it has at the very least made me feel a bit more relieved and confident for maybe considering the X7 DT due for release here on the 4 July 2016.

Regarding the engineering/design challenge of fitting a 1080 desktop version in Aorus X7. I didn't state it was easy, neither impossible and I had mentioned a while back that any vastly upgraded version of X7 flagship model would no doubt or maybe require an X7 version being bigger, beefier or only slightly larger to accommodate the higher performance cooling system that would be required for a higher powered card intergration. I don't mind a much larger or slightly larger 'Flagship' version of X7 Pro that purely concentrate on all out unrestricted raw power rather than striking the perfect balance of size, performance and battery. Having at least just one insane Flagship version of the X7 Pro line-up would then be catering for everyone, i.e. older versions or lower spec X7 for gamers on a budget, current X7 v5 for gamers wanting a balance all around, X7 DT (980) for gamers requiring VR or single card compatibilities and finally an all singing all dancing 'Flagship' model possibly with the very latest top end desk top card (GTX 1080) at the time for those that want insane mobile performance. That latter will inevitably mean beefing up the X7's chassis/size much more, but I'm pretty sure Aorus will do a good job of this as they would no doubt retain the legendary Aorus design appearance and looks albeit it beefier and meaner looking. I would even go as far to say that I would be more than happy buying an X7 unit that undergoes serious modifications to accomodate 2x (yes two) 1080's in SLI even if it meant adding 50 % more thickness to the shassis and cost much more in price. MSI stuffed dual GTX 980 desktop SLI cards in the GT80S Titan, why can't Aorus use an oportunity to lead the way and bring out maybe a new X7 with 1080 SLI to the block as an industry first instead of MSI bringing out industry firsts for flagship units? Aorus will have a customer right here for starters (already a current X7 Pro SLI owner).

Aorus did a good job with the X7 DT's appearance; it's slightly bigger but virtually un-noticeable as they reshaped the underside backing plate/panel which only subtlety bulges out more towards the rear back-end underside of the unit to accommodate the larger card/cooling. I personally would be more than happy if the whole unit's base were slightly bigger for accommodating a 1080 desktop version card. If the larger unit upset some, then they can go for the other X7 versions with SLI or the 980.

Until my main goal is reached of owning an X7 with either 1080 or 1080 SLI desktop cards is reached, I'm currently torn between updating my X7 Pro v3 to either the X7 DT or the X7 v5. Naturally VR is the biggest factor, however performance is marginally different and even some cases less from the X7 DT to the X7 v5 SLI for non VR use. Mmmm...

 

Thanks for the tests Ken. Aorus showcased some changes to the X7 chassis at Computex including but not limited to a different touchpad and an rgb keyboard. Did these changes make it to the DT? Either way, a few quick pics of the actual unit would be greatly appreciated.

 

Can anyone confirm if X7 DT has a single 512GB M.2 SSD occupying one slot, or would it be 2x 256GB M.2's occupying two slots? Overclockers UK show "SSD Drive: 1 x 512GB" and can't be sure if they mean 1x single or 2x 256GB. Off course 1x 512 internally would mean a cheaper option for 1TB when adding another 512GB rather than having to buy two.

 

I don't see any different in the chassis or keyboard, everything still the same. The only difference is that they put the Avermedia back.

I can confirmed it's a single 512GB PCIe Samsung SM951.

 

Hmm, the temperature still can reach 90 plus... Wonder how the internal looks like

 

Thanks for that and good to know, saves couple of hundred if upgrading critical fast storgae to 1TB.

 

Here you go:

 

Wow, that looks bizarre. So the left one with shorter heat pipes is CPU and the middle one with long heat pipes is the GPU, right?
That's what Aorus has been working on for more half a year's result? In my view, it looks shaky under heavy load


Boring boring Chelsea

 

I would think it's the other way around: Left unit with short heat pipes dedicated to GPU with the right unit cooling CPU / GPU / VRMs on top? What makes you think the it's the CPU under the unit on the left?

 

can you try to run bench mark with disabled CPU turbo? wanted to see temperature difference and average FPS or gpu score. Thanks