So the NP2090/IFL90 has an 8600GT with DDR2?

Well that's a dealbreaker.

After comparing the Asus G1S (8600GT 256MB GDDR3) to the Zepto 3415W (8600GT 512MB DDR2), it's apparent that the GDDR3 not only nullifies any advantage that 512Mb may have, but outperforms it. Guess that means the NP2090 is out of my choices now. All that's left is the Macbook Pro, Dell E1520, and G1S.

The NP2090 was so well-priced...if only it had GDDR3.

 

This review in Portugues (you can use Google to translate) has the 512mb in DDR3. There seems to be some question on what the US models will have. I'm not sure we know for sure it'll be DDR2

 

The first wave of shipments came in on Friday, so hopefully we'll have something by next week.

Here's to hoping it is indeed DDR3.

 

This would totally suck

 

hopefully itll be DDR3....but most people are guessing that it is DDR2

 

please o please be gddr3, then everything about this one will be better or equal than the g1s (for cheaper ) and i wont have such a tough decision

 

Why don't they just give the option between the two anyways.

 

hmmm well there are two confirmed ppl who have gotten theirs... either of u want to chime in as to what yours is? is there any way to tell?

 

why exactly is it a deal-breaker? to be honest, i don't think the performance is going to all that noticeable(correct me if i'm wrong)

 

I am new here but I wanted to post what I have heard from vendors. Most note that it won't be as much of a determinant as the actual card that you are using instead. The card you have ie the clock speed of the processor and the number of pipelines will be the greater determinant.

I bet if you take a 8600 GS with its 16 pipelines and DDR3 and compare it with a 8600 GT with DDR2 the GT will still be noticibly faster.

The Sager is such a good deal and I can't justify the additional $200 or so for a Asus G1S for just DDR3.

 

You are not wrong.

I would challenge anyone to put away the synthetic benchmark software and just use GDDR2 and GDDR3 side be side...If you can tell the difference without guessing I will give you the turkey sandwich that losthighwayblues is going to make for Peter5897 over at http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=134370&goto=newpost

 

I believe, and I may be wrong, that because of the DDR3, G1S will also be a better overclocking machine when compared to the IFL90

 

Someone who has received their IFL90 is reporting DDR3 and posted a screen shot

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=135460

 

Yep, looks like the 2090 has DDR3. Everyone may rejoice!

 

That's great news!

 

dont rejoice so fast. Look at the memory clock speed. Its a little on the slow end.

 

This might be the truthful part of the thread. Although you'd still like to roll with the good stuff first.

 

I'm still curious as the what the real difference between GDDR2 and GDDR3 is in real life situations, not in synthetic virtual land.

 

ya i saw that too but as the guy after u said... some ppl are skeptical.... and im just confused so it has gddr3? but its slower than its supposed to be?

 

Even in synthetic land it's only a 5% incease. So to your eyes it will be much less than that. People who are stressing over it, are stressing over nothing. I don't know if most people can see the difference.

The reason for the low clock speeds is probably because the ifl90, like the Hel80 iirc, comes to us underclocked.

 

if it comes underclocked, is changing the clock speeds to the specs advertised be nvidia safe?

 

i sureee hope so

 

i would imagine it wouldnt hurt anything since technically you are not overclocking it. just makingittherightspeedclocking it : D

 

Hmm, in the first place are u sure its DDR2? If its not DDR3, then trying to overclock it to 'stock' speeds on DDR2 is not a gud idea and cud damage the RAM..

 

This is spread out across the forum.

 

The DDR2 or DDR3 question?? Well, correct me if im wrong but i was still under the impression that it was a pretty hazy on whether its DDR2 or DDR3..

Rivatuner unless updated has known to be wrong on occasions with newer cards..

 

The whole thing and if you can OC it enough to get similar synthetic scores regardless. Like Donald said, you can OC but it's best to just test it up to a stable and cool setting instead of turning your laptop on and slapping 700mhz in and thinking it's going to kick ass. I think another thread said someone got it up to about 500mhz with 3800 type score. <shrug> Jury is still out. But it's still cheaper than the G1S.

Also you probably could try just OCing when you gaming and then change it back afterward. That way it's not juiced up all the time. Just game time.

 

Sounds reasonable.

 

Every site I've seen it at doesn't make mention of whether it's DDR2 or GDDR3, which personally makes me think GDDR3 is more likely. And when Rivaturner is wrong, it's usually about clock speeds, I don't think I've ever heard it being wrong about a physical portion of the hardware.

 

As I understood it with help from Donald, the issue was not so much about GDDR2 v GDDR3, but more about memory clock speeds (for which people are using the GDDR2v3 as a proxy issue).

I don't think it matters meaningfully whether its GDDR2 or GDDR3, what matters more (although this is also debatable), is what clock that memory is running at. We know the G1S runs at 700mhz clock (stock).

Petrov.

 

www.xoticpc.com it has ddr3 8600gt video card.

 

From another forum:

Note that computer only has one gig of RAM in the system as well.

 

wow that was a cool site! he got it up to 3924

pretty impressive

 

the sager web site says ddr2
http://www.sagernotebook.net/pages/...e=2090&SubType=C&hdid=40001492&ramid=80001305

 

The Sager website is wrong...maybe.

The Compal specs say DDR2, but RivaTuner says it is GDDR3.

No one knows for sure yet whether the memory is GDDR2 or GDDR3 even though one owner has posted their Riva screen shot showing GDDR3. The problem is that software tool is not an “official” (read “reliable” tool recognized by either Compal or nVIDIA. The Compal specs say GDDR2, so until we actually get the production models into the US we won’t know for sure. However the bottom line is that it really doesn’t matter to the performance of the video card. It will kick butt just the way it is, and you couldn’t tell the difference in your gaming experience.

 

good! thanks for clearing that up Donald!

 

donald lays it down

 

So, what do you use to overclock the card then? I've never overclocked anything on a computer before.

 

riva tuner is a goood program

 

The best advice is to QUIT with all the overclock, timings and synthetic benchmark analism and just play your games.

Why fix it if it ain't broke just to see some higher numbers in the synthetic benchmark software that isn't even written for these DirectX 10 cards?

Game on folks and quit worrying about benchmark scores that don't matter. It's the gaming experience that matters isn't it?

 

QFT! I still dont understand why we need to overlock the graphics card, (moreover considering its a notebook one) to get wat maybe 200 points in a benchmark test which may translate like 2 fps more in the game..

Now thats the laptop is here, we should be saying, its game time!!

 

Can't wait to play some Medieval II on this rig!

 

yeah i'm with you, all I want to know is how medieval runs with huge unit scale in like a 2000 man battle...

 

I don't know much about notebooks graphics cards, but if they're anything like desktop cards, overclocking it will shorten it's lifespan. And with it being a notebook, you can't replace the card. So why bother overclocking when you don't have to. Wait a year or two, maybe even three years, when you can't play anything at even medium anymore, then OC it because by then the notebook will be near the end of it's lifespan and the OC might extend that a bit.

QFT

 

Gotta agree with you there.

 

I don't even mean the overclock, but to get it up to its standard clock speed (since it comes underclocked, correct?) Unless it won't matter that much.

 

don is right. as long as its running the game and a manageable speed we shouldnt be complaining right?

 

@ blackyoshi Well underclocked as it is, it's already comparable to the G1S which came stock. If the manufacturer underclocked it, they underclocked it for a reason. Some recent tests have shown us taht OCing it to stock gets considerable results.

And as far as most companies are concerned I think anything other than what they give you is considered OCing it.

If you want to there are other threads out there that go over how to OC step by step.

 

I have a friend who Overcooks his cards. That's how he killed his laptop. did you know notebooks could catch fire? Because they can, and it is funny if it isn't yours.

 

For sure, using benchmarks and OCing as a pissing contest by proxy achieves little.

Still, I would be glad to see some synthetic benchmarks (I know the limitations) and more importatly some real FPS stats with the *stock* hardware (by stock I mean the hardware as shipped from the manufaturer/reseller, not what nVidia says stock should be). Especially, if those tests are run in a systematic way. Why? Because there are so many things that can interfere with the optimal functioning of our systems. Could be a bad driver, a bad setting somewhere in Windows, the game itself might need a patch, etc. If we have some *ballpark* idea at least of what should *normally* be expected, then we have a reference point.