GTX580M or Radeon HD 6990M for a Sager NP8170?

The Radeon HD 6990M seems a little BETTER than the GTX580M, which is incredible because it's about $200 cheaper. However, I read that it's intended to be used in bigger models like the 7280.

So would the 8170's power consumption be enough to feed a 6990M? Why is it so much cheaper? Is there any catch?

Because it's definitely tempting to preorder an 8170 with that card. They ship mid-August but I think it'd be really worth it.

Also, is the NP8170 capable of using a wifi card with 3 antennas? I was looking into upgrading the wireless option. Some tips would be appreciated.

 

6990 definately, and it is cheaper mainly because of nvidia's CUDA. It adds more work onto the chips = higher manufacturing cost = higher selling cost

 

I don't understand what you meant by higher manufacturing cost.

But if it's cheaper because of nvidia's CUDA technology, wouldn't there be a risk of a small life time? I'd hate to get the 6990 only to have to replace it.

 

Nvidia's CUDA is for processing power, it has nothing to do with graphics, but with using a graphics card as extra number crunching power

 

Ah. Well, you'd still recommend the 6990 over the 580? It's a lot cheaper so if it's reliable, I don't see why not. Only thing I'm worried about is the power requirements. I guess if Malibal is offering it as a gpu for the 8170/P170HM, it should work just fine.

 

The 6990m is worth every penny, and the P170HM can handle the power no problem. Just don't tell your battery, it might not be as happy as you

 

Ah, so it'd drain the power really quickly? That isn't a problem if I've got a power source nearby, right?

How much battery time would I be looking at if I was packing a 6990m?

 

Well either one would drain it a bit more than their older counterparts, but I'm guessing around 2:15 as compared to the usual 2.5-3

 

The 17" machine ships with a 220W adapter. Power is not an issue.

 

2:15 is amazing battery life for a machine like that. More than I'd need for any of my classes.

Wow, I'm really glad I looked around on here. Malibaal is the only retailer that packs a 6990 into the machine. Time for my preorder!

Finally, a reason to go with the 17" over the 15". =) The extra HDD bay and bigger screen was nice...but there's no competing with that card.

 

the p150hm has that card too and it will do just fine in it, and its 50 less in the 15" model.

 

But the benchmark page for the card said that it's intended for 17" models and bigger because of the power requirement.

Dang, this isn't as simple as I thought it'd be.

aduy, how is the 95% Gamut Matte screen? I heard glossy was better for gaming and movies because of the color...but does the 95% Gamut screen rival a glossy screen?

 

no it doesn't rival a glossy screen, it flat out beats it. its incredible. and the 485m is designed for 17"+ laptops but it is offered in my laptop, which it runs fine in, and idles at 34c and under gaming load gets to 80c, which is really very good for a laptop.

 

PROTIP: Stop reading NotebookCheck as gospel.

 

PROTIP: stop spreading gospel

 

Well, are notebookcheck's game benchmarks reliable?

Also, the 95% Gamut Matte screen BEATS the 95% Gamut Glossy screen? That's hard to believe. Are the colors the same on both? Even if the Gamut is the same, wouldn't the Glossy produce better more vibrant colors?

Glare isn't a concern for me, by the way. Also, how much better is a 17 inch for 1080p gaming? I already know the added size won't bother me. I used to own a G73 and I was fine with the weight. Unless the smaller model has a substantially better screen, I think I'd go with the 17 inch.

 

I've seen the specs of both screens. The 95% Glossy screen has a higher contrasts ratio.

 

sorry your post confused me, i thought you were comparing the regular glossy and the matte screen, and i assume that the glossy will look better, but i need a matte screen so.

 

compared to the 95% matte screen?

 

Glossy will be vibrate to matte screen no doubt and that apply the same to the 95% gamut screen as well. It like plasma versus LCD, plasma is more vibrate but it also worst for your eye then LCD. I remember owning a plasma tv and it hurt my eye so much.

If you have no problem with glare, go with the glossy one.

 

If you're spending a lot of time behind the screen, is the matte much easier on the eyes?

 

I don't think so I'm using my glare macbook right now, and it make no differences, of course I'm not playing game.

 

I think it depends on the lighting in the room. If you are in a bright lit room you would get lots of glare from the glossy which may strain your eyes. "May" being the key word there.

 

The matte is softer than the gloss. From the pencil hardness test, the matte is rated at 2H while the gloss rated at 3H. This means that a 2H pencil which is softer will scratch the matte screen while the glossy screen can only be scratched by the harder 3H pencil. Key point if you like to wipe your screen down regularly, you will have to be more careful with the matte screen.

A matte screen works by diffusing reflected light, thus this inadvertently causes the backlight of the screen to be dimmer, and typically black font on a white background will look somewhat "hazy", as though you are looking through a frosted glass. Google "matte screen sparkle effect".

For the glossy screen, it allows ambient light to reflect off the LCD, and coupled with the backlight, allows higher contrast and saturation at the expense of glare.

Both glossy and matte screen are inaccurate. Gloss exaggerates contrast and saturation while matte detracts from it.

Both can be calibrated to look indistinguishable from each other in controlled lighting.

You can always buy an anti-glare screen guard for the glossy screen and a glossy screen guard for the matte screen.

Not all matte/anti-glare coatings are created equal. For example, the revered Dell Ultrasharp U2410 has very harsh anti-glare coatings, while the matte 13.1" 1080p 96% wide gamut screen of the sony vaio Z11 to Z14 models are actually right in between matte and glossy. Matte enough to diffuse the worst ambient glare but retaining most of the glossy saturation and contrast characteristics.

The best 15" and 17" screens for laptops right now are the HP Dreamcolour 2, which are 10 bit IPS panels with an upgrade cost of $600 to $800 available in their elitebooks. Anyone wants to try putting them in a Sager?