Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Msi Gx60 vs. Force/msi 16F3 (675M)

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
November 11, 2012 4:00:15 AM

Hey all,

I am currently looking to buy a new gaming laptop. After quite a bit of research with respect to my budget and desires, I have narrowed down my search to two laptops (I also strongly considered the sager np9150, but didnt want to sacrifice the optical drive for an ssd). I would like your opinions on which you think would be the better option. I will be using the laptop half for gaming, and half for work (autocad, photoshop)

1st is the msigx60 http://www.xoticpc.com/msi-gx60-1ac021us-preorder-p-500...
2nd is the force/msi 16F3 http://www.xoticpc.com/forcemsi-16f3-36025-675m-msi-gt6...

Overall these laptops are pretty similar in price and specs.
My main dilemma is trying to determine which laptop has the better trade off between graphics card and processor. The gx60 has a great video card in the hd7970, but an underperformer in the amd trinity a10 processor. The 16F3 has a way better i7 processor, but the gtx675m is quite a bit worse than the hd7970. Basically I want to be able to play games at very good settings, but I also need a good processor for work.

What do you guys think is the better trade off between the two?
a b D Laptop
November 11, 2012 4:11:12 AM

I would like to strongly re-suggest the Sager - you can buy an external optical drive for about $30, but there's nothing that compares to the SSD.

That being said, I'd go with the16F3. The A10 is GREAT for extreme budget options, but not so much for gaming.
m
0
l
November 11, 2012 4:48:17 AM

DarkSable said:
I would like to strongly re-suggest the Sager - you can buy an external optical drive for about $30, but there's nothing that compares to the SSD.

That being said, I'd go with the16F3. The A10 is GREAT for extreme budget options, but not so much for gaming.


What specifically do you think is better about the sager? It is a little more expensive for all the same specs and has nowhere to put an ssd besides the optical drive. Is it just better build quality/reliability?
m
0
l
Related resources
November 11, 2012 2:49:28 PM

calmlikeabomb said:
Actually, benchmarks show that for extreme settings gaming, the GX60 is quite good:


Thats what i thought. Just wasnt sure how its weaker processor would handle autodesk programs and video editing programs
m
0
l
November 13, 2012 2:33:19 AM

hafijur said:
Don't get the pile of junk 675m. Its will heat up more, take considerably more power and scores 80% less then a 7970m or 680m at 3dmark11 and the 675m comsumes 50w more electricity. In essence a 675m is a pentium 4 and a 680m is a core 2 duo.

Look to get a new 670mx or 675mx which are new 28nm kepler cards that are still quite a bit better then a 675m but the new gpu consume less power. Also a 7970m is decent for budget virtually similar performance to a 680m if not bettter on some games but a lot cheaper.

I would not go with the amd cpu one as it is basically a very low end cpu for most tasks.

Hafijur,
If i could go with the hd7970m with the i7 processor i would, but my budget doesnt allow for this. Basically my whole dilemma is i have to choose between the gx60 and the 16f3, one has the better graphics card
and one has the better processor.
m
0
l
a b D Laptop
November 13, 2012 9:57:56 AM

by the way, both the GX60 CPU and GPU are upgradable ..
m
0
l
November 13, 2012 3:37:35 PM

hafijur said:
Don't get the pile of junk 675m. Its will heat up more, take considerably more power and scores 80% less then a 7970m or 680m at 3dmark11 and the 675m comsumes 50w more electricity. In essence a 675m is a pentium 4 and a 680m is a core 2 duo.

Look to get a new 670mx or 675mx which are new 28nm kepler cards that are still quite a bit better then a 675m but the new gpu consume less power. Also a 7970m is decent for budget virtually similar performance to a 680m if not bettter on some games but a lot cheaper.

I would not go with the amd cpu one as it is basically a very low end cpu for most tasks.



hafijur's hatred of the 675m is unfounded. His numbers are also rediculous in reference to this thread.

The 675m will do a reasonably good job. It runs warmer and actually operates in the same TDP as the 7970m and 680m. (100w) Since it is a generation behind it has similar performance to the 670mx. (TDP~75w) All of MSI's high-end gaming laptops deal very well with heat. (Sager does just fine too.)

Note please, TDP refers to the heat the laptop will be required to deal with due to power draw.
The 50w number hafijur lists is extremely loaded and plugged in power draw. It matters very little in real-world, but certainly is a drawback if you are trying to shave pennies off your electrical bill. The result is an entire laptop which pulls less than just the 560ti/6950/7950/GTX670 video card on most desktop PCs.
On battery, these laptops use the integrated GPU which is reasonably efficient on battery in both cases.

80% better performance is incorrect for these two laptops. (refers to the raw difference between 675m and 7970m) The GX60 is bottlenecked by its A10 processor. It will still score better in most benchmarks and games as most games are GPU-limited.

The 675m and i7 3610qm score around a 3600-3700 (P score) in 3dmark11 with updated drivers.
The GX60 A10 + 7970m scores around 4200-4300 (P score) in 3dmark11 with updated drivers.
Thus the GX60 is about 16% better in 3dmark11.

The GX60 is actually an interesting choice... if you do mostly FPS games,(usually gpu-limited) the GX60 seems like an easy choice. If you play more CPU limited games (RTS games, or certain CPU-sensitive games like some RPGs) then the 675m and i7 seem like better choices.

I'd say its really about which makes more sense for you. The GX60 is very interesting and is an amazing combo for FPS-junkies.
Your AutoCAD and Photoshop requirements make the i7/675m combo more desireable IMHO.


You likely could find a 9130 Sager with a 670mx for a similar price... this wouldn't be much more GPU potency. (slightly more in DX11, slightly LESS in Dx10...)
Given your SSD requirement, a Sager is really only useful if you are ok replacing the optical drive or don't mind using an mSSD.
(it really isn't the end of the world to have external optical...)

I'd like to also mention the MSIs usually ship with better sound hardware (not just speakers) and default screens as well.
(The Sagers can ship with nicer screens, you just need to pay for them.)

m
0
l
a b D Laptop
November 13, 2012 3:45:18 PM

I agree about the 675M
3Dmark11 is not very insightful, although it gives some idea. I think that in extreme settings gaming, the difference will be much bigger than 16% averagely.
Also, for 1200-1300$ it is the fastest and the most cost effective, even without the Windows included
m
0
l
November 13, 2012 4:00:39 PM

3dmark11 is not the end-all-be-all, but it is a reasonable middle-ground. It's also one of the most standardized tests we can use for comparison.
(more variables = bad as people tend to forget them or screw them up)

Extreme preset isn't really applicable as it is usually too extreme for laptop GPU setups that aren't SLI/X-fire.

The point is... that A10 bottlenecks the 7970m. Truth be told, the GX60 will do quite a bit better than 16% better in some games... but it will underperform in many others due to CPU bottleneck.

One point not covered. AMD's enduro is in its infancy in comparison to optimus (nvidia). Enduro sometimes doesn't work right and either uses the integrated mistakenly, or doesn't fully utilize the 7970m even with up-to-date drivers which were supposed to fix that. The 675m, for all its "old tech" arguements, is also "tried-and-true" and works right the first time.

Also, for any GPGPU calculations, the 7970m is better than all of the Nvidia GPUs. The Fermi 675m is actually considerably better in GPGPU calculations than the Kepler GPUs as the Kepler GPUs have been artificially nerfed to make way for Nvidia's Quadro GPUs.
m
0
l
a b D Laptop
November 13, 2012 11:03:04 PM

did you have a good laugh?
m
0
l
November 14, 2012 6:13:06 PM

hafijur, I am well aware of the 680m and 7970m's potency. However, it is beyond the price range mentioned in this thread. Certainly if the OP wants to save up a bit more for his laptop budget, the 680m or 7970m would be wonderful choices.

However, in the price range and assuming performance and price are the primary criteria, the 675m makes a lot of sense.

The 675m doesn't throttle unless you didn't have the power supply to handle it to begin with or are pushing it to extremes by overclocking. (A concept I hope everyone here understands is not for those on a budget or with limited time to devote to montiroing your hardware.) The MSI with the 675m can drive its 675m at stock clocks even at high utilization fairly easily.

How do I know? Theres a GT70 with a 675m on the desk next to me. Its used daily and pushed in gaming by a co-worker. It's never failed to deliver.
No, its not a 7970m or 680m.... then again it didn't cost that much either.

You continue to come back to power consumption... but let's face it, its not that big of a deal. Due to hybrid graphics, the only time this matters is when plugged in and gaming. When plugged in, all you save are a few pennies on power consumption. Yes, some people will be interested... but its a small price to pay for the combination of potency and mobility at a reasonable price.

This might matter if you are the kind of person who shuts off every lightbulb in your entire house except the one you are using or if you refuse to let your 46" TV be in standby mode. I keep my electricity costs down to under $20 a month, but even I am not that picky.

Also, ancient is a matter of opinion. The laptop I type on is 4.5 years old and sports a 9800m GTS. The 675m absolutely destroys it in every category.
m
0
l
!