M570ru: Vista, 8700Gt vs. XP, 7950GTX -- help!

CRFfred: one could also argue you are the one trying to defend your purchase

however, those who choose the 7950, did that for a reason
those who choose the 8700, did that for (probably) another reason
nobody is to say this or that reason isn't a good one since it all comes down to personal choice
and if, at some point, someone changes his point of view, he can simply change the cards

on a side note, and totally irrelevant, cause it's from M$
but my Vista experience gives me a 5.9 for Aero and a 5.6 for gaming, and I have 1 8700 (in a M570RU)
I fluently tried the Bioshock demo yesterday @ 1280x800 @ highest settings (no idea bout the FPS, but it didn't stall anywhere at all ) ... was doubting to try a higher resolution after I finished the demo, but frankly I was rather disappointed (I think it got hyped too much for me) so I forgot about playing it at higher reso, and uninstalled it

 

People this is a thing of personal opinion more than specs or performance, is like buying a car some people like economy cars and some others like high performance cars while some other people like luxury and very comfortable cars. It will always be discrepancies between people but at the end We are going to do the same spend the money. While the companies by the time We get our machine they will throw new and faster products. Remember the pc market change too fast...

 

Nobody is talking about the performance of Bioshock, but I dont believe 1280x800 is your native resolution for your rig. Try a true DX10 game like Call of Juerez. This has nothing to do with personal preference, this has to do with the GO8700GT running low DX10 at a low resolution and comparing the image quality to DX9 at a high resolution.

 

i think the 8700 will be okay for me.. this will end up being my "office" machine anyway. im looking into a 9261 here in a couple months.. so that will be my "beast" lol

 

That's where I disagree with you CRFfred. You keep saying low DX10 settings at low resolution. About anything would probably look better than that.

BUT, I'm saying that with 8700's in SLI you WON'T have to lower your screen resolution nor your DX10 settings. Case closed imo.

 

How about we all just wait a little bit and get some actual results from the 8700m SLI configuration before this turns into an all out flame war about mobile dx10 vs dx9. I personally went with the SLI 7950's because I wanted max performance and the 8700's just don't do it for me...dx10 looks nicer...but not nice enough for me to take the performance hit. By the time DX10 becomes pretty standard in games...I should be back home...able to play those games on whatever monster tower I have at the time.

 

case not closed. how about you give us some screenies and fraps kozi, i personally would like to see how they perform, im guessing about the level of a 8800gts, in which case you wont have to lower the resolution. SLI is still very buggy in vista, and vista its self is just abysmal. So at the most your cards will equal a 8800gts, but their memory bandwidth combined still is less than a 8800gts. im just speculating that WSXGA res would be optimal for you.

 

I supplied you with benchmarks for desktop systems, and you still refuse to believe the imformation they provide. Kozi I am not making this stuff up as I go. Look at the performance of the 8800 Ultra 25fps with 4xAA and 1280x1024 resolution. The go8700GT in SLI will never be as fast as the 8800Ultra desktop GPU. The Go8700GT SLI might be as powerful as the 8800 GTS and this only gets 16FPS. The 8800 GTS could not even run the game at your native resolution WUXGA. The only way to get your FPS up to playable would be to lower your settings, right? Or are you saying GO8700GT in SLI are as powerful as a 8800 ULTRA, cause if you are I think that everyone will agree it is not. I am done arguing about this, the proof is in the benches supplied to you, if you refuse to believe them that is your choice. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3029&p=3

 

You guys are wrong on 8800's not being able to run Call of Juarez. I've been stating the same thing again and again. Here's another article from the same site as before:

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM4NCwzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Go with the 8800 GTS 640MB (the 8800GTS 340MB has insufficient memory to hold all the textures... this limitation won't hurt the 8700's because two in SLI have 1GB).

The average frame rate is 30FPS. Sounds playable to me... and they didn't dumb down their settings nor their resolution.

I'd post FRAPS numbers but there are two problems with this:

1. I don't have my lappy yet (ships this week I hope ).
2. I have no interest in buying Call of Juarez

So as I said before the 8700's in SLI should not have any problem running Call of Juarez with good settings and high screen resolution.

I'm tired of arguing with guys who don't even own a DX10 card. Enjoy your 7950's -- they're great cards hands-down. But the 8700's are good too and I get the benefit of DX10 .

 

Are you kidding me 30 FPS when I look at the link you provided and go to 1600x1200 resolution and DX10 with noAA. The 8800 GTS 640 starts at 24fps and from 31seconds to 271seconds your playing almost always below 20fps. Thats not playable FPS LOL. And your trying to compare a buggy SLI Vista Go system to a desktop GPU.

And the reason were talking about Call Of Juarez is b/c this is the game you pointed out about how much better the DX10 looks compared to the DX9. It does look better than DX9 but only when you crank it up.

And by the way its not about owning a DX10 GPU its about not misleading people about the DX10 performance of the GO8700GT.

 

Call of juarez is a resource hog, on my desktop Quadcore @3.2ghz with a 8800gtx oc i get 25 fps at 1920x1080 in dx10 with no AA but everything else maxxed my 3dmark scores are 13k in 3dmark 6 so with a laptop running dual 8700s which is still not anywhere near the power of my desktop card i would not hold your breath being able to run the game at high rez with decent fps

You can test it buy downloading the dx10 benchmark for call of juarez just google it

 

Wonder how the enthusiast website is getting 30 FPS... strange indeed.

I'll definitely run the DX10 benchmark. Can you post your benchmark results? It would be great to compare with the 9261/8700 SLI setup!

Thanks XPS.

 

Call Of Juarez dx10

Ok i reinstalled it for you applied the patch which was supposed to give better dx10 performance but didnt, here are my results on my desktop Quadcore 3.2Ghz 8800GTXOCBFG and my vista install is tweaked to all heck for best performance as vista can perform Just installed beta 163.75 beta drivers today and performance is the same all these months later for this particular game .

Min 13.7
Max 44.7
Avg 23.9

Settings for benchmark are

1920x1080
fullscreen
custom settings
shadowmap size 2048x2048
shadows High
Anti Aliasing None

I read an interview awhile back from i think it was someone from nvidia stating that the game wasnt optimized for there card under dx10 and supposedly it runs better under ATI. ATI just released drivers today for this game that are supposed to give like 42% better performance nothing was ever done on the nvidia side of things to increase performance under drivers that ive seen .

 

Thankx XPS. As soon as my lappy arrives I'll give the benchmark a go as well. It will be cool to see how the two systems compare.

Are you really at 1920x1080, or should that be 1920x1200?

I've read that 1024x1024 shadow mapping yields nearly the same results with better performance.

 

That means it will be a right decision if I buy it my machine when I get back from Iraq with XP and a Go7950 GTX? It will still available by the beginning of Dec or not? Or by that time the new option will be better but spensive? Thanks...

 

1920x1080 is my 42inch monitor on my desk

 

reran at 1024x1024 for you 13.8 min 45.1 max 25.1 avg hehe not much difference sadly

 

lmao 42" monitor. sweeeeeeet.

 

nice.. sometimes i use my 60" flatscreen in the living room man it is sweet. not a "monitor" but can be used as one..

 

Ya ive been a tad spoiled by the larger screen the past few months since i sold my XPS 1710 and built a desktop , but i still miss just sitting back on the recliner or in bed with a good gaming laptop so im on the fence about what im going to buy next, so many choices thats why i was chiming in on this thread cause im looking at the 9261,1730xps,x205s they all look good . trying to decide if i should just wait till xmas time and /hope a new card comes out or pull the trigger and get something soonerish.

 

I would wait to see what the next GPU Nvidia offers, if its a 8700GTX or a 8800.

I hope that us 9260 owners can upgrade and make the jump to the next release.

 

Wait till Xmas u will not be sorry
New Card will be out soon

 

^^ how are you sure of this?? crap i should have waited then

 

Not to worry, hopefully Sager/Clevo will comethrough for us and we will be able to advantage of MXM.

 

Im sure the 9260/61 will and should be able to handle the next gen cards, especially if nvidia shrinks the dye to 65nm, which im sure will happen at some point . the question is always when ? and if cards were coming for say xmas time wouldnt we have heard something even some sort of rumor and considering that the new supposed desktop GPUs are still in very much rumor form i dont think anyone knows what the hell is going on at this point.

 

how very NOT nice of you guys to forget about the poor 5790/1 owners out here!
hopefully, we'll be upgrading as well

 

haha. i was just thinking that. i thought the 9260 and the 5791 both used MXIV, not MXV.

 

Hey, i'm hoping for you guys too.

 

lolz
thx fred

theorist: the 5791 uses MXM-IV, MXM-V doesn't exist (yet) (to my knowledge)

 

was it in here people posted some stats for Call of Juarez?
I benched a bit myself
T7700
4 GB RAM (Vista 32)
8700M
250GB 5400rpm

I get these results:
With shadowmap = 2048x2048
Shadows high
AA=4
1920x1200: 3,1-8,8-5,7
1600x1200: 3,7-10,4-6,8
1440x900: 5,2-14,7-8,8
1280x1024: 5,1-13,6-8,5
1024x768: 7,4-18,2-11

With shadowmap = 2048x2048
Shadows high
AA=off
1920x1200: 3,5-12,9-8,0
1600x1200: 3,7-14,4-8,8
1440x900: 5,6-17,7-10,3
1280x1024: 5,5-17,8-10,5
1024x768: 8,1-22,5-13,0

With shadowmap = 1024x1024
Shadows high
AA=off
1024x768: 8,2-24,4-14,7

With shadowmap = 1024x1024
Shadows off
AA=off
1024x768: 8,0-48,4-27,5

 

Hey guys, dont get me wrong. I think that the GO8700GT is a fine GPU. I just dont think that the image quality in DX10 is better than DX9, B/C you will have to lower a few settings. I think the image quality might be on par with the GO7950GTX, but not better and with less FPS IMHO.

 

I thats true the the Sager/Clevo comes with 8700M factory overclocked or not? Because is a difference in # when is compared to the X205-S9359 and boths machine have the same card...

 

no idea bout the OCing
never heard it, but could be true
if i feel like it, and have some time, I'll get rivatuner or sumthing to read my clocks

fred: don't worry, my benchies kinda say you're right
now, someone with a 7950 should run the same things i did, and tell their scores, for comparison

 

the gpu in the sager is clocked at 800mhz for the memory while the toshiba x205 is clocked at 700. so the toshiba is a bit underclocked the sager is clocked normally

 

to bad for the Toshiba then

 

sager is clocked at 800mhz for the memory while
the toshiba x205 is clocked at 700.

What about XPS 1730 ?

 

maybe someone in the Dell forum knows?

 

yes so stop spamming here and ask there

 

lol, yes please ask Dell questions in the Dell forum. Nobody here cares except when we're interested in showing how superior the D901C is to the Dell. (which it is in every regard -- except maybe for unused physics processors... Dell has that battle won... sort of like extra cup-holders in your car).

 

hey!
those cup-holders are a DAMN good feature

 

by the way, i can't play crysis on my laptop. even at 800x600, i crash and it is just horrible.

 

That's why they call it a beta.

 

yah, hah. i tried my native first, then went down one resolution at a time, it was sad!