sort of discomforting 570ru review from notebookcheck??

they had a lot of negatives to say about it imo... and man that orange paint looks so cheap in the close up shots.. does it really looks like that.. if so man thats nasty see the review here and please post thoughts...updated to include what text translates and most of the pics from the review... seems like they had a lot of complaints..while the x200 (x205 same thing) they had tons of good things to say...???? that could change my mind looking at these pics

http://translate.google.com/transla...sult&prev=/search?q=x200+notebook+check&hl=en

 

and why do some of the 8600gt ddr3 cards score better than 8700gt cards?? or is this site full of it?? seems like pretty good reviews here?

 

the link didnt take me to it.... BUt with the Scores.... where they using 05 vs 06 for 3dmark... also where the 8600 Overclocked or something?

otherwise i dont know... but i trust this site for the most part, ive learned all i know from here and so far it seems accurate.

 

hi. i can't seem to find the review using that link. can you give me another link (with the translation)?

thanks!

 

takes me to it just fine??? the toshiba x205 scored better in almost all areas..??

the 8600 was a macbook pro at stock clocks so im not sure ill have to look..they showed 3dmark 05 and 06 results. i was just suprised that the toshiba scored a decent amount better all the way around overal quality and everything..

 

try this: http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=Test+Nexoc+Osiris+E705+II

then click to translate make sure to check the pics and the scores the name of this is Nexoc Osiris E705 II its the same thing as the clevo/sager over there

i may still get the x205... i get so much more for the money.... cant decide if i was to get the clevo and it came looking like that with the orange stripe id send it back in a sec.. no way a system this expensive should be finished like that

 

hrm. i tried to get what i could out of that review. some of the translation didn't come up correctly for me.

what i was able to get out of it:

construction sucks? the quality control for the orange definitely was lacking.
the asus g1s with a 8600m gt ddr3 card outperforms it? there is a problem with the brightness of the screen in some areas?

now this is only what i was sort of able to piece together from what they are saying.

how about you? what can you add?

just a note: i really hope the orange border paint job on the one i ordered look like that.

 

Test Nexoc Osiris E705 II Notebook
If one would look for the word Desktop Replacement in the dictionary, the Nexoc Osiris E705 would show up. Largely and heavily for it very high performance it is particularly as companions for LAN Parties and the like meant, because as an all time mobile implement. Nexoc brought now with the Osiris E705 II the DirectX10 out variant of the Notebooks and exchanges the GeForce 7950 GTX for a GeForce 8700M GT. In the service section we will deal with the differences of the two diagram maps and them by bench mark results will compare.

Housing


Careless lacquer finish
The Nexoc Osiris is in each regard a typical representative of the Desktop Replacement of devices. With a weight of nearly 5 kilograms inclusive power pack, ausufernden external dimensions and modest Akkuleistung is mobile it only compared with Desktop devices.
The Nexoc Osiris E705 Notebook is blocked be based on the Clevo M570RU bar Ebone, also by other manufacturers (e.g. Cyber system SR 17, One Notebook G8220, donor M570RU, Sager 5790, skirt Xtreme 770,… .
Are positively noticeable above all equipment, achievement and display, even if that one exhibits a large brightness downward gradient from top to bottom. Also the connections fail very rich.
The processing can be classified only as sufficient. In the center section the keyboard, orange strip that is bordered to which the housing only moderately exactly painted, rattles in addition exhibits that plastics in “carbon look” a processing error. To pressure the Notebook reacts with Knarzen and cracks. The Schaniere of the display however is well finished and the display needs much Kraft over to be moved and is so always stably fixed. For inexplicable reasons the display cannot be bent around 180 degrees to the rear.

Input devices

The Nexoc Osiris E705 offers inclusive Numpad up to the rattling center section a very large and comfortable keyboard. The left “tighten” key is very small failed which by the extra large right variant one compensates.
With exception of the somewhat smaller arrow and function keys the keys of the Nexoc are to be able to tap largely enough over also longer problem-free. Already initially mentioned rattling is only noticeable here negatively.

The Touchpad of the Nexoc Osiris E705 measures 8,5 x 5,5 cm. The surface of the sufficiently large Pads is diminished however by a 1 cm broad strip on the right side, which for the Scrollen serves, but is unfortunately more frequently erroneously betätigigt. The surface of the Pads is something rau which the sliding qualities of the Pads worsened.


Display


Color slide gram
The Nexoc Osiris E705 is equipped with 17 " WUXGA a FullHD Bildschirn with 1920x1200 dissolution. This leads under Microsoft Windows Vista and still more with XP to a very small representation. The display is very bright, we average 207,5 cd/m ² measured. Illuminating is rather moderate with 74.7%.
Subjectively the reflecting, finely dissolved display quite pleases. The weak brightness distribution is noticeable with black background easily, however not disturbing.

187.5
cd/m ² 245.5
cd/m ² 223.4
cd/m ²
195.1
cd/m ² 238.2
cd/m ² 215.7
cd/m ²
178.0
cd/m ² 185.0
cd/m ² 198.9
cd/m ²

Information
Maximally:
245.5 cd/m ²
Average:
207.5 cd/m ²
Schwarzwert:
0.5 cd/m ²
Contrast:
491:1
Illuminating the screen
The Schwarzwert is 0,5 cd/m ², therefore the contrast relationship well with 255:1.
Point of view stability is moderate. The screen of the Osiris E705 Notebooks colludes itself starting from for instance 20-30°, if one looks from downside on the panel and over-radiates starting from for instance 30-40°, if one looks from top to bottom. The colors remain lateral practically 170° stably.











In the free one the reflections disturb in the case of the relatively bright display before all.
For brief use in the shade is the display to however quite use (see right photo).
To the start of page
Achievement

Both the E705 and the E705 II were well equipped with Intel a core 2 duo T7700, 2 GB main memories as well as 160 GB a non removable disk. The E705 represented here the achievement maximum of the old DirectX9 guard and start with the Geforce 7950 GTX in group with Windows XP. The E705 II counters with a GeForce 8700M GT as well as Windows Vista and with it DirectX10.
7950 GTX:
• Clock chip: 575 MHz
• Clock memory: 700 MHz
• Memory: 512 MT
• DirectX: 9.0c
• Current consumption: 45 Watts
• Bus width: 256 bits
8700M GT:
• Clock chip: 625 MHz
• Clock memory: 800 MHz
• Memory: 512 MT
• DirectX: 10
• Current consumption: 29 Watts
• Bus width: 128 bits
One goes to the data record can the 7960 GTX with the higher bus width only score, but straight those is the bottle neck of the apparent stronger 8700M GT. Together with the hardware-hungry Windows Vista the bench mark results are clearly worse. However this Spiess with the first DirectX10 capable plays could turn. According to diginews.com Crysis on a similar system runs absolutely liquid.


Bench mark comparison:
• 3DMark05: 7950 GTX: 10005/8700M GT: 9446
• 3DMark06: 7950 GTX: 5502/8700M GT: 4592
• PCMark05: 7950 GTX: 6088/8700M GT: 5416
Play comparison:
• Quake III arena: 7950 GTX: 551,9/8700M GT: 561,5
• Doom III min: 7950 GTX: 189,1/8700M GT: 164,6
• Doom III med: 7950 GTX: 190,7/8700M GT: 158,1
• Doom III high: 7950 GTX: 189,9/8700M GT: 150
• Doom III ultra: 7950 GTX: 176.5/8700M GT: 123,6
• Fear min: 7950 GTX: 405/8700M GT: 479
• Fear med: 7950 GTX: 199/8700M GT: 169
• Fear max: 7950 GTX: 85/8700M GT: 53
To recognize here is good that the prozentuelle difference is the larger, the becomes higher dissolution and texture size of the plays. Here the broader memory bus of the 7950 GTX becomes apparent, while the only 128 bits large memory bus of the 8700M GT cannot supply the faster main memory with enough information, and so a classical bottle neck represents. With small dissolution and badly dissolved textures the 8700M GT can overhaul partly even the 7950 GTX owing to faster clock with memory and processor.
Particularly well this fact shows up when extreme dissolutions: While the 7950 GTX with 1600x1200 and ultra details still fps creates 116,8, the 8700M GT is here slower nearly around half with 64,4 fps.
However: With both Notebooks all current plays with high details can be represented liquid. In addition Windows Vista nibbles also some more achievement away, how is well visible at the result of the PCMark05, which makes rather few demands against the diagram map.
Medal OF Honor airborne one ran on the Nexoc Osiris E705 II with approx. 30 fps in 1280x1024 with maximum details even better than on the Alienware m9750 with 7950 GTX SLI. Here is it shown already somewhat from the DirectX10 power, even if the stronger processor has likewise a portion to this result.




3D Mark05
9446 Punkte 3D Mark06
4592 Punkte
3DMark06 SM2.0 Score: 1754 Punkte
HDR/SM3.0 Score: 1680 Punkte
CPU Score: 2058 Punkte


3DMark06 im Vergleich
Test Sony Vaio VGN-TX2XP/B (min)
49
...
Test Asus G1S Notebook
3994
Test HP Compaq nw9440 Notebook
4074
Test Nexoc Osiris E705 II (Clevo M570RU) Gaming-Notebook
4592
Test Nexoc Osiris E703 Gamer Edition (Clevo M570U)
4686
Test HP Compaq 8710p Notebook
4781
...
Test Alienware Area-51 m9750 Notebook (max)
7472
PCMark05
5416 Punkte

PCMark05 im Vergleich
Test Samsung Q30 (min)
861
...
Test Lenovo Thinkpad T61p Notebook
5132
Test HP Compaq nw9440 Notebook
5196
Test Nexoc Osiris E705 II (Clevo M570RU) Gaming-Notebook
5416
Test Apple MacBook Pro 15“ Notebook (Santa Rosa)
5517
Test Asus G1S Notebook
5568
...
Test Nexoc Osiris E705 (Clevo M570RU) Notebook (max)
6088
Quake 3 Arena
Das Timedemo ergab im Schnitt 561.5 fps
Doom 3
Das Timedemo demo1 ergab im Schnitt unter den Einstellungen
Low: 164.6 fps
Medium: 158.1 fps
High: 150 fps
Ultra: 123.6 fps


1600x1200 - ultra Details: 64.4 fps (voll spielbar)
F.E.A.R.
Beim Performancetest des High End Ego-Shooters konnten folgende Benchmarks ermittelt werden:
CPU min / GPU min - Im Schnitt: 479 fps
CPU med / GPU med - Im Schnitt: 169 fps
CPU max / GPU max - Im Schnitt: 53 fps
HD Tune:
Toshiba MK1637GSX (160 GB) Benchmark
Transfer Rate Minimum: 11.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum: 43.7 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average: 34.2 MB/sec
Access Time: 17.6 ms
Burst Rate: 61.6 MB/sec
CPU Usage: 5.4%

 

they said the screen had some light bleeding, the bottom of the screen has poor lighting compared to the top, the center of the keyboard rattles, they did not like the touchpad, etc... just seems like an aweful lot of complaints for a system that expensive.. this site is usually pretty reliable from what im told..?

 

damn. this can't be a good thing. can m570ru owners confirm these issues?

 

thats what im saying... i was going to order one tomm... i may end up with the x205 instead..and this review is from sept 10th 2007 so its def a current unit

 

they must have received a bad egg. i mean it looks like a six year old painted the area near the orange border from one of the earlier pictures.

i'm just a little confused as to the tests that were done that had the older m570u and the gs1 8600 beating it.

the spec of the one that was reviewed on that site is almost exactly like mine, except for the video card.

 

OK i just checked..... MY LAPTOP COMES TODAY!!! YAY !!!! Although i have school and work today (its 1:30am atm) i will deff have Stock Scores and Pics for everyone on friday!

hang in there 1 more day lol

 

more of the review:

That practically continuously running exhausts is noisy, depending upon load, between 38.9 and 46.6 railways. The 38,9 railways without load is relatively bearable, however the exhaust drives every few minutes on 44.8 railways highly around warm air from the housing to blow.

In principle us the noise window blind disturbed when playing rather little, in calm environments (for working), is the Nexoc however less recommended.

Volume
Idle 38,9/39,5/44,8 railways
HDD 40,2 railways
DVD 47,1 railways
Load 46,6/46,6 railways

30 railways
quietly 40 railways
clearly audibly 50 railways
disturbing
Putting one: min: , med: , max:

Temperature

The Nexoc does not behave here unusually and the temperature rose at no time somewhere over 38 degrees Celsius.

Top side
Hand edition max.: 35,3°C
total max.: 36,5°C
Average: 31,5°C
Hotspot:

Lower surface
total max.: 40,1°C
Average: 32,7°C
Hotspot:
Ambient temperature: 22,5°C

Loudspeaker

The loudspeakers of the Nexoc are moderate, and for a so large Desktop Replacement equipment something disappointing.
To the start of page
Akkulaufzeit

As we test - Akkulaufzeit

The Nexoc Osiris E705 is equipped with 8 cells a Akku. Due to the large display as well as the strong components it is to be worked not possible during a longer period independently from external power sources to.

After maximally 2 hours the Akku of the Nexoc makes schlapp.

A condition foot of the Notebooks is in addition on the Akku, which does not make it possible the Nexoc without Akku stably to set up.

Akkulaufzeit
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness) 2h 6min
DVD 1h 12min
Load (full brightness) 1h 20min

Current consumption
Idle 35//Watts
Load 56/118 Watts

Putting one: min: , med: , max:
To the start of page
Result

As we test - result

The Nexoc Osiris E705 remains free by surprises. The housing also with many other manufacturers is blocked affords some processing weaknesses. Very well fall the play fitness as well as the bench mark tests from which however no surprise represent in view of the high-quality components. Also the display succeeded well and play-suited.

For Gamer with LAN party rises surely mad equipment, that with most Dektop systems without problems to keep up can and compared with these also concerning achievement right at the top along.

That can be done naturally at expense of the Akkulaufzeit as well as noise. Also that is however no surprise and should in view of the tasks those the potential buyer place also no problems will make.

The moderate loudspeakers are completely inappropriate only such a large system.

Thus a not completely error free Desktop Replacement system with top performance data and a good price performance ratio of which remains seems as cut on mobile players.

The Nexoc E705 II with 8700M GT costs for instance 50€ more than the old variant with 7950 GTX. A heavy decision whether the better bench mark results of those. We would take nevertheless the new model: With DirectX10 plays the 8700M GT more effects will be able to represent, in addition Vista, even if it hurts some, is the future of the “Games for Windows” and as such a condition for Crisis and CO. And as additional comfort plaster can hold the lower current consumption of the new diagram map.

 

sounds like they just strait up have something against this model!

 

Processing 75%
Keyboard 82%
Mouse replacement 82%
Konnektivität 94%
Weight 56%
Akkulaufzeit 50%
Display 85%
Achievement of plays 97%
Achievement applications 95%
Temperature 80%
Volume 75%
Impression 87%
Average 80%

 

dont know man this is the second time i have heard stuff like this...

 

where's the first time? this is the first time i actually read a negative review about it.

 

i dont remember now i found it yesterday somewhere on google. ill try to find it again they had a lot of the same comments about the orange paint, poor sounding speakers, poor battery life, and poor "case" they didnt use the word construction but then it was also translated, ill try to find it again i kinda stumbled onto it while looking for more thoughts on it and more pics

 

Which graphics card and what resolution are they running 3dMark06 at? I have a 7950GTX with Core 2 duo 2.00 + 3GB RAM on Win XP Pro 32-bit and I get 5344 marks at 1280x1024, which is much better than the 4592 marks they got...


Overall I'm happy with mine.

 

thanks for the info. can you please comment about the quality of the orange paint? the review makes it seem really bad.

 

the 8700gt at 1280 x 1024 what gets me is the toshiba scored nearly 300 point higher with a slower cpu and a lower clocked 8700gt... the 570ru was at 800 while the toshiba was at 700.. both at the same resolution??

 

hmm... I'm not sure which part of the orange paint are they talking about but from what I can see I think it's not too bad (definitely acceptable imo and you need to be really close to the notebook to spot some of the "careless paint") but I agree that Clevo could have done a better job with it.

 

thanks maksin. that was actually the answer i was looking for.

i mean i can accept a minimal amount of careless paint. other than that, the overall construction is on par with other notebooks you've had?

 

are the speakers as bad as they say they are?? im almost ocd with my notebooks im not sure ill like the paint argghhhh

 

Yep, I was using a Toshiba M40 and my brother is using a Asus G1 and I would say the construction of my Sager NP5790 is about the same as (if not better than) both of them. (ie. build quality should be above average) The speakers (after doing some tweaking in the Realtek sound software) actually sounds better than the ones on my brother's Asus G1, so I would say it's quite decent for notebook but I usually have my 5.1 speakers plugged in. Although I would also say the speakers on my old Toshiba definitely sound better than it but that's not a problem since Toshiba's notebook usually have better quality speakers.

 

did you OC your card?

 

thank you.

i have heard that the asus g1 are renown for this poor speaker volume!

 

I got 5344 without OCing and I got 5693 when I OCed my card to its limit.
Have a look at the images in my mini-review if you want proof.

 

thank you! i see it. nite now it's 4 am here!

 

the review is of 1440 x 900 on the toshiba..

 

Wow, can't say I've got many negatives to say about the 5790, but on mine, the orange paint looks good. I'm not sure how or why people freak out about it. Hell, it was one of the first thing I've had multiple people say "That looks neat" when they saw it!

As for screen, no light bleeding or weird uneven-ness on mine, it's perfect.
Sure, not at bright as my 24" imac but hell, I'd never expect it to be!
Still, represents color amazingly, very bright, and clear. (I have a Glossy WUXGA).

Speakers.. Well, it's a laptop, it took me a little bit to configure the equalizer and what not to get it acceptable. I think one of the biggest if only real negative would be sound, and that's because laptop speakers are never something you'd consider "Good" but placing them on the sides facing outward rather than above or directly at you as you're sitting in front of the computer does help degrade the sound quality. (I think anyways).

Keyboard, no problem at all. Doesn't flex, bend, do any fancy tricks, etc.. It's a keyboard, works as it should, is responsive enough. I have no complaints and I use a Razer Tarantula (which is supposed to be a top end responsive gaming keyboard) on my main system, and using the Sager's keyboard has given me no real noticeable problems in comparison.

My specs are:
2.0 Santa Rosa
2 Gigs Ram
8700GT 512MB (Never O/C'ed)
120GB 5400RPM HDD
1920x1200 WUXGA Screen

I've played the following:
World of Warcraft - 120-160 fps in Ironforge @ 1920x1200

Bioshock Demo in DX10 Mode - I don't know FPS as I didn't see a way to measure it in game, but it ran flawlessly (to me) and I'm usually picky as hell when it comes to games and eye candy @ 1920x1200

Lord of The Rings Online - 90% of the eye candy turned on, it would slow down if I turned on post processing effects to the max, causing it to have little stuttering moments. @1920x1200

I haven't run many other games since I'm pretty much involved in only 2.
And the few I have, I've never really bothered to check Frames Per Second or anything like that because as long as I can turn up the visual quality, run it at native resolution and have it playable (no lag, stuttering, pauses, graphical glitches, etc..) I'm a happy guy.

I've never run 3DMark on this system as what numbers that gives me does nothing for how I view or use a computer system. People take far too much stock in synthetic benchmaks. I feel sorry for everybody who "Plays" 3DMark more than some of the cool games that are out there.

Noise - Well it's no silent, but figure the cooling required when you fire up that 3D game, and really, how much can you complain? When it's idle, it's still got the fans spinning and a lower RPM but it's hardly an annoyance.

Build Quality - As good as any system I've had in recent memory. There is no flex, the screen casing is solid as hell, and requires 2 hands to open it. The hinges are sturdy, everything appears and feels well built.

The finish is a matter of opinion. Some people will like the lid and the carbon fiber trim, others wont. If you don't like the look of it, don't buy it. Simple as that. Some people go out of their way to modify their systems to look like this! Hell, few years ago, you'd have people cutting up, painting, vinyl wrapping, everything to get the same look current model systems have today. But, if it's not your preference, nobody is forcing you to buy it. Go buy an HP or something.

Overall, I am quite happy with the system, there are a few negatives as with every piece of equipment. Show me a computer that doesn't at least have 1 thing wrong with it, be it a placement or number of ports, layout of keyboard, limitation of hardware, etc.. "Wrong" is a matter of opinion anyhow when it comes to reviews on technology.

Sorry for the long unorganized post.

 

how you get so much fps in world of warcraft.... my wow game is limited to 60 FPS...

 

I wouldn't give that review too much weight (although you should still keep it in mind). When you factor in translation issues, possible bias, and the other reviews of the 570/579x the 579x is still a good system.

Notebookcheck.net/.com doesn't have a team that reviews the systems - usually users write the reviews for them and then submit them (like what is done here on notebookreview.com). For example: Matti an Asus v1s user wrote the review of the v1s displayed on their website.

Lawlz_xd and Unfairs reviews may be better representations of the system (minus the 8700, turbo memory slot, and in lawlz_xd case the fingerprint reader) that are on the current model.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=150747

 

And on notebookjournal.de they rate the lcd panel even worse...

http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/279 - this is a review on a 8700gt equiped unit...(you can translate it using http://babelfish.altavista.com/)

Still, based on the huge amount of time spent reading user reviews and other articles on the internet about the m570ru, i still ordered it (waiting for its arrival next week), as i dont think that its as bad as some sites like these german ones are saying....remember, as someone said above, no notebook is perfect so...its a matter of choosing what can you live with or without.

 

there are 2 reviews on that site about the same notebook from 2 different vendors and they stated both examples were the same...

 

i got 4719 in 3dmark06 without OCing.

 

honestly, the other poster has a good point. no notebook will ever be perfect and from what i've read in this forum, it seems the quality is in fact solid. i will be getting mine in a couple days. we'll see how it goes.

 

thank you! excellent indeed.