9262 Ordered...

I ordered a NP9262 from PowerNotebooks yesterday afternoon with the following specs....

1 Sager NP9262 - Gaming Laptop - $3,469.00
17" WSXGA+ (1680 x 1050) Glossy Widescreen
DUAL nVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX 1GB in SLi
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8600 3.33GHz Processor w/6M L2 Cache - 1,333MHz FSB
Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound
4GB (2 SODIMMS) DDR2/800 Dual Channel Memory (64bit Vista Required)
320GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200 RPM Hard Drive (16MB Cache Buffer)
RAID Disabled
Combo 8x8x6x4x Dual Layer DVD ±R/RW 5x DVD-RAM 24x CD-R/RW Drive w/Softwares
7-in-1 Memory Card Reader (All versions of MS + SD/MMC)
Built-in Intel® PRO/Wireless 5300 802.11a/g/n
Built-in Bluetooth Wireless
Smart Li-ion Battery (12 Cell)
Windows XP Professional
Full Range Auto Switching AC Adapter
Standard Carrying Case
NO Dead Pixel Guarantee
NO Second Hard Drive
NO Third Hard Drive
NO eSATA /USB 1TB SATA II 7200RPM EXTERNAL HDD
NO Floppy Disk Drive
NO USB Multi-Region HDTV Tuner w/Remote
NO "Medialess" Microsoft Office Software

1 Sager 3 Year Labor 1 Year Parts Warranty - Lifetime 24/7 DOMESTIC Toll - $0.00

Now I am having second thoughts about the processor....the one I ordered is the fastest Core 2Duo that is offered...but if I swapped that out and got the Quad 9650, would it give the same performance as the Core 2 Duo plus future proof the system? Also, will I be able to overclock either the processor I picked out, or the Quad 9650? Will I be able to overclock the 9800m GTX's if I want to later? Let me know your thoughs...I know that I can always buy a Quad 9650 off of Newegg and install it later...but I just dont want to make a mistake with this (it is a gift for my son for Christmas). He plays Half Life 2, Garrys Mod, Call of Duty: World at War, and other high graphics games....Thanks

 

I think you picked a very nice configuration for gaming. I would stick with the E8600 for now. Also, check out this thread for information on overclocking the 9800M GTX: forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=299286

 

really?IMO,you should change your order and get WUXGA!your notebook is a monster,and you ll need WUXGA to unleash it's power!!!

 

WXUGA....really? I had read that for games it is better to use the lower resolution, as the system is not having to churn as much, not to mention that everything will appear smaller on the screen (I use the 1680x1050 on my NP5791). Is the main reason for going with the 1900x1200 if you are going to get the BlueRay drive for movies? If that is the reason, I am not getting BlueRay for this machine.

 

not in this case,since you have 9800 GTX in SLI-this will play Crysis on 1920x1200 on 30+ fps @ all max games look so good @ that res!

 

with a system like the NP9262, there isn't a game other than the unoptimized Crysis that will make your system 'churn' at 1900x1200.

IMO, you are missing out by not having the higher resolution.

You can always change the resolution to 1680 if you wanted to... while still having the 1900 res.

Really is personal preference, but it is almost like buying a ferrari and never driving it over 50 mph cause you are worried about it.

If you want to game on 1680x1050 and do everything on that res, you can do with a weaker laptop and save lots of money. your 9800M GTX SLI will be bored.

Everything looks better at 1900x1200, pictures, games, etc. if you eye-strain from text, reduce the res.

But really, you should at least have the OPTION of going to 1900x1200 especially for a system of this calibre.

 

Thanks for the info on the 1920x1200...I may go ahead and upgrade that now...can you tell me if it would be worth it to upgrade to one of the Quad processors (Q9550 or Q9650) for games like Half Life 2, Garrsy Mod, Call of Duty: World at War? Will my son see the difference between one of those processors and the E8600 that I have in my configuration right now?

 

Not particularly.

In the future, quad will definitely be the way to go as more and more games support multi-threading.

However, at this point, you are talking about the last 10% of performance.

The difference between having extremely smooth play and extremely extremely smooth play.

Quad is a safer bet, but the 9650 is quite expensive and i think a bit unnecessary. Ultimately, it extends the lifetime of the system.

Call of Duty World at War, along with the others you listed, at maxed out 1900x1200 all highest details and such will still land you above 40-50fps in all situations, regardless of processor ( pretty sure )

 

I would go with 9550-best price/performance ratio

 

^^ agreed.

The statement "dual core's are better for games" is about to be overturned.... since upcoming games are being programmed to fully utilize multicore CPUs to help increase FPS and do physics calculations.

I even tried Left 4 Dead on a quad-core system without Multi-Core support enabled and disabled.
- pretty significant difference in performance from FPS and stability of framerate with a lot of zombies coming into the scene with multiple explosions and effects happening.

Multi-threaded games are coming out and they will do much better with quad-cores than dual-cores.

 

Should of got 1920x1200 but if the lower res is your preference that's fine. Also why a E8600? If you want dual core just get the E8500 and save the extra bucks or use that extra $100 on a quad core.

 

Thanks for the input....I did call Donald up and changed my screen res to 1920x1200 and also changed out the E8600 Dual Core for a 9550 Quad Core...now I will just have to keep my hands off of it... I hope my son will enjoy it

 

If he doesn't enjoy it, then he isn't your son (just kidding) - on the other hand, if he doesn't enjoy it then, gee shucks, you'll just have to start using it because, well, no sense in wasting a perfectly good notebook, right?