THoughts on 580m in the 17.3 Clevo

Im thinking of buying the 17.3 inch clevo laptop with the 580m gpu.
just wondering what peopl think to it if they game on it. are the games lag free, whats the quality like?

cheers

 

For just gaming the 6990M is the better value at this time. If you look at the performance between the two they perform very similarly but the 6990M is a few hundred bucks less.

If you were doing other GPU demanding programs besides gaming, like 3D model rendering or HD Video editing then the 580M is much better then the 6990M

It sounds like you're really more interested in gaming performance so the 6990M is your better value right now.

 

The main purpose is gaming. Some others keep telling e go for the 580m as games seems to run better with it and s a lot cooler

 

Performance will depend on the game itself. Some will run better on Nvidia while other run better on ATI. The difference is pretty minimal though with ~5% difference in performance.

Nvidia is known for updating their drivers more often and as you mentioned does run cooler.

If you dont mind the extra cost I'd personally go with the 580M. The difference in performance/price is something to really consider though.

 

At this late point in the game, I consider it borderline foolish to go with the 580M.

Two reasons:

1. The 6990M has been tried and proven to be virtually equal to the 580M in nearly every game available, while each of them has one or two games they lead by a few percentage points.

2. It's an amazing $330 more than the 6990M. This is my main source trepidation of trepidation, because we're right on the cusp of a new generation of cards, which will leave these in the dust.

Let's look back. In the last two generations, when finally available for aftermarket purchase, AMD's flagship mobile cards have been priced around $500. That's just around $150 more than you'd spend on the 580M today, and this card will absolutely dust it.

So why spend the $330 when it's not gaining you a faster GPU, and is money you could spend on something more substantial?

 

to buy a 580M now is wasting money, you might as well buy alienware, they don't have any price diff bet amd/nvidia

 

But, at the same time, the Alienware is like $400 more than an NP8170 so it equals spending the same.

 

Try with 420$, so awesome, I love it! (sarcastic)

It's pretty much.. hmm how do I put it firmly.. ignorant! I mean the consideration of even though of buying something "old" now is basically out of my brains spectrum. All of the new technology is due next month, and the 2 month beyond that, not to talk about the fall in price in all the tech that for "sale" now (yes I'm talking about you, SSD's and 6990/580 etc.)

I might seem out of my mind, but if you ain't in a freaking hurry and unless you actually need a laptop for anything else than gaming and feeding yourself with useless information that will satisfy you, I would recommend to wait a while and then gratitude yourself with the newest or maybe the second newest tech (with a cash in spare, thanks to the financial cuts to promote the new tech).

I believe some of the others would agree blindly (or is it blindly agree, my grammar is not sufficient enough) with me

 

If you go for Alienware you also get a much better keyboard, better speakers, better on-board audio, better battery life , better touchpad, better connectivity and, some might say, better workmanship. On top of that you get a nvidia card, which I personally would prefer over amd.

In other words, it doesn't automatically equal the same spendings, simply because the specs are the same.


OP: Both the 580m and 6990m are excellent gpu's which allow you to play most games on high/ultra quality.

 

To get 580M and save money instead of Alienware look at MSI Force 1761, although I believe it has a single fan for CPU and GPU. In either case there are hundreds of P170HM owners with 6990M, they haven't experienced overheating, so with some thermal paste you should be fine.

 

Couldn't say anything regarding the touchpad, never use them and never use the speakers either, always using headphones. That aside, some might say that a AW is reasonable larger than the P170HM and the on-board audio can always be switched assuming that's what you are talking about.

And regarding the connections:
The P170HM has, the following:
1 HDMI output Port
1 DVI-I output Port
1 eSATA Port
2 USB 3.0 Ports
2 USB 2.0 Ports
1 RJ-45 LAN (10/100/1000Mbps)
1 Headphone Jack
1 Microphone Jack
1 Line-in Jack
1 S/PDIF output Jack
1 IEEE-1394a Fire Wire
1 Kensington Lock Slot

The AW (17 inch that is) has:
(1x) Power/DC-in Jack
(2x) Hi-Speed USB 2.0 ports
(2x) SuperSpeed USB 3.0/2.0 Combo ports
(1x) eSATA 3Gb/s + USB 2.0 Combo port(with USB charge function support)
(3x) Auto-sensing jacks for Line-out (2 line out; 1x SPDIF/Headphone)
(1x) Microphone Input jack
(1x) RJ-45 (10/100/1Gb IPv6)
(1x) HDMI-1.4 output with Audio
(1x) HDMI-1.3 input3 with Audio4
(1x) mini-Display Port
(1x) VGA Port (DB-15)
(1x) 9-in-1 Media card reader

You are correct, but that sure ain't by a much.. although the AW has a better camera too (3MP)

But wait what is that?
The dimensions of the P170HM that is:
Height: 4.19 cm - 4.54 cm
Width: 41.20 cm
Depth: 27.60 cm
Weight: 3.90 kg (with Battery!! which is an 8 cell)

Now to the AW:
Height (rear): 1.77" - (4.5 cm)
Height (front): 1.75" - (4.45 cm)
Depth: 11.96" - (30.4 cm)
Width: 16.14" - (41.0 cm)
Starting weight* - 9.39lbs (4.26kg); [9.67lbs (4.39kg) with 3D panel] (now thats WITHOUT the 9 cell battery )

Now ofc, this is completely foolish and you can't really compare these two laptops, but I just wanted to give a inside on the information one vs. the other.

Now we can talk all day about if it's worth or isn't worth the extra money, but ultimately it's not up to us, but the OEM and resellers.

Either way you would be happy for any machine, but I would personally prefer Clevo, anytime, anyday, although they have some mistakes here and there, nor do I disagree in the slighter better workmanship in the AW (although they have some major flaws sometimes, for some weird reason, but I guess any laptop could experience that).

In the end, I agree with oan001, nVIDIA is the manufacturer I would prefer over AMD.

Sorry for the long post

 

$1627 for the 17" 1761 with i7 2670qm, 580m, steelseries backlit keyboard, 8 gigs ram,500gig HD( No op system)DVD-RW,standard wifi/blutooth card.

IMO this is actually the best bang for the buck. And basically because of the backlit keyboard(Major reason) and better sounding speakers(Minor reason). This is probably the setup Im going to get for the SO, and add my own SSD on the side.

$1364 for the NP170($100 and $50 off rebates for NBR members)with all the same specs but a 6990m, but no backlit keyboard.

This is a great deal too, IMO if it came with a backlit keyobard,and better built in audio, it would be the best bang for the buck. But if you dont need or desire a backlit keyboard and plan on using headphones or another external audio source, then it is the best bang for the buck going right now for performance laptops in the $1500 range.

$1899: Alienware...... the 1761 is a better option if you need to stick closer to $1500 without question unless you want to pay the $2-300 premium for the label and "customer service"..........BUT..........if your a hardcore gamer first, this laptop comes with a 580m and the standard resolution screen is actually a bit lower at 1600x900(You can upgrade to a 1080p for $150 more)which for a gamer has serious benefits. Because at the slightly lower resoltion(Which you wont be able to notice by eye at roughly 2 foot distance), you get a SERIOUS boost(About 50% on average on framerate increase) in performance and framerate(comes in handy for those who want all settings maxed) and can pretty much play ALL games out currently at or near 60fps. For the gamer who wants the most out of their card, this screen allows for it(As the 1080p screen is a bit demanding for the 580m and 6990m cards)and is actually a better match for the top end laptop cards out right now. And now that Im thinking about it, I might do this for the SO myself................plus this price comes with a slightly larger 750gig HD, windows 7 OEM installed, and an upgraded wifi card..........

 

Can't you just lower the resolution of games and/or your desktop itself?

 

Yep, but the display doesnt look anywhere near as good as it does when you play at the native resolution.

 

I can't decide. 6990m or 580m. Or wait. Technology I'm driving the missis up the wall with it.
I really really want one but don't want to buy in month then get a better gpu out. Then the other side of me says buy the new gpus will be more expensive

 

Like I said, the new GPUs are going to cost what the 580M costs now, which is why I wouldn't buy a 580M, because they'll be way more powerful at the same price.

 

Maybe, but by then you might be able to get the 580M for the 6990M's price (not sure though, just a guess) I would wait, you wouldn't die! Either way you will save money, unless you ofc buy the new gen GPU's and CPU's

 

You will NOT see ANY difference in performance between the 6990m and 580m in real world gaming.......NONE!


But I will tell you this. That Alienware m17x with the 580m using the standard 1600x900 screen natively will give you a 50% performance increase roughly vs. the 6990m or 580m running natively on a 1080p screen. That right there is a HUGE difference.

And Ill tell you this, your eyes will not be able to tell a difference in resolution between 1600x900 and 1920x1080 on games or BLu ray movies etc. Especially on a small 17" screen.

If raw gaming performance is what your after, the slightly lower sceen resolution that the M17x offers as a standard display option is much better suited for the 580m and 6990m.

 

yea i went from a 1440x900 to 1366x768 to a 1080p and i have not noticed any more sharpness. they all look identical. people that think having a higher resolution is the better choice tend to have mental issues.

 

That isn't true. Your eyes can tell the difference. I have 1680x1050 laptop, there is a difference between Full HD, even though my resolution is bigger than today's 900p. Both look great though, so it isn't the issue. Also the amount of effective work space available is also different. I'm also unsure about the quality of 17 inch 900p panel vs 1080p panel.

 

I can definitely tell the difference between 1080p and something less. Unless you type with outstretched arms, it's simple to tell. Plus, Blu-Ray minus 1080p just doesn't sound very enticing.

Also, I severely doubt the only time you ever turn on your computer is to play games or watch movies. Buying a $1500+ machine with a lower-quality display JUST so you can play something a native resolution seems like a bad way to spend $1500. You lose a ton of real estate (30%) in the process and end up with a 17" machine that has the same effective screen as many 14" machines.

 

A. At a 1-2 foot distance(2 feet is typical for laptop use) its a proven fact on a 17" display that your eyes cannot discern the difference between 1600x900 and 1920x1080.

B. A slightly lower native resolution does not necessarily mean a lower "quality" display. Things like ANSI contrast, color accuracy, greyscale performance etc. will determine that.

In reality all these displays are roughly the same in quality(cheap) regardless of native resolution.

C. One thing is a garentee though, and that is the fact that a video card that can push 40-50 frames per second on a 1600x900 native screen will look and play ALOT better than the same game running at roughly 25-30 frames per second on a 1920x1080 screen.

 

1600x900 on a 17" screen is gross. You have to think about more than just the gaming factor.

Also, the 900p screen the M17x ships with is less than stellar.

The more posts you make, the less I feel anyone should trust your opinions.

 

I wouldn't consider something as "bang for buck" unless it was under $1200. Primarily because anything over such would present itself prone to further upgrades. I wouldn't buy the customized MSI or Clevo lines without a better wifi card at the dead minimum after seeing the crappy range my Qosmio has.

"Bang for buck" is subjective to what someone needs and/or wants. I say the best bang-for-buck, going beyond the $1,200 limit, is probably any Clevo machine with a 6990M upgrade and nothing else.

However, if someone is looking into buying a fully fledged machine, $2100 is the sweet spot for most builds. This allows for a better GPU, SSD in most cases, better wifi card, more RAM, adding a decent warranty, etc, the more important aspects of a computer. If you drop more than $1,200 on any computer, it better come with at least a two year warranty in my book.

 

A) Source? Beyond the fact that I can tell the difference, all visual acuity calculations I can find based on screen size indicate the maximum threshold before detail loss is beyond two feet for a 17" 1080p display.

B) Of course. Correlation doesn't imply causation, but it doesn't refute the existence of the correlation either. At any given screen size, the highest quality screens with regards to your listed parameters are always those of the highest resolutions. Never the other way around.

Also, just because they may be "cheap" quality in comparison with desktop displays, it doesn't mean you should settle for any random screen you can find. Given a finite amount of money, how can anything else other finding the "best" fit be construed as logical?

 

Any ISF tech will tell you the same thing I have. "THX" standards on visual perception are the same, so is CCPro. THe most important aspects of picture "quality" are contrast, color and resolution in that order. Also, this is based on a static picture. But when we are talking about MOTION resolution, its also a proven fact that a video or game at 1600x900 that is able to produce a significantly higher framerate will actually have better percieved resolution and much better depth of field than a video or game at 1920x1080 playing at a lower framerate.

Your more than welcome to debate any of what Ive stated, but please do so over at the AVS forum. They have a dedicated "HTPC/gaming" forum.......in fact you should start a thread stating you can visually tell a difference in resolution talked about here on a tiny 17" screen without jamming your eyeballs up against the screen, and Id give it about 15-20 minutes before you get laughed off the board.

As for stating that the 1600x900 display is of a lower quality, this is nothing more than pure specualtion, unless you can toss up charts showing that the contrast(white levels),brightness(black levels), gamma curve, greyscale, primary color accuracy etc. are proven to be inferior on Dell's 900p display vs. their 1080p version.

 

Ntrain, I think you are confused with the terms "uneducated opinion" and "proven fact." Make sure to check up on those definitions at the AVS forum. I know you are very willing to make another 15 page thread trying to convince everybody that games are unplayable under 60 FPS, but honestly I'd rather not to. This thread is about GTX 580M.

Also feel free to prove that 900p 17 inch displays are the same quality as Full HD ones on M17x.

 

And feel free to post up threads and tests showing proof that Dell's 17" "Full HD" display is in fact a higher quality unit versus their 900p 17" version.

 

I think Ntrain has alot of good points but is off on one thing.

You can tell with the naked eye 1080p on a 17" screen from about 2-7ft. So
many people can appreciate this. This is with a STATIC image.

However, as he stated once moving images are involved the benefit is
going to be much harder to tell.

There is no doubt that in gaming the visual difference would be little to
none while the 1600x900 would have a substantial improvement in fps.
Which is very noticeable.

Also as he pointed out people often assume quality display strictly by the
resolution. There is more to it than that.

 

Just wanted to join in your little cozy conversation really quick.

Well according to Wikipedia, 900p shares the same color-depth as the 1080p.
That is supposedly a reliable source, I guess..

SOURCES //
Graphic display resolutions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Computer display standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Display resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of common resolutions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (tell you what resolution 900p is and so on, that if you just don't know that much about it )

I've done a few searches, and I guess 1080p is supposed to look sharper, and it uses more energy and requires more hardware power to run (ex. playing a game like Crysis in 900p vs 1080p) I personally couldn't find any scientific proof of 1080p being BETTER than 900p by any mean.

Well that off the topic. I'll go on topic again..

So, I still can't figure out why Clevo can't tell us what kind of new hardware that now there is going to be in the newest 17" line! Those P170EM, they are pretty close and still no news.. No specific information! Damn can't wait no more

 

Well, the CPU's and GPU's are pretty much known; "Ivy Bridge" and nVidia's GTX 600M series. It will have the HM77 chipset, and nVidia's "Optimus" will be supported. It will also have a backlit keyboard.

It can also be inferred that it will support mSATA SSD's since the P150EM will.

Everything else should pretty much be the same.

 

So we are told, indeed. The chipset is supposed to support RAID (even in the P150EM) and regarding the keyboard, how will it work? Like in the P270WM? Hmm and that Optimus, oh god, unless it's fixed and that new firmware or w/e hasn't been bugged out already I'm going to cry

Ah yes the GTX 600M series, no news on the high-end one's though, at least no official OEM news that is, all those rumors just don't make up for it. And IB is going to be awesome.. oh well the P1X0EM-series are going to be legendary! Or just better I guess

 

Typical brightness - 900p = 220 ; 1080p = 300
Color Gamut - 900p = 60% ; 1080p = 72%

This is straight from Dell's website. Must I continue digging?

 

OK, those are mfg. specs, now what do ACTUAL tests show. I can probably name off a half dozen other mfg's that give superior "specs" for displays that just don't measure up.

Also typical "brightness" is literally a worthless standard. How about giving ANSI contrast instead? What is the ratio on a properly calibrated monitor that doesn't bloom white levels or crush blacks?

So yeah, you need to continue "digging".

 

I have had the luxury of seeing a Nvidia video card in my desktop v the ATi 6990 in my Clevo p170hm on the same game. From looking at the same scene on both systems the colour and image quality on the ATi blows Nvidia off the planet.

However, in compromising the image quality Nvidia claws some fps which is minor and hardly noticeable.

I'd go with the ATi as I prefer a better image quality than higher fps.

 

Nobody needs to do anything. Proving you wrong yet again over and over is not that high of priority. You keep posting uneducated "facts" without any proof behind them and then expect others to disprove your baseless opinions. Your posts are littered with logical fallacies. The burden of proof is on you, do some research. Just like several of your other ridiculous opinions of 18.4" laptops being the same size as 17" and many others. You are also attempting to derail a "580M in Clevo" thread to talk about Alienware.

 

Just to lay this to bed:

Anandtech reviews the 1080p screen (in the M17x). LG Philips LP173WF1.

The 900p screen is the AUO129E. Reviewed by Notebookcheck. In the Acer Travelmate.

Check.

I'mma go ahead and put my shovel back in the shed.

 

stating an opinion that conflicts with your nonsense.

your a winner bud

 

Exactly what have you "proven" me wrong on? I have yet to see any proof on your end on any subject that states that anything Ive stated is false. All you have proven to show is that your horse with very large blinds on.

BTW, post a picture of a Clevo 180 next to a 170 please.........a picture will show that their size is very similiar, both are LARGE notebooks.

 

Unfortunately, the "review" of the AUO129E panel is very limited, but regardless looking over Dell's own 1080p upgrade, it most likely is a poor screen overall.

 

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

I don't want to have to delete posts but this is getting out of control.

Please stay on topic going forward. Ignore any troll-like behavior and instead simply report the post.

Continued derailment may result in infractions.

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

OP...My 580m burnt every game i threw at it with no problem ,

Then I flashed my 580m to the 0.92v bios, and im now able to achieve GTX 560 TI desktop clocks, the thing hammers now! I recommend personaly the 580m. My opinion, nothing more.