bignazpwns wrote:
Um there is something seriously wrong with that MX17 because that MX 17 punts the G75 across the room. 3D Mark 11 the 7970 scores around 5800 and is slightly slower then a GTX 680m. The 7970 is way faster then that GTX 670m.

If you do a comparison make it fair because that Alienware is running much slower then what it should be.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

The 7970 is much faster then the GTX 670m in fact is almost faster then 2 GTX 675m's

the Alienware worked at its pace for 7970, ussually it is that fast, but the ASUS was incredible. That was the amazing part. I did not expect such high results. I mean with WOW for example it depends on outside factors as well, but with the BF3, as I said, I expected under 30 fps., arround 25-28, but it was mutch faster. The 7970m always has been working at the pace that it has on this test, and the 3DMARK test, has always been arround 3.7-3.8k for it, so on the AW side, it did what was expected. Why my Asus did so good, now that is the question I still cannot answer myself.

bignazpwns wrote:

I got a GTX 660m that's over 3.7k in 3dmark 11 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4392361 and that's the same setting i run every day. I have had much higher 3Dmark 11 scores. I would love to baleave that my GTX 660m is faster then a HF 7970m but its not.

so your GTX660m outperformed by 1/4 my 670M which is 15% faster and ussually scores 3.170-3.190, but this time arround it did better, and you with your lower-priced GPU scored 600 more? Dude please... either this means, I didn't have electricity as well, since I should score 4.2-4.4k at least, and the AW then should be at a steady 5k. What you are claiming is just impossibru. The only explanation could be, if we didn't have electricity at the time, but I really think we did have. Although the PC room is dark, I am 99% sure the electricity was on. Anyway I will call my guy again to do benches, and give you the links, since you are so annoying :).

and btw, read your LINK -
YOUR RESULT HAS THE FOLLOWING PROBLEM(S):
Graphics driver is not approved (What is this?)

G75 rocks at gaming. I also sometimes look at AW as a possible alternative,
but not making the switch because my Asus never let me down...

I have one question - did you pay attention to GPU temperatures when
you run your tests? I am curious how hot Alienware gets when playing games.

bubblegunz wrote:
No, no, no the AW graphic's card is obviously mutch better. It scores 1/4 better at benchmarking then the 670m. The thing I wanted to say is that the 670 will do the job just fine. If you run CRISIS on both, probs the fps difference will be mutch bigger. I am just happy with my G-Series. The 7970m though has less power to el. consumption ratio then the 670m. I am a fan of NVIDIA, because AMD make powerfull cards, but they are not perfected. And yes, those games probably were optimised for the NVIDIA, but trust me, the AW was plugged in, and the tests were legit. You will not get more then 45 fps on a 7970 in BF3 I guarantee you. Unless it is overclocked, and then I have no idea how high it can go. Probs about to 50-55. But although the AMD card is better, the GTX does the job just fine. The rendering on the ASUS was faster, probs because of the RAM. Overall, the AW is the better performence package as I said, but I am happy with my G-series. But yes, I hope they put a last generation maxed out video card on the G-76. Then ASUS might become the best in the business.

I appreciate you posting this and your enthusiasm. I am with you in the mind set that you do not need to drop $2.5-3+ grand (USA cash) to get high end gaming. It's true that more money buys you better bench scores. However, there is a point when you are just chasing benchmarks or e-peening to justify the expense to yourself (which is cool, I been through that phase more than once on my main systems I build). However, a system that games great without lag can be had for way less money. Also, insane bench scores are not needed to game like champ at current generation games.

The real advantage of buying high end setups is they have more longevity in terms of not needing a new upgrade so soon. It can be argued though that the money you save going middle of the road can be better spent buying a full system upgrade once a generation cycle vs buying an extreme system every 2 generation cycles. (by generation cycles I am speakin major cpu updates and major gpu updates holistically)

As for our G75 I agree, this system with its humble video card has amazed me at every step... you don't need to have the highest end video card to have good gaming ever. It's why lower end (200-300) buck video card market i so big on the PC building side. I myself usually always buy the 500+ model because I like the 2 generation upgrade path (vs once a new one every gen). Therefore I know our G75 will get chuggy slow in next gen games in around 1.5-2 years, but still hold its own. In 3-4 years it will not please me anymore and make me sad :). This is technology though that's just the hobby we are in. 🙂 For now I love my G75 and have no regrets in my purchase!

PS: welcome to the family!

bubblegunz wrote:
No, no, no the AW graphic's card is obviously mutch better. It scores 1/4 better at benchmarking then the 670m. The thing I wanted to say is that the 670 will do the job just fine. If you run CRISIS on both, probs the fps difference will be mutch bigger. I am just happy with my G-Series. The 7970m though has less power to el. consumption ratio then the 670m. I am a fan of NVIDIA, because AMD make powerfull cards, but they are not perfected. And yes, those games probably were optimised for the NVIDIA, but trust me, the AW was plugged in, and the tests were legit. You will not get more then 45 fps on a 7970 in BF3 I guarantee you. Unless it is overclocked, and then I have no idea how high it can go. Probs about to 50-55. But although the AMD card is better, the GTX does the job just fine. The rendering on the ASUS was faster, probs because of the RAM. Overall, the AW is the better performence package as I said, but I am happy with my G-series. But yes, I hope they put a last generation maxed out video card on the G-76. Then ASUS might become the best in the business.

lol a 1/4? By your math my GTX 660m is faster then the HD 7970m. Lets see the HD 7970 does what 5900 on a bad day 3Dmark 11. "Yes more then what you got but your results are not valid as you gimed the system or that system is so FUBAR its not even funny and that thing needs a RMA bad." The GTX 670m does what 3300-3500 on a good day. Thats a pretty big gap there and GTX 670m's dont scale that great so the fact is the HD 7970m is faster then a GTX 670m or GTX 675m sli setup.

You say the test are legit but anyone who knows how to read can see your test were not lol. Fact is that MX17 was either on the battery or your making up numbers because i called a guy who has a maxed out MX17 with a HD 7970m in it and he ran 3DMark for about 20 times at stock clocks and never got anything under a 5700 and funning thing is he pulled close to what you got running on the battery.


You can try to act like you know what your doing but anyone who knows anything about GPU's can tell that if a HD 7970m is only hitting 3700 in 3dmark 11 it was on the battery or it was not running a HD 7970m at all. You can look up the stock numbers pretty easy and you can check the 3dmark 11 result data base and see the HD 7970m averages 5874 and the GTX 670m only averages 2834. The current top for a GTX 670m is 4103 running 850 on the core. What is not even close to the lowest HD 7970m



But woots your right about the whole $2-3g system. My main system was a little more then $5k running SLI GTX 680m's. Overkill if you play at 1920X1080. However i play on a display that has a res of 2560x1600. Now their is a heafy hit going from 1920X1080 to that. This is why we have SLI. And then when you play at that res in 3D it will bring even the best systems to their knees. Like a wow maxed out at 1920X1080 in 3D the GTX 680m barley has enough power to play it without dipping into the low laggy frames at times. But not everyone uses 3D in that case the card is pretty overkill for that game unless you pass the 1920X1080 res and go to large areas like the jade forest.

About maybe 1-5% of gamers will use the power from the systems that use SLi and GTX 680's and HD 7970's. Most could be using a slower card and never see a diff. But people who game in 3D and at the higher res's need the stronger card. A GTX 670m will get hit hard in games running 3D with the settings maxed.


All that said do i defend Alienware? Nope their systems are all $500 over priced. I did a cross review of the MX17 and G75 on notebook review and the MX17 i had was the same specs outside of having a 7200rpm drive and a lower res screen but it was $500 more. But they do have great in home support and if you got the $500 to spend i say go with them as Asus support is pretty bad and rma's are long and every dell system i had my stuff was fixed next day in my house what is awesome.

You cant compair a lower middle class last gen "Fermi" gpu against a current gen flag ship Gpu. This is 2 diff. tiers of GPU's. That gpu is closer to the HD 6970m..well about 3% slower but 3% is really nothing.

And as for real world gaming i did do some test between the HD 6970m and the HD 7970m when the 7970m came out and in D3 maxed at 1920X1080 the HD 7970m was hitting 103fps vs the hd 6970m's 62fps. I mean in raw power is almost 2 X faster then the HD 6970m what makes it 2 X faster then you GTX 670m "I have a GTX 670m here and i can confirm my friend HD 7970m gets quite a few more fps in games then my GTX 670m can"


Now when we go current gen GTX 670mx stock it is slower then the HD 7970m but in the G75 the GTX 670mx can overclock to match and be slightly faster then a stock HD 7970m. Keep in mind the new mx is a kepler like the GTX 660m and 680m but brings some impressive specs aand overclocks extremely well.

I have been benchmarking cards and systems for over 10 years. I know every trick people use. I know how fast every card is i also know how to check the average scores and overclocks. I have been benching for team 32 for a long time so its hard for people to pull one over on me.



Also to Moqel the Alienware docent really get to hot as long as its not laying flat. Temps are the same in my G75 when i ran a MX17 but you do have to have the MX17 lifted lightly or on a pad. The G75 uses better fans "More blades" So they do move more air at lower RPM's so the Alienware is a little louder then the Asus. If i remember the load temps were about 63c running prime on the Alienware and my G75 does about 61c