Chose my model - undecided on processor and monitor type...

I chose the model to buy - Clevo D901C from notebookguru.de with 4GB RAM 800Mhz, 2 HDD's Seagate 7200rpm 120GB in raid 0, 2x 8800M GTX SLi and a Blu Ray drive. Price is 3279 Euros including Vista 64 bit and shipping.

I cannot yet decide whether to go for the:

-Core2Duo E8400 2x3,0 GHz 6 MB Cache 1333 MHz, or
-Core2 Quad Q9450 4x2,66 GHz 12 MB Cache 1333 MHz.

Price is not an issue.
Is the quad supposed to run cooler since it's 45nm whereas the duo is 65nm?
If they perform both exactly the same in games, I'll get the quad so that I have some future-proofing...

I also cannot decide on whether to get:

17" WUXGA TFT Display 1920x1200 Glossy/Glare, or
17" WXGA TFT Display 1440x900 Matte.

Some friends told me that I would kick myself when I see the glossy screen... but then the matte one available is a much lower resolution.

 

You will probably get a few more FPS with the dual core (since is has a higher frequency), but my advice is to get the quad core.
You should get the WUXGA screen for the D901C, since it's a big screen and you will have lots of space.
That's my opinion.

 

I'd have to say Quad core. If your playing games designed for multi-core use (crysis) you'll notice smoother gameplay on the quad. I would recommend the Q9450 though 12MB cache, 160MHz faster (4x160... 640MHz spread across cores).

 

^^^ Ditto .

 

I just emailed the seller about the possibility of a better quad than the Q9300, and he told me I can get the Q9450 4x2,66 GHz 12 MB Cache 1333 MHz for 70 Euros more than the Q9300.

Guess the Q9450 would be better than the E8400 wouldn't it?

Edit: lol I read your minds, I made this post before the above replies had gone through!

 

Get the quad core for much more future proofing!

 

I've the exact same spec as you, but a QX9650.

Take the 1920x1200 believe me. If you have a dead pixel you cant see it. No need antialiasing with a such definition. And a lot of space to work.

 

I was thinking about that too. My mother has a 3 year old qosmio with a 17" glossy screen, it looks good I mean its glossiness doesn't bother me when I use it.

 

My vote's for the glossy 1900x1200. Glossy just looks much, much better than matte unless you're typically going to be using it in an area with bright overhead lights (like in-ceiling flourescents) or outdoors in sunlight. 1900x1200 for the screen real-estate; plus, it's easier to drop resolution down below native (though you do pay a bit of a price) than to boost it up above native (impossible). Really, though, the only way to tell for sure on resolution is to find one of each and compare, preferably running some apps you would normally be using.

 

Youre getting 8800's in SLI, might as well get the resolution to really work both of them (and WUXGA looks nice)

 

im sorry but that just aint true. i found mine within seconds of switching it on, its either dead or stuck (it changes colour) and it can be seen on most lighter coloured backgrounds. i can see it right now as im posting this reply. i can also see it when playing games such as STALKER

 

I believe the TDP of the quad is 95 watts while the TDP of the dual is 65 watts. However, since few applications use more than two cores, I doubt if you will notice much difference in heat.

The benchmarks I've seen here show that the dual outperforms the quad in current games, but the difference isn't overwhelming, and, as you suggest, that may change in the future.

 

As FTB said, the higher clocked dual core will perform better in games for now. But the quad is better, I`d take the fastest quad since you`ll be taking the fastest GPUs too.