560m

Hey guys,

So my laptop will be coming soon.

What games can I play with the 560M, can I play BF3??

How does it perform compared to the 8800MGTX?

Thanks,

 

Check these videos out. This is from one of our customers who has the Lotus P151HM1: coolguylstan's Channel - YouTube

 

Also check out the two links below that have full benchmarks for that card. They'll give you an idea of the settings you can play at for a pretty decent selection of modern games:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M - Notebookcheck.net Tech
Computer Games on Laptop Graphic Cards - Notebookcheck.net Tech

They should both list the 8800M on there as well for comparison (go back to the main chart on that first link). In general, the 560m is ~2.5x faster.

 

I can play any modern game with my GTX460M at near maximum settings. THats with a first gen i7 and non S/B northbridge.

 

Most 2011 games at 900p resolution + max settings + 0 or 2x AA.

 

yes u can play bf3 with 560m on high

 

from Can You RUN It | Can I run that game | Game system requirements

 

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

The performance is about the same as desktop 450GT, I think.

 

bf3 is one game 560m can not max. When I play bf3 on 1080p with ultra preset settings, I only get 15 fps.

The sweet spot for the 560m is 1366 x 768 resolution with the high preset graphic settings. With that combo I get 35-60 fps.

 

That's fine..couldn't even run it on low with my 8800MGTX haha

 

About to get a new Malibal and trying to decide between 560m and 6990m, anyone with either card play SWTOR or Skyrim and can comment on how they perform? These are likely to be the only two games I'll be playing for awhile so want to make sure I have a card that can max them both.

Pretty sure the 6990m will max them both since it seems to be a laptop equivalent of the card in my desktop, the 5850, and so far it's ran everything I've thrown at it at max settings.. but it seems that the 560m is only about 3/4 as powerful going by 3dmark benchmarks.

 

Meh maybe but I've always been a.nvidia guyt and always will, I think they have better support and drivers I feel. 560 m will def run swtor not sure about skyrin but I assume so

 

6990M without a doubt if you are buying a new laptop why go for a card that is struggling to max games out at the moment and it eats the 560M alive, people get too worked up over drivers and support which is rubbish these days as the ATI drivers for the 6 series have been miles better than previous cards.

See my sig link for my results from my 6990M paired with a 2760QM the thing is a monster and smashes all newer games. Skyrim handles fantasticly for me maxed at 1080p with a ton of mods I dont see below 40FPS anywhere with my overclocks even in intense scenes but remember its very CPU bound.

Maxed BF3 at 1080P earlier in single player its 35-60fps easily.

 

Yea, it's quite a bit more for the 6990m, but slowly starting to talk myself into it, because seems right now it can max out out most games and still stay a little above a comfortable fps level. And I'm pretty sure something with 3/4ths its power will only be able to max some games and get almost maxed on others, and probably not be able to max most big new upcoming titles.

But then again, how much difference can you usually tell between maxed and high settings, the difference usually seems to plateau at some point.

 

It depends but like you say the FPS difference is noticable 25 to 40 fps in skyrim when your maxing it out with mods is the difference between smooth and laggy, in graphical terms there is a difference from having HBAO and shadows turned to low or off compared to having them on and set to high.

SWTOR is not that intensive the 560M will handle it but with the next Metro and games like Diablo 3 and the like waiting around the corner to go into 2012 you need a 6990M or 580M if you intend to game properly and the 580M is too high a price while the 6990M is very well priced + it overclocks like a pro my clocks in my sig link are not maxed it can go to 870/1150.

 

In a lot of benchmarks, the 6990m is over 50% faster than the 560m. In 3dmark Vantage, it scores 13K in the GPU portion, whereas the 560m scores 8k. It is significantly faster than the 560m, almost have 2x the FPS in intensive games such as Dues Ex and Dirt 3 at max settings. If it is in your budget to make the upgrade, I'd definitely suggest it.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M - Notebookcheck.net Tech
AMD Radeon HD 6990M - Notebookcheck.net Tech

 

Game properly? I'm pretty sure 560m will allow you to game "properly" lol and def play diab....

 

The 560M is just an overclocked 460M and that struggled with games at 1080p Ultra settings when overclocked so if you intend to game at maximum settings for the near future you will want more than the 560M that is the difference and it is a worthy price to pay.

You dont buy a laptop to be out of date within a year so if you want to game properly into 2013/14 it is worth coughing up the extra for the 6990M/580M unless you intend to upgrade to the GPU at a later date which if the 7 series works which we all hope it does will also be worth waiting for.

 

Yea but why ever play at Ultra settings? I feel like trade-off from Ultra to High is 0, I can never tell!! haha, I never play at max settings I don't see a reason too...

Like right now I could play Starcraft 2 at Max, but why would I? I play it at high and it looks exactly the same.

I could play SWTOR at Max (granted wit a bit of slower FPS incantina's and fights) but why would I it looks the same on High?

^^ This is with a 8800MGTX not event he 560MGTX

Just saying my 8800MGTX which is not pushing 5 years old plays everything I throw it at (Except BF3), I mean it sounds like you are some ub3r hardcore gamer that demands everything at Ultra, but for me High and even Medium is just fine.

Maybe when the price on the 580MGTX drops to something more reasonable than +425 or whatever, I'll consider it a year 2 from now.

 

The 8800M GTX cannot handle the latest games at high settings especially not at 1080p that is total rubbish unless you are happy playing at 15-20fps which most aren't. Starcraft 2 can run on any mid range card at high so that is a poor comparison.

The 580M is a rip off so why would you spend another $300-400 when you can get the near same performance now in the 6990M make no sense clearly ''you are some uber hardcore nvidia fanboy''. The difference is not about playing at ultra settings is about playing above 30fps at high and BF3 and Skyrim struggled to do that in some scenes and if you intend to play multiplayer with any demanding graphics it is a must have. Once the even more brutal games like the new Metro that is where the high end card will have been a worthy purchase. Even so I was referring to the fella who asked if it was better to get the 6990M over the 560M and just like Malibal themselves said above it is very much worth doing for the small price increase.

 

Yah Im totally lying, I don't play Starcraft 2on my 8800MGTX at high settings your right because you know all...never said it was 1080p,current laptop is 1680x1050. Still trying to find the difference between High and Ultra though, and those video's Malibal guy posted of BF3 gameplay on 560m looked perfect to me....and avg. 43fps which is fine? TBH I would prob play with even slightly lower settings, see no need for Texture quality "Ultra" I can't see a difference. I feel like were comparing things that are so alike they make difference its just for bragging rights.

Edit: yes I am a nVidia "fanboi" I said that thanks for repeating!!

Still have no doubt I'll be able to play all the new games just fine and on med-high settings which is plenty for me, for the next 2 years at least, and then I'll just upgrade or buy a whole new laptop am i right? Your 6990 will be outclassed/outdated by then anyway so see ya upgrading/buying new then too probs oops.

 

Learn to read I that Starcraft 2 will run on any mid range card at high so comparing it is a poor comparison.

Anyway before you start getting anymore childish the fact remains the 6990M is a worthy purchase over the 560M if you intend to keep your laptop for more than a year as games are becoming more and more demanding.

 

As long as PC games remain to be console ports, even 560m will last at least two years.

I am able to play Skyrim on my Lenovo 460y which has 5650m at high settings with comfortable framerates. (But then it's at 1366x768)
Though I usually play Football Manager 2012, so CPU is more important. Got over 600 hours on FM so far. 1000+ hours on FM 11.

 

Childish comments in bold. Name calling/insults for the win, arguing against you saying the 560M is crap not childish imo.


Anyway as you said 7 series comes out I can always upgrade, and I intend to have this laptop more than a year. I'll let you know when I can't play games on it anymore, I am guessing that will be more than a year fromnow. Please enjoy your games at Ultra, and I will enjoy them at Med. High, as I said I can't tell a difference.

Besides I am building a desktop for anything more demanding, laptop is for mobility gaming.

 

I am still using a three year old Sager so I have been out of it for a while, but I am trying to spec out a new 15.6 screen that is lighter, smaller, and has longer battery time for use when I am on a trip in my RV. Lets assume for the sake of argument the 6990 is worth the extra coin of the realm performance wise over the 560. I have seen a couple of posts about how it runs a little hot, which kinda worries me; can anyone get me up to speed on the expected longevity of the 6990 temperature wise.

 

Its a bit of a beasty card so dont expect super low temps and it is worth the Thermal Compound upgrade if you can get one. I have repasted my CPU and GPU with ICD and its a worthy cause. CPU never above 66oC even with a prime test.

The GPU at Idle it sits in the low 30oC's with 100/150 clocks. With a furmark burn in test 8x AA and Post with my overclocks (sig) 850\1125 which is way above stock the highest temp I see after 10 minutes is 86oC. For a high end laptop GPU that is very good. Gaming wise I never see above 77oC even with Battlefield 3 flat out.

You are bound to see lower temps with the 560M however because less power consumption less heat produced.

 

Why I chose 560m over 6990m?

1. Battery Life, Less Heat Issue, Excellent Support.
2. I don't need that super HD duper pimple on my character's face.
Try analyzing two computers put next to each other: Ultra vs Max, there are some difference but not really noticeable.
3. I can game fine with 560m for the next two years.
4. Save the money for a better purpose. SSD, RAM or maybe even a better GPU coming out this year.

 

It depends if you want to upgrade the next year to a new GPU. However, I feel that the 6990m is a great choice that will stay for 3 years.

1st year: Ultra
2nd year: high
3rd year: Med


560m

1st year: high
2nd year: med
3rd year: low

these are the game setting you will see in games!

 

As already mentioned it is not just about having ultra it is about having higher FPS. Most cards there is minimal difference, but between the 6990M and 560M the difference is quite substantial. In some cases games which require a lot of bandwidth when running in full HD the 6990M shows its real potential.

At stock 560M - 64GB/s against 6990M - 114GB/s, when overclocked I can get 144GB/s. In Games like GTA 5 when it arrives that is going to be a huge difference because of the vast open landscape and you can all say Ultra does not matter but when it comes to games like GTA and its about the distance and you can only run Medium because it will struggle for me its an easy choice which to choose.

It really depends on what side you are if you are Nvidia through and through your going to go Green no matter how mid range or how expensive their high end is you will go Green.

If you dont care like me you will just open GPU/z and take a look what is really going on and choose the best bang for buck!

 

I agree with above, the 6990m is superior to the 560m. I am a SC2 player, at 1080p the 6990m will run SC2 at max settings and run at 60fps(ie nice and smooth). Using the 560m it does not run SC2 smoothly at 1080p with all settings maxed. Not even close. Alot of times the framerate will go well below 20fps depending on units on the screen.

Now at a lower resolution this may not be the case with the 560m, but at 1080p it can't run smoothly with all options maxed out.

 

How can this be true when I can run SC all on high with a 8800MGTX - maybe its not FPS, maybe its your internet connection? Unless there is some enormous usage increase from High to Ultra/Max that I don't know about?
Seriously no joke I just don't understand how these statements can be accurate, unless the 8800MGTX is some sort of super card that can keep pace with cards 2 generations newer...

 

On "high" settings, or on "ultra" settings for SC2? I am not familiar with the 8800MGTX,but from my understanding its right around on par with a Nvidia GT 550-555m and slightly below a 560m in terms of performance but with significantly less video RAM,so I honestly cant see how you can play SC2 at 1080p with textures maxed and all the visual effects set to Ultra. Heck I dont even think that video card has enough memory to run the texture quality at Ultra. Id love to see a video of you running that video card with ctrl+alt+f showing SC2's frame rate at 1080p with all settings at Ultra and running buttery smooth.

 

What you say is true, but it's not going to be impossible to game on with 560m. 560m is a better choice for a less-hardcore gamer with less $$. I think 560m is enough for me, lasting 2-3 years.

Don't you think there will be a much better and probably inexpensive card in this year? 6XX from nvidia and 7XXX from amd.

 

Not Ultra, still haven't said Ultra - Just high!! But I would imagine a 2 year old card that can play a game on High, should mean a new gen card can run it on Ultra, or at least some stuff on Ultra.

 

Thats the thing comparing the 560M in the UK for me against the 6990M when building my laptop it was only an £80 difference which is nothing compared to the increase in performance when as gamers the GPU is most important.

Nvidia's high end 6 series card will be a bombshell if the 580M price is anything to go by and so far the information being released says yes lower NM meaning less power consumption and heat but not a lot of difference in the performance region.

IMO the 6990M is the best card you can get atm bang for buck and longetivity, as the Ivy bridge wont fit in the current motherboards your not going to want to just upgrade the GPU you will want to hold on until 2013 when you can pick up a nice high end next gen laptop at a lower price so until then its all about if you can survive on a 560M or if you want to make sure you are comfortable with all the new games this year and then some, as you currently have a 560M or some of you do that is not an option but for you new chaps as a person who was in the same position a short while ago when my G73JH got stolen it was the correct choice. £80 upgrade to me - Bargain and will help my resale price.

As already mentioned guys its about the ((FPS)) at high or ultra not the fact a GPU can handle it, Metro 2033 is 2 years old and still punishes todays cards and would leave the 8800M GTX in the stone age so the 560M is going to struggle with GTA 5 and the next Metro on the higher settings not quality wise but performance wise. If you already have one then you need not worry because you have probably been gaming for a while comfortably but for NEW buyers the price of a 6990M has dropped to a point it is worthy of jumping on.

 

To me, "High" settings on SC2 mean maxed out/ultra/extreme, which you cannot do with a 560m, which means your 8800 isnt capable either. But if you mean actual "high" on the SC2 options tab, then yeah Im sure it can do it decently. The 540m I have plays pretty smooth at "high" settings too(both texture and quality settings), but its still well short of constant 60fps. It plays more in the 40-50fps range.

I look at it this way, if you want a laptop that will play SC at all the maxed out settings in 1080p and hit 60fps consistently the minimum you need is a single 6970 or 6990 Radeon card, or a single 580m Nvidia card or the equivalent roughly(Not sure if a pair of 560m's/SLI will do 60fps for SC2 since I dont know if SC2 accepts SLI).

 

I agree, I think a single 560m is a good entry level "high end" card for budget gaming, but there are alot of laptops out there now with the 570m with 1.5gigs of DDR5 video memory for the same price as well.

Myself personally, Id recommend people looking at trying to get into a laptop with a 570m for those on a budget.

 

Garand: The way I look at it, you spent about $250-300 bucks on extra upgrades on your new 15" laptop(You spent around what? $1200 give or take)that are pretty much worthless($90 on 1600 RAM upgrade, $40 on thermal "paste", $50 on the CPU upgrade, $85 on the hybrid HD)in terms of actual gaming performance. At the $1200-1300 range you could have gotten into a 15" laptop that features a 570m or a Radeon 6990 without question.

Heck as an example you could have gotten into a 17" 170HM from Mal with a radeon 6970 or 6990 videocard for the same price roughly that will hands down outperform the P151HM1(and with a larger display)you picked up and most certainly given you an extra year worth of useability from a gaming standpoint.

 

Actually it would have cost him $420 more to get a 8170 with the same spec and a 6990. That is without upgrading the screen so really more. His upgrades may mean nothing to gaming performance, but who says he got them for that reason? I imagine he upgraded to the 2670 because the 2630 is on back order ( that is why I did anyway ), and the hybrid drive possibly to help his boot times. Not my place to question really I guess. If like me he just wants a good price vs. performance laptop then he did great. The 560M will play comfortably for at least a couple years.

 

A. Im not "hating" on anyone's laptop. But since he seems to be worried about how well it will play I gave him some opinions.

Opinions here ARE OK right?

B. I pointed out things he bought that really won't give much in terms of actual performance.

$40 "thermal compound",$90 for the 1600mhz RAM$, $85 for a hybrid SSD HD, and the $50 for the slightly i7 upgrade, all 4 of these things combined will not net him any performance upgrades/offerings for gaming(other than maybe a slight loading time decrease on the hybrid HD, but still, I would have stuck with the stock HD and bought a true SSD seperately for less money), or even real world apps. I was just stating that he could have taken that money saved and landed himself into a laptop with a larger screen and a much better video card that will give a significant real world performance upgrade for roughly the same money.

Things like memory, HD's, "thermal paste" you can buy seperately and for much cheaper money when the need comes to upgrade.

Id take a 170 with a 2630 i7, 8 gigs of 1333mhz ram, "regular" and "free" thermal paste, and a generic 500gig HD with a 6990m anyday of the week over a 151 with a 2670 i7, 1600mhz ram, $40 IC thermal paste, and a hybrid drive with the 560m card without question.

C. I think the 560m card is a good card, but not great. For the "bang for the buck" money there are better solutions like the 570m, or 6990 or 6970 etc......just my friendly opinion.

Either way, not slamming on his purchase at all. I think its a good laptop, I just think he could have gotten MORE for the money spent by going a different config route if he is worried about gaming performance. And the 170HM with the larger screen(assuming he would even want a larger screen) and much better video card for the same price was one such example.

 

Yea I edited, to bad you quoted me first.. He may have gotten the upgrades for reasons other than gaming.

 

P.s the 2760QM 2.4-3.5ghz is a fantastic CPU highly recommend pairing that with a 6990M if anyone is considering a purchase it nearly tickles the 2920XM at stock in terms of performance.

Sorry to butt in gents, carry on

 

Don't want a 17incher, thermal paste because why not, maybe I can oc a bit now too right? Upgraded processor because I like the sound of 2.2 to 3.1 more than the other one or whatever, and I'm not trying to max stuff on my laptop I want mobility gaming. Building a desktop for anything more serious....money not to much a concern but I refuse to use ati because I'm a fanboy, maybe I'll upgrade to 580 later our just buy a new one next year not like these lappies are expensive.

Also hybrid drive because it sounds more hardcore amirite and ssd are too small.

Speaking of desktop can I play ultra with dual 580s rofl.

 

Garand: Hey bro, if the rig does what you want, when you get it and your 100% happy in your own mind with your purchase than thats ALL that MATTERS.

A decade ago I used to build custom desktops and mainframe servers for a small local computer sales and repair store. So my mind and opinions come from logic, and its always done in a friendly way.

If money wasn't too much of a concern, Im actually surprised you just didnt spend a few hundred bucks more and go with another config honestly. I mentioned those extras because when it comes right down to it they just dont do anything at all for the overall computing experience. I can understand the 15" screen or the need for it, but the paste,ram, and the 2670QM over the 2630QM will net you 0 difference in noticeable performance on anything basically. But if you went with a 2630QM i7, the regular 1333 ram and free paste, but had a Radeon 6970 or 6990(Or say even an Nvidia 570m GTX), you would have noticed a SIGNIFICANT improvement in graphics performance. Significant without question(especially with the Radeon options). Wouldn't you rather have a mobile gaming laptop that performs "hardcore" even though it doesnt sound as "sexy"?

Im also not a fan of Ati(Or AMD)at all, and remember the original Radeon desktop chipset. For the time the hardware was pretty impressive and the price even back then was undercutting Nvidia to draw buyers, but the card range had a huge flaw. poor drivers and driver support. Could never get those cards to perform to their potential for one reason or another. But I feel that Ati has come along way and their driver support is much better than it was a decade or so ago. Would I prefer an Nvidia 580m? Sure would but the price just isnt worth it to me for a ported midrange desktop card. At least Ati makes their hardware more reasonably priced for their mobile port, and the only reason I say this is because their drivers are alot more stabile and mainstream unlike years back. I too am a fan of Nvidia, but I would take a 6970 or 6990 over a GTX 560m in a heartbeat. First time you play your favorite game with all the settings maxed and it running buttery smooth would alone make that worth switching brands.

I just know from my own experience that many here are the type that if they have to keep fiddling with drivers, and graphic settings and even overclocking to try and get the native resolution and all the eye candy graphical performance out of their card that they wish it was capable of doing stock, that they in reality won't be happy with the card they ended up with to begin with. And I kind of put you in this classification because your asking about performance potential here in your own thread, lol.

Im having a hard time myself figuring out if I want to go with a 170 with a 6990, or 180 with a pair of 560m's in SLI. Id prefer to go with the slightly larger screen and the pair of Nvidia 560m's myself, but if the SLI 560m's cant do better than 30-35fps with SC2 maxed out on all settings then I will end up going with the smaller 17" laptop featuring the 6990m which I know can do 60fps with ease. Unfortunately I dont have any hands on experience with the 560m's in SLI, but over the weekend I was playing with the 6990m and 580m and both cards were equal in performance in real world gaming performance I found. Both ran as smooth and looked as good to my own eyes. If the 180/8180 laptop with the 560m's in SLI played and looked as good on all of the games I play, I would buy it, but I dont see much info from owners who own the 180 with the 560's installed on games like SC 2 which I dont think supports sli. I just know the 560m by itself is what I call a "teaser" card. It has the technology and hardware to give you all the nice visual eye candy, but just not quite enough of it in terms of throughput(fps). Its good, ut it keeps making you feel like more performance could or should be had. Its on the wrong side of the fence in terms of satisfaction for some of the latest games. The 570m on the other hand has that same feel as the 560m, but it gives you just enough more in throughput(fps) where it feels satisfactory where you dont feel the need to mess with performance on most games out. Man I honestly don't know why all these small Clevo/Sager vendors don't offer the 570m in SLI config for the 180HM laptop. Pricewise it should be in the same league as the Ati 6970/6990 cards for upgrade. Sorry, lol, just rambling my thoughts.

 

Didn't get the base stuff cause didn't want a base model and it sounds sexier I imagine there must be some performance.improvement with the upgrades even if slight. i would maybe get a 570 if offered but its not . Still as mentioned can always upgrade later if I run into perf. Issues which I doubt anytime soon. Maybe I'll just get a 6 series when that comes out and put you all to shame !!

 

The faster RAM and Processor will of course make a difference just as an SSD would just not solely focusing on gaming like a GPU would. Of course most of us buy a laptop for a variety of things not just gaming hence why I coughed up for the CPU and Faster RAM and the SSD and they all make up a fantastic fast system.

If as you say you are only interested in games like SC2 mainly then the processor and RAM will actually be more beneifical to you along with Skyrim and the games that are poorly ported. One bonus of having a better CPU is just that I remember the difference in skyrim between my 720QM and my 920XM was probably the biggest gain I have seen in a game solely relating to a CPU.

Your system is fine I was even considering the 560M SLI myself because the 18inch Clevo model is damn good looking. The 6990M might even run a bit hot in the 15 inch model with lesser cooling if you had the 17 inch then the 6990M would have been a must have.

 

If I put 2 151's together, but upgraded the paste, used the higher speed ram, and the model up 2670 processor you would not notice any appreciable difference on day to day tasks and gaming(the hybrid HD you would probably only notice slightly quicker load times on large file apps). But if I swapped in a 6970 or 6990m on the 151 using the cheaper and "slower" i7 and ram, plus the generic paste etc, you would notice a big difference in your gaming performance over the other laptop with the 560m and faster ram/i7 cpu and upgraded paste. BIG DIFFERENCE.

 

I highly disagree with this. In real world computing tasks, apps etc you will not notice any difference between a 2630qm and a 2670qm. Nor will the 1600mhz ram add anything either. In fact do a search on benchmarks on DDR3 ram that pits 1333,1600 and 1866mhz ram and they all perform the same. Just not gonna be any real world benefit that you can physically see when in front of your screen. The Hybrid HD though on the other hand has shown to have some mild benefits. But you can BUY a 500gig Seagate XT hybrid drive seperately for basically the same price he upgraded for. He could have kept the generic 500gig Sata drive and bought a seperate Seagate XT hybrid drive seperately and had 2 hd's and double the storage with some mild read benefits from the HD. See what Im saying?

SC 2 is very CPU dependant, but will not ever task any of the new 2nd gen i7 quad core processors. But the GPU will determine your effects and fps you can get with the effects on. Hence a the reason why a card like the 6990m or 580m can do 60 frames(which should be right around your target # for smooth gameplay during even the most intense graphical displays and action on screen) with settings on max, while a 560m struggles to do half that.

 

I have no problems running sc2 on 1080p max/extreme. I get around 35-40 fps. I use stock speeds, no overclocking. I play the marine arena custom map with 8 ppl and when we fill the screen with marines/units it doesn't slow down.

I don't get what the debate is here. 6990m is obviously faster than 560m, but it cost $145 to upgrade. So it's not like it's a free upgrade. If you want the faster gpu, you're going to have to pay $145 more.

$145 to play games at 1080p ultra versus playing games 1080p high/med is the debate here? I guess if money is no issue than 6990m is the best choice for your money.

 

Took me almost 2 weeks pay to get what I ordered and it is more for everyday things. Plus I was already buying Christmas for 2 kids and family. I game but not hardcore, plus a bit of photoshop, ect. I would have liked to have gotten a 580M or a 6990 just to have the best but I figured the 560M would handle what I planned on throwing at it for the price I was paying.

Unfortunately I cannot buy upgrades just for the cool/sexy factor as Garandhero can. Not sure on his situation but I have to buy my own crap, no one to do it for me ( not that he has someone to do it for him either ).

I choose to do the paste myself if I need it to save $30. I can live without a SSD also. I only paid for the 2670 so I would not have to wait for a restock. I think I will be happy with what I got so that is all that matters, like ntrain96 said.