Sager 8268-S vs 9752-S

Hey everyone! First post here, been lurking the threads for a while now.
Looking to get my first laptop (been in desktop gaming for a while) and debating between the models mentioned in the title.
For both models, I'm considering the GTX 970M. I don't plan to heavily game, but enough to run stuff in good setting and have a pleasant experience.
Now, I've done a comparison between them, and after adding up costs, the 8268-S costs around $300 less. I know that the 9752-S is newer, and has some benefits with the extra price (like the 256 GB SSD instead of the 128 GB, Kingston RAM and the desktop 4790 CPU instead of the 4710MQ), but other than that, the 8268-S seems almost identical. It even has a Blu-Ray drive included.
My question is, are the added bits of the 9752-S worth the extra $300? In what other ways is this model better than the older 8268-S? Any suggestions and opinions would be helpful.

Oh, and I also don't expect to buy the laptop now...most likely in August, so what can I expect the prices to be by then?
Thanks a lot!

 

You mentioned you do not plan on heavily gaming, do you plan on doing anything else that would be CPU demanding? If not the desktop CPU wont really help you out, even the mobile ones are very capable. If you wont be taking advantage of the better CPU then I would go with the 8268-S.

 

Thanks for your reply!
I don't think so. I'll be needing it for university, so I'm looking for something good that'll last me a while, in which I can game a decent amount. Other than games, I might need basic simulation modeling, but I believe the mobile CPU can easily pull that. So yeah, it doesn't look like I'll be specifically needing the desktop CPU. But I do need something with good build quality, so I was also wondering if there is much of a difference in the build quality of these two models.

Also, I had another question. What is the difference between the 4710, 4810 and 4910 MQ CPU chipsets, and is it worth investing more money into the latter models?

 

The 8268-S is a bit thicker at the back, but the 9752-S is little bit heavier. The 8268-S is a slightly older chassis design, but one Clevo/Sager has used for years. And, as you noticed, has an optical drive as well.

I think the CPU as Hutsady mentioned is the biggest difference.

 

So, the build quality seems almost similar. Yeah, I did notice that the the 9752-S has a slightly different design, but I'm ok with both their designs...they seem modest enough.
Do you have any idea about their differences in battery life, or other features like the audio quality? Thank you!

 

The main difference is clock rates. The 4910 also has a 8MB cache instead of a 6MB. If you plan on spending the cash upgrading the CPU to a 4910, you might be better off with the 9752-S. You'll get more out of a desktop cpu with less $$$.

 

Hmm, I don't plan on upgrading the CPU, I was just wondering why there was such a big price difference between those models. And yeah, if I do decide to invest more, the desktop CPU is definitely the better option.
So basically, the clock rates and cache sizes are the main differences? I'll have to do a bit more research into this, but for now it seems that the 4710MQ is decent enough.
Thanks again for your input, appreciate it.

 

The 8268-S has Optimus - a feature that lets you use the integrated GPU to save power when not using the 970m. This will provide a lot more battery life when not gaming.

You might want to also consider the 8651. It's smaller and cheaper, but the trade off is a a soldered CPU and GPU.

 

Ah, so the 8268-S has Optimus. I was wondering if it did, since the 9752-S doesn't. Thank you for that info!

I had a look at the 8651. It is a bit cheaper if I add in RAM upto 16GB (around $100) than the 8268-S, and it does seem more portable, with the tradeoff of parts being non-upgradeable, as you already mentioned. However, the 970M on that is 3GB, instead of 6GB. What difference does that cause towards overall performance?

 

The 9752 is better as a desktop replacement. It doesn't have Optimus, which mean it's less useful on battery only, but Optimus has its downsides too. I chose the 9772 (17" version) because I have a nice G-sync monitor, and G-sync doesn't work with Optimus. I'm also never gaming off of power, and don't often carry my laptop with me,
For portability, the 8651 wins hands down of the three. It's smaller, lighter, and has Optimus.
The 8268 is in the middle for portability, and also has the capability to upgrade. More importantly, if you GPU or CPU dies, you can replace it. Most people never replace the CPU, and it's usually more cost effective to buy a new laptop than to upgrade the GPU in an old one.

I believe the video ram is an issue if you plan on gaming at higher resolutions, or with high levels of AA. It's one of those things that doesn't matter until it does. You ca probably check here or some other review sites to see when/if video ram is an issue.

 

Ah, I see. That was a nice summary of the pros and cons of the three models, helps me weigh my options and priorities a bit more.
You're right though, I need to look more at how and when the VRAM matters. I'll keep your words in mind during consideration.

Anyone else, feel free to share your experiences and opinions!

 

At least the mobile chips do give the full 4GB unlike the desktop 970

Lack of optimus also means you can overclock the internal/external displays.

 

Ahaha, yeah, at least that much we can get!

Oh, so that's a benefit of not having optimus....although, I doubt I'll end up overclocking much, if at all.

 

I always like to get above 60hz when gaming myself but I am quite picky

 

Haha, but I'm not that picky. As long as it works nicely and lasts a while, I'm good

 

My advice: don't be picky for as long as you can. It's cheaper that way =p. Once you start noticing things that bug you, you can't unsee them.

 

Well different things bother different people, screen tearing never bothered me much but input lag really annoys me. I see the tearing but it just does not impact my experience.

 

Yeah, exactly! The more I start noticing flaws, the more expensive the whole setup seems to become! Well, not that I can't help noticing stuff, but I've come to realize that a laptop, unlike a PC, isn't the perfect machine if you don't have a massive budget.

 

Well either you throw money at it or you can also tweak it

 

And I don't have a lot of money to throw at it either. Hmm...tweaking it is, if only I'd be able to learn more on what tweaks affected which part of the performance better...

Still open to more advice people!

 

For games there is only really one part, the gpu core and memory clocks.

 

Hmm, understandable.
I'm currently leaning a bit towards the 8268-S, but still a while to go before I actually make my buy, so gonna keep researching.

 

How long exactly? Models never do stay still for too long, there are always changes so it's worth keeping track of what does.

 

I'll be buying it in August, so another 3 solid months to go. Will prices decrease by then? I don't think I'd find anything much better in the span of three months...

 

Prices stay fairly consistent but updates to chips can happen so usually there are more options or better performance.

 

Which basically means newer parts = higher costs.
Thanks for your inputs though, and answering my questions consistently. I'll keep an eye out for new updates.

 

No the newer parts phase out the older ones at the same cost usually.

 

Yeah, but that takes some time. The initial cost tends to remain high for some time. But yes, I get your point, keeping individual parts in mind is just as important as the whole setup.

 

You are mostly hoping for a gpu refresh as a gamer but they may not do that for a bit.

 

Actually, I don't think I'll be aiming above the 970M, anything above it is too expensive (namely, the 980M)
So, I don't actually need a GPU refresh.

 

A refresh would be for example a 975m replacing the 970m at the same price point as discussed above but with higher performance.

 

Oh, ok, now I get it. Yeah, doubt that'll happen in 3 months, and I need to get my laptop by August.

 

Well you never know Just keep an eye out and dip in from time to time.

 

The 8268 is being discontinued in June.. Clevo has all but confirmed it... These models are currently EOL... You'll most likely be ending up with the 9752 tbh... I'd expect it to be updated with the Skylake desktop CPU's around August/September so what I'd suggest is that you start saving up money for it from now

 

WHAT! Dayum, didn't know they'd be discontinuing the 8268...and I was liking it more too! Thanks for your information, saved me from a nasty surprise!
So it does look like the 9752 remains my only option. Hmm, so you're saying the Skylake update will occur in August/September. Do you have any idea if any big sales will be happening in the July-August region? Could save me some money...

 

Usually they are pretty good at managing stock so there are not huge slashes. There should be some good prices around though.

 

Yeah...wondering if I can find some good Halloween sales or something

 

Just another question to try and distinguish these two models - how much a performance difference would you expect to see between a 980M with 4GB vRAM vs 8 GB?

 

Well, from what I understand, vRAM mainly affects performance with resolution and all.
For example, if you plan on gaming at 2k resolution, or while plugged into an external monitor/screen, the extra vRAM would be very helpful and is most certainly recommended, but if you just plan on gaming in your laptop at 1080p, then 4GB vRAM is more than sufficient imo.

Also, the 8268-S is now, out of market. I'm personally planning on getting the 8652-S model now!

 

Yeah, expecting 4k gaming on a laptop at this point seems a bit unreasonable, I'm mainly planning on just gaming on the laptop. From everything I've read, performance will likely never be bottlenecked by the mobile processor in the 8652-S, especially given the lower temperatures, so I was just trying to gauge if the 9752-S was worth getting purely for the extra vRAM in the 8GB 980M configuration. Any thoughts?

 

Well, I was actually in the same predicament, but I've sorta decided on the 8652-S now.
There are a number of reasons for that. To begin with, the MAIN advantage of the 9752-S is that the parts are socketable, i.e they can be separately upgraded or replaced down the line. However, I don't have the luxury to upgrade laptop parts like CPU and GPU later on (costs way too much as it is already), and I'll maybe get an extended warranty to cover parts, since I want my purchase to last a good 4 years at least.
Secondly, the 980M config of the 9752-S is a lot more expensive, a good $300 more at least. I just can't afford that right now, since my budget is limited to $2000. I was considering the 970M variant, but the 980M is just a lot better.
In addition to these, I need to use my laptop a lot for university, so it would be better if I get something that is lighter, thinner, more portable and has better battery life. The 8652-S is better than the 9752-S in all those departments. Build quality is also solid (maybe not AS GOOD as the 9752-S, especially the keyboard, but I plan on using an external keyboard anyway).
Plus, as you yourself said, it's pretty cool in the 8652-S, so I can't realistically expect bottlenecking, and I don't plan on running too many resource-heavy applications either.

All these advantages of the 8652-S just trump the socketable+desktop CPU benefits of the 9752-S for me, but they are both great systems, from what I've gathered. Get the one that best suits your needs.
Hope that was helpful

 

I would not get it just for the fact one has 8GB vs 4GB. While having more is nice its only used when needed. Keep in mind most desktop video cards are 4GB so its not too big of an issue (right now anyway).

 

Regarding the 8GB vs. 4GB: you're not likely to notice any performance improvements in terms of FPS. Like the RAM in your computer, as long as you have enough, then everything moves along normally, but if you run out, then you'll suffer a performance hit. The question really then becomes: is 4 GB enough for the games you'd want to play?

The answer to that tends to be that 4 GB of VRAM is sufficient. If you look back on here at some of the older threads when the 880M was released and the VRAM was doubled from 4 GB to 8 GB, many people were quite upset about it. They wanted more overall performance, rather than extra VRAM that wouldn't really be used. While it is possible that a few games can see VRAM usage of over 4 GB, there isn't really a clear answer about whether performance would drop if the card was limited to 4 GB. That is, a game might be cacheing textures and such just in case, but never actually use them.

On the list of things I'd pay extra for, I think the extra 4 GB of VRAM is probably lowest on the list. The selling feature for the 8 GB model is really that it's socketable (if that matters to you) as that's likely to have more value than the extra VRAM.