Laptop manufacturer Clevo is reportedly preparing to debut an all-new high-performance 18-inch laptop at CES 2025 sporting extremely high-end internals and next-gen CPUs. IT Home reports that a whistleblower has dished out the specs of the new laptop, which reportedly features Arrow Lake-HX series 55W CPU options, a massive 18-inch screen, and support for up to 192GB of memory.

Specific Arrow Lake HX CPU variants were not listed, but leaked specs reveal that the laptop will be operating on the "Arrow Lake HX 55W platform," so we can expect the laptop to be compatible with any Arrow Lake HX series mobile CPU from Intel that has a 55W TDP or lower. Clevo also went all out on the memory config, offering four DDR5 SODIMM memory slots supporting memory speeds of up to DDR5-5600.

The GPU platform will purportedly consist of an Nvidia "GN22" board powering one GPU. Unsurprisingly, GN22 is rumored to be the mobile board platform powering Nvidia's mobile versions of its RTX 50 series GPUs.

Storage consists of a whopping four PCIe M.2 slots, one operating at PCIe 5.0 speeds and the rest operating at PCIe 4.0 speeds. This Clevo 18-inch laptop is possibly one of the first laptops to support PCIe 5.0 SSDs courtesy of Intel's updated Arrow Lake I/O. All four M.2 slots support the widely adopted M.2 2280 form factor.

As mentioned, the display specs include an 18-inch panel with a "Narrow Bezel Design." There will be two resolution options, 4K and 1440p. There's no telling which display option is the "higher tier option," so to speak. Usually, the higher resolution display is the flagship variant, but there's a chance the 1440p option could be better for gamers if it offers a higher refresh rate and better response times; only time will tell if this will be the case. The screen will also natively support G-Sync, giving gamers adaptive refresh rate support.

I/O consists of dual USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports (one being powered), one mini-DisplayPort, one HDMI port, a 2-in-1 audio jack, dual (yes, that's two) RJ-45 Ethernet ports, and a single DC-in for charging. The show's star is the laptop's dual Thunderbolt 5 type-C ports. Interestingly, these two ports purportedly come straight from the Nvidia discrete GPUs only, not from the Arrow Lake CPU or the motherboard itself. This suggests that Nvidia is integrating Thunderbolt support directly into the RTX 50 series GPUs, which would represent one of the most significant I/O upgrades for GPUs in years. The HDMI and DisplayPort connectors are also powered by the discrete GPU alone.

This new monster Clevo 18-inch powerhouse is expected to debut at CES 2025 when Nvidia's RTX 50 series GPUs will seemingly be announced.

Schenker has introduced its new Vision 16 and Vision 16 Pro ultrabooks that bring together performance, portability, low weight, and upgradeability. The 16-inch machines are based on Intel's Core i7-12700H processor with 14 cores and can be equipped with up to Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop graphics subsystem, but their weight is still lower when compared to Apple's MacBook Pro 14. 

Schenker's Vision 16 and Vision 16 Pro machines are based on Intel's Core i7-12700H (six performance cores at up to 4.70 GHz, eight efficiency cores at up to 3.50 GHz, Intel Xe Graphics, 45W PBP, 115W MTP) that is paired with Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 4GB (vanilla Vision 16), GeForce RTX 3060 6GB, RTX 3070 Ti 8GB, or RTX 3080 with 16GB GDDR6 memory (Vision Pro 16). To ensure consistent performance of CPU and GPU, Schenker's 16-inch mobile PCs are equipped with a cooling system featuring three heat pipes and two blowers, according to an image published by VideoCardz. 

The laptops can be equipped with up to 64GB of DDR4-3200 (Vision 16) or DDR5-4800 (Vision Pro 16) memory as well as two M2-2280 SSDs with a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface. Both devices are user upgradeable.

When it comes to displays, the Vision 16 is equipped with a non-glare 2560 x 1600 LCD, a 350 nits luminance, and a 90 Hz refresh rate, whereas the Vision 16 Pro comes with a non-glare 2560 x 1600 LCD, a 350 nits brightness, with a 240 Hz refresh rate. 

As for connectivity, the machines offer two Thunderbolt 4 ports, one USB Type-C connector, two USB 3.0 Type-A ports, an HDMI 2.1 display output, an SD card reader and an audio jack for headsets. The laptops come with Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.0 on board to connect to the internet and peripherals.

The Vision 16 and Vision 16 Pro notebooks use the same magnesium alloy chassis that measure 354 x 245 x17.1 mm and weight starting at 1.45 kilograms for the version with Intel integrated graphics, 1.5 kilograms for model with GeForce RTX 3050 Ti discrete GPU, or 1.6 kilograms for SKUs with higher-performance graphics processors. To put the numbers into context, the laptops are slightly thicker than Apple's MacBook Pro 16 with M1 Pro or M1 Max SoCs (17.1 mm vs 16.8 mm) and yet their weight does not exceed that of Apple's MacBook Pro 14 (1.6 kilograms). 

The cheapest Schenker Vision 16 starts at €1,549 without shipping ($1,298 without VAT), whereas the most affordable Schenker Vision Pro 16 starts at €1,899 without shipping ($1,592 without VAT). Both machines will be available in November. 

Like many other suppliers of gaming notebooks, Schenker uses barebones built by Clevo. That said, expect other brands to offer their high-performance ultrabooks using the same barebones featuring similar configurations and offering a 17.1 mm thickness as well as an up to 1.6 kilograms weight.

Tuxedo may not be a household name for many of us, but it is one of the well-known suppliers of high-performance Linux-based laptops from Germany. Earlier this year, the company introduced its Stellaris 15 Gen4 notebook aimed at performance-demanding users with an optional external liquid-cooling system. To great surprise, Tuxedo only offered the machine with Windows, but this week the company finally began to offer it with Linux, reports Phoronix. 

The Tuxedo Stellaris 15 Gen4 is a very powerful desktop replacement gaming laptop designed by Clevo. It comes packing up to Intel's Intel Core i9-12900H processor mated with two DDR5 memory modules and two PCIe 4.0 x4 M.2 SSDs as well as Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3080 Ti graphics chip. The machine uses a 15.6-inch display with a 2560x1440 resolution and 240Hz refresh rate to maximize the gaming experience.

Given the heat generated by Intel's Core i9-12900H and Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3080 Ti GPU, as well as performance constraints caused by overheating, we are not surprised that Tuxedo (or rather Clevo), decided to offer it with an optional Tuxedo Aquaris liquid cooling system. When used on the road, the Stellaris 15 Gen4 can work fully autonomously using its 93Wh battery and without any external liquid cooling. But once in desktop mode, you can plug in the liquid cooling to amplify cooling and therefore maximize performance.

Tuxedo initially only offered its Stellaris 15 Gen4 with Windows because of software issues. The machine was designed by Clevo with Windows in mind, so the base software only supported Microsoft's operating systems. As a result, the company had to develop its own Tuxedo Control Center for Linux to allow users to adjust fan speed for the liquid cooling radiator as well as alter the addressable RGB LEDs.

Tuxedo's Stellaris 15 Gen4 starts at €2599 (with a Core i7-12700H and Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3060M), whereas you'll have to buy the Aquaris liquid cooling block separately for €199.

Clevo has started to advertise its Clevo X270 notebook with Intel's range-topping Arc Alchemist A770M graphics processor, as noted by @9550pro. The company calls the machine 'the first Intel CPU + GPU gaming laptop' and, judging by its configuration, positions it for demanding gamers, which may imply the somewhat competitive performance of the graphics processor.

Clevo's X270 is a 17.3-inch gaming notebook powered by Intel's 12th Gen Core 'Alder Lake-H' processor and the company's flagship Arc Alchemist A770M mobile GPU that is cooled down using a dual-fan cooling system featuring seven heat pipes and liquid metal. In addition, the machine comes with a premium Mini LED display panel from AU Optronics and has all the I/O ports that one comes to expect from a gaming PC (Ethernet, two TB4 ports, mDP, HDMI, USB 3.2 Gen 2, 3.5-mm audio, etc.).

Clevo did not publish performance numbers for the machine. Still, it would be illogical for the company to equip a gaming laptop with mediocre performance with a rather expensive monitor, so we can make some guesses about what to expect from Clevo's X270.

Perhaps, the most important thing about the gaming notebook is that it comes from Clevo. Clevo may not be a household name, but this manufacturer produces barebones laptops for well-known brands like Alienware, Eurocom, Gigabyte, Maingear, MSI, Sager, Schenker, XMG, and Xotic PC, to name a few.

We do not know which of these gaming PC brands will use the Clevo X270 design with Intel's Alder Lake-H and Arc Alchemist A770M discrete mobile GPU, but the chances are that at least some of Clevo's over 35 clients will use this configuration are pretty high.

Another thing that remains to be seen is how much Clevo's X270 and products on its base will cost. AUO's 17.3-inch panel is certainly not cheap, so we are talking about a premium product here. Still, since Intel is interested in capturing discrete GPU market share, it may offer its top-of-the-range Arc Alchemist A770M at a very competitive price.

Introduction, Technical Data & Details

PNY's PrevailPro mobile workstation family starts in the $2500 range, but quickly ramps up to the around-$4500 P4000 model we're reviewing today. Availability seems to be working itself out slowly. Though the PrevailPro family was announced in November of 2017, a handful of online vendors do show configurations ready to ship within a couple of days.

A closer look at the tooling indicates that PNY is using the Taiwanese ODM Clevo as a contract manufacturer. PNY's version is based on the P955 platform, but it enables more opulent hardware options. After all, the company needs to justify its business-oriented price tag.

The PrevailPro Base and Upgraded Pro both sport lower-end graphics and storage options, saving hundreds of dollars in the process. But as today's review will show, the flagship's Core i7-7700HQ and Quadro P4000 mobile GPU are a well-balanced pair. Obviously, PNY's motto here is go big or go home.

The Bundle

In addition to the notebook, you get an external 150W power supply, a quick-reference guide, a microfiber cloth for removing fingerprints, a DVD, and a USB stick. Since the PrevailPro doesn't even have a DVD drive, the disc probably could have been left out.

Look & Feel

A width of 14.96 inches, a 9.8-inch depth measurement, and a closed z-height of 0.73 inches make this a fairly average-sized device, given its 15.6" display. The PrevailPro does weigh 4.8 pounds, putting it on the heavier side. But obviously a high-end workstation's performance (and cooling) has to come from somewhere. We're just glad it's not an all-plastic affair bound to break sooner than later.

Unfortunately, the metallic matte surface covering everything from the lid to the base plate, as well as the interior plastic surfaces, is extremely sensitive to oily fingerprints.

Connectivity & Audio

With a few exceptions, the PrevailPro is very similar to Clevo's base platform. The left side hosts a security lock slot, ventilation for the CPU cooler, a DC power-supply connector, one HDCP-compatible HDMI 2.0 output, two mini-DP 1.3 interfaces, two Type-C USB 3.1 (Gen 2) ports, and two USB 3.1 (Gen 1) ports. It really wouldn't be possible to cram more connectivity on that side.

On the right, you get a 3.5mm headphone jack, a combined 3.5mm 2-in-1 audio port (microphone and S/PDIF), one USB 3.1 (Gen 1) port, a 6-in-1 card reader, and an RJ-45 GbE port.

The back is dominated by three cut-outs for ventilation. Two are for the graphics processor, and one allows general passive exhaust.

The front is mostly unpopulated, except for the left side with its status LEDs.

Up close, those LEDs include the operating status and mains indicator, battery status, storage activity, and airplane mode.

Beyond the wired GbE controller, connectivity also includes Intel's dual-band Wireless-AC 8265 (M.2 2230) module. Right next to a Fritz!Box 7590 router, we measured a maximum of 674 Mb/s. Range and data rates in the laboratory correspond to those of a proper USB-attached Wi-Fi dongle, even though internal antennas do have some disadvantages in terms of range. We didn't notice any real disruptions or connection breakdowns.

Furthermore, the Windstorm Peak module incorporates Bluetooth 4.2 support as part of a well-rounded communications package. It does nibble away at battery life if you don't switch it off, though.

The two built-in loudspeakers are sufficient for a workstation, but we'd stop short of calling them impressive. Integrated audio, enabled through a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi BM5, supports high-definition audio, as well as ANSP 3D sound at the output. With headphones attached, the sound is quite nice. To be sure, this platform has its roots in the gaming segment; the motherboard employs nearly identical components across all derivative implementations.

Input & Output

The keyboard utilizes standard-fare short-stroke keys, and its configurable backlighting is quite nice. However, this is probably more of an inherited feature of Clevo's platform rather than something we'd choose to see on a mobile workstation.

Large (but still soft) rubber pieces on the enclosure's bottom side ensure a stable grip on the surface below.

Our sample employs a matte Ultra HD IPS panel made by LG Philips (LP156UD1-SPB1), which features a 60Hz refresh rate, but isn't particularly state-of-the-art anymore. In contrast to pure RGB panels, this RGBW version makes use of a sub-pixel array that, under certain circumstances, may have a negative impact on contrast. Black areas in particular are just not as black as they could be. Although backlight bleeding does occur, we noticed only mild effects. The screen's four corners are affected, as are spots on the upper and lower edge. Depending on the display's angle and on-screen content, this is noticeable but still tolerable. Maximum brightness attached to mains power is sufficiently high: ~260 to 300 cd/m².

Upcoming retail models will come with an AUO B156ZAN02.2. These are AHVA RGB panels, like those already used by other Clevo-made notebooks. A 92% coverage measurement of the sRGB color space is fine, but the meager 62% for AdobeRGB is merely satisfactory for a workstation in this price range.

The display can be tilted up to 130 degrees. This is more than enough, and it doesn't make the device top-heavy or unsteady, either.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Tear-Down, Hardware & Cooling

In this case, a tear-down is necessary because PNY doesn't provide detailed specs on all of the PrevailPro's hardware. For example, we didn't know what memory the company used, nor did we have a make/model on the SSD.

To open the notebook and get a look inside, it's first necessary to loosen two screws in back holding the keyboard in place. Next, nudge the keyboard away from the chassis by pushing it from behind through one of the screw holes. This allows the keyboard to be carefully removed from its mount. Once this is done, the two connecting cables can be pulled out using the designated lugs.

The tactile feedback of the keys is noticeable in both feel and sound. However, they're still relatively soft. Typing on the keys is comfortable thanks to large surfaces and plenty of space between them. A little more resistance would make the keys even better, we think. Unfortunately, this form factor's height limitations prevent the use of more-tactile scissor keys.

Included FlexiKey software provides customizable macros, keyboard recording options, and a three-zone RGB backlight. The absence of LED indicators for caps and number lock is a bit unfortunate.

Next, we loosen five exposed screws underneath the keyboard that hold the top to the bottom, close the notebook, and carefully turn it on its back to remove the remaining nine screws. After that, the bottom part of the case is reasonably easy to remove, exposing the platform's internals.

This is a fairly classic configuration, with the GPU and CPU cooled separately. The battery pack and other modular components are now accessible for easy replacement.

Component Analysis

For memory, PNY uses OEM RAM modules made by Samsung. Two 16GB DDR4-2400 SO-DIMMs add up to 32GB in dual-channel mode. Together, they max out the platform's capabilities; you cannot add any more than 32GB of of memory.

PNY doesn't provide much information about the SSD, either. Our tear-down reveals that it's actually a Samsung PM961 featuring the following specs:

This is a desirable model that was originally designed for OEMs only, but it can still be purchased online. As far as pricing goes, however, there aren't really any advantages versus Samsung's standard consumer models.

PNY's Wi-Fi module of choice is the Intel Dual-Band Wireless-AC 8265. Two connected cables for the antennas are visible on the right side.

Cooling

Components from Auras Technology, one of the largest heat-pipe suppliers, are used for the thermal solution. The blackened copper heat sink and composite pipes making up the GPU cooler are arranged as a single module. Air flow and exhaust are provided by a pair of radial fans that suck air in from the enclosure's bottom and push it through two finned chamber coolers. Warm air then leaves the chassis through an opening on the back.

The CPU is cooled separately. Its module is made by Auras, as well, though two heat pipes and a shorter cooling chamber must suffice for this lower-power component. Heated exhaust is blown out the notebook's left side, not the rear. Since most users are right-handed, Clevo's design ensures they aren't (unpleasantly) affected by the hot air.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Benchmarks: 2D & CPU-Heavy Workloads

System Setup

To what do you compare a mobile workstation when it's just a normal consumer notebook with Quadro graphics? The Intel Core i7-7700HQ does not support ECC memory, and even though the other components are workstation-like, PNY's PrevailPro P4000 is built almost exclusively with standard hardware.

In order to keep the CPU at least somewhat similar, we bought an Intel Core i7-7700T with a slightly higher 2.9GHz base clock rate and an equal 3.8GHz Turbo Boost ceiling. We installed 32GB of Kingston DDR4-2400 and dropped it onto an MSI Z270 Gaming M7 with a M.2-attached Samsung 960 Pro 512GB SSD.

For graphics, we tapped the Quadro P4000 and P2000 to benchmark against. The mobile Quadro P4000 has a slightly lower GPU frequency and a 400MHz memory deficit. Meanwhile, the Quadro P2000 employs a GP106 processor instead of GP104, giving us a more complete performance picture. According to its technical specifications, the mobile Quadro P4000 Max-Q should end up somewhere in the middle, perhaps with a tendency toward the Quadro P4000.

Benchmarks

You'll notice that we're avoiding the usual synthetics, since targeted driver optimizations often tell an unrepresentative story. Instead, we rely on licensed and certified workstation software. After all, enthusiasts who wish to render movies or run DirectX-based suites can find better (and less expensive) options in the consumer space.

CPU-Heavy 2D Graphics Output

Using our GDI/GDI+ benchmark, we first test two different output methods for 2D objects that are typical of older applications. They are still used today either to generate user interfaces or for printing purposes.

To this end, the graphics driver uses the CPU quite extensively, but typically occupies only a few threads. After all, there hasn't been any real 2D hardware acceleration since the Unified Shader Model was introduced. The Windows driver model really puts the brakes on this, as well. Since every single action has to pass through the entire system, we also get a good depiction of platform performance.

Next, we introduce memory to the game as we use the only remaining 2D hardware function: copying graphics created in memory to an output device. This follows the same procedure, except all drawing is done on a virtual bitmap first, rather than going straight to the monitor. Then, only the complete graphic is sent to the output device via bit block transfer. This time around, the graphics card plays a decisive role as the CPU takes a back seat.

The 2D AutoCAD 2017 test exposes shortcomings in IPC throughput, making this a predominantly theoretical measurement and the logical continuation of our two previous synthetic benchmarks.

The CPU composite score in SolidWorks shows very clearly that both single- and multi-threaded scenarios influence the overall result to some extent, although rendering performance contributes to the outcome, as well. Thus, the graphics card also plays a role, even if the actual focus is on host-processing performance.

The same applies to PTC's Creo 3.0. After all, it is, like SolidWorks, another important piece of software in the development field.

The CPU composite for 3ds Max is significantly less dependent on graphics performance, revealing the Core i7-7700T-based system's advantage. It is only Intel's feeble HD Graphics engine that drags down the results.

Next up, we have a CPU-intensive workload that couldn't be more different. It calculates the yields and losses of a complex photovoltaic system based on long-term weather data and sun positions, including possible errors and power drops during operation. A total of eight threads creates an almost 100% load. In this case, 3D graphics output to visualize intermediate results has only marginal impact on the overall result. PNY's PrevailPro is definitely at a disadvantage.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Benchmarks: Complex Workloads

Now let's combine CPU-intensive and real-time graphics tasks. The nominally faster Quadro P4000 Max-Q is at a disadvantage against the desktop Quadro P2000, which benefits more fully from GPU Boost.

We start with SolidWorks 2015's GPU composite, along with three selected individual results (sub-composites).

A similar picture is painted by PTC's Creo 3.0. The PrevailPro's lower CPU performance limits its theoretically faster GPU.

Even in Adobe's Creative Cloud, the CPU's influence is unfortunately what prevents the Quadro P4000 Max-Q from performing better.

It may look like the following benchmark is graphics-limited. However, we also registered high CPU utilization in one thread. Not surprisingly, then, the notebook once again suffers a disadvantage.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Benchmarks: Graphics-Heavy 3D (OpenGL)

To keep everything balanced, we're also interested in looking at workloads where the Quadro P4000 Max-Q is allowed to operate almost entirely unrestrained. In those types of scenarios, a Quadro P2000 add-in card often trails.

When we load a complex scene in Maya 2017 and simply rotate it around, the mobile Quadro shines, landing precisely between the two add-in workstation cards.

Since its CPU load is even lower than Maya 2017's, 3ds Max shows us that the mobile Quadro P4000 Max-Q can land closer to Quadro P4000 than the P2000.

AutoCAD's DirectX functions are no challenge for modern GPUs. Maybe that's why Intel's HD Graphics engine fares better here than in previous benchmarks.

One 80%-utilized CPU thread has a noticeable impact on performance, causing the mobile Quadro P4000 to land down by the add-in P2000.

Results from Cinebench R15's OpenGL benchmark are even more extreme, though we're able to blame drivers for once. Remember when we mentioned targeted optimizations favoring benchmarks? This workload means very little when it cannot be extrapolated to other tasks.

The mobile Quadro P4000 Max-Q is adequate, but limited by the Core i7-7700HQ in applications that would have otherwise been GPU-bound. Whenever the CPU comes under heavy load, a desktop Core i7-7700T is able to propel the nominally weaker Quadro P2000 beyond the theoretically faster mobile solution.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Power Consumption, Battery Life & Noise

Power Consumption

Power use varies depending on whether you're plugged into the wall or using the battery. But since we can't modify this sample, we're only able to measure between the mains socket and power supply. Thus, the following table is limited to consumption on mains power.

Our tests include several scenarios, including sleep mode. The stress test is rather theoretical in nature; you'll never replicate it using real-world applications.

Real-life measurements, even for something like a larger SolidWorks workload, make it obvious just how important power-saving technologies are to stretching out battery life. Still, don't expect to run demanding applications away from the wall for any length of time.

Even though CPU and graphics performance is dramatically reduced on battery power, taking consumption down a notch, there's only so much capacity to keep this platform running. We keep its display on the normal brightness level across all workloads except the stress tests, where we max it out.

Once we completely deplete the battery, it takes less than two hours to fully recharge it, assuming you don't use the notebook during that time.

Noise

Clevo employs three fans in this design, similar to its original P955 platform. The graphics module's thermal solution consists of three flattened heat pipes connected to a sink with two radial fans, while the considerably more economical CPU gets by with two heat pipes and one radial fan. Noise generated by both subsystems under load is quite audible.

We even pick up a low humming sound when the PrevailPro is idle and charging. Higher-quality coils for the DC-DC converters would have helped there.

From 50cm away, our equipment registers approximately 40 dB(A) through a battery-powered SolidWorks benchmark run that pushes 2D/3D, compute, and rendering. This is an acceptable result.

But the almost 46 dB(A) we measured from the same run at higher clocks (plugged into the wall) is a bit too much. The experience is all the more uncomfortable as the keyboard above and your legs below start heating up.

Under maximum load, the notebook gets up to almost 50 dB(A), which is easily enough to drown out any other equipment in your office. The three fans spinning as fast as they can definitely take a toll. After all, up to 150W of energy converted into heat in a compact enclosure has to be dealt with one way or another.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Temperatures, Clock Rates & Thermals

Temperatures & Clock Rates

Actual performance typically differs from manufacturer specifications, if only because frequencies dip once a platform warms up. Because the PrevailPro is a workstation-class notebook, it's reasonable to assume that professionals using it for work will be plugged into a wall outlet for their heavy lifting. As such, that's how we'll test.

During a demanding SolidWorks run, the average CPU clock rate stays just below 3.5GHz with a load well-distributed between cores. We don't actually reach the peak Turbo Boost frequency at any point. CPU core temperatures range between approximately 60°C and 70°C. The Quadro P4000 Max-Q maintains an average of 1100MHz to 1250MHz across a temperature range of about 50°C to 56°C, depending on the somewhat different workloads in our benchmark.

During our stress test, the CPU drops below 3.4GHz and rises above 85°C, but is able to maintain those values. The GPU eventually stabilizes around 69°C and achieves a frequency of about 1100MHz.

There is a somewhat larger gap between the maximum Turbo Boost and GPU Boost frequencies, and what we actually observe. But this delta is something we'd consider to be generally inherent notebook behavior, too. Naturally, this makes direct comparisons to desktop PCs with well-cooled components difficult.

Temperature Measurements

Accurate measurements are a prerequisite for any fair evaluation. In order to keep our results as representative as possible, we keep the chassis intact (rather than zeroing in on specific components inside). Furthermore, we covered the opening in our workbench with special foil that we tested beforehand to determine its thermal permeability. Thus, we're able to ensure that our approximation of a normal user environment is as realistic as possible. (An earlier test with exposed platform components resulted in significantly lower numbers, so we discarded that data.)

We also noticed that it does not help to simply rest the opened notebook in an upright position against a surface. On the contrary, this causes the heat pipes to either lose performance or stop working altogether. Consider that a word of warning if you were thinking about using your notebook on a stand at too steep of an angle. Up to about 25° is safe, but we wouldn't suggest going any further.

After finding the correct focus point, we took measurements right through ventilation openings on the back, which gave us a good view of the GPU cooler's lowest (and hottest) heat pipe. We also have readings from the laptop chassis' surface.

During normal operation and through our SolidWorks benchmark, readings remain in a tolerable range. We also measure an average delta of seven to eight Kelvin between the heat pipe and GPU diode, which is perfectly fine. The CPU runs a bit warmer, but that has less of an impact on the overall thermal load.

Even though a stress test on battery power isn't particularly practical, it does yield interesting results. The notebook operates at roughly the same level as it did in SolidWorks, though MSI Kombustor coaxes the GPU into generating a little more waste heat, despite obvious throttling to keep thermals in check.

Of course, the battery won't last even an hour if you try to use it like this.

In order to determine a worst-case scenario, we plug in a power cord and crank up the display's brightness. A reading around 65°C won't cause anything to melt, but it's certainly enough to get your legs nice and toasty, as the laptop's bottom panel gets up over 44°C.

We also want readings from the top side, since you're always going to have your hands on the keyboard during use. Rather than using measuring lacquer for our thermal imager or thermal adhesive for sensors, we went with an infrared thermometer to capture data from the top side.

Connected to a wall outlet, our stress test causes temperatures in the center-upper quarter of the keyboard to rise to 54°C. The F8, 8, and I keys get the warmest. In a 3D workload like SolidWorks, temperatures are still around 46°C to 48°C. Otherwise, the key caps simply stay a little warm.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Conclusion

PNY does almost everything right with its PrevailPro P4000. The mobile Quadro P4000 Max-Q design works well with Intel's Core i7-7700HQ CPU. Although Kaby Lake as an architecture is no longer state-of-the-art, it's still modern for mobile platforms. Besides, Clevo relies on a mature P955/957 platform to make the PrevailPro P4000's unique component list possible.

Aside from the Quadro graphics module and big DDR4 SO-DIMMs, everything else inside is consumer-grade hardware. Then again, ECC RAM could be considered unnecessary in a mobile platform, and an expensive mobile Xeon CPU to drive the Quadro wouldn't help much. The combination in PNY's PrevailPro already makes a nice team.

Whether an Ultra HD panel makes sense while traveling is another matter entirely. Many professional applications, such as AutoCAD, Adobe's CC, SolidWorks, and Creo rely on their own GUIs that unfortunately scale with the screen. This makes them very difficult to read and use. Attempts to install SolidWorks 2015, for example, were certainly not enjoyable. Even scaling font sizes up to 300% is no use when dealing with a GUI that relies on fixed-size bitmap elements.

While PNY's PrevailPro P4000 is certainly well-balanced, we're left wondering about the application that calls for such a notebook. A traveling engineer working on construction plans and presentations would be on a perpetual hunt for the next power outlet, and as a primary device docked wherever you need to work, the acoustics aren't particularly optimized. You'd need a strong voice and plenty of patience to work with all of that noise.

On the other hand, we have to admire the cooling subsystem's effectiveness. This platform can handle the most powerful graphics solutions in a compact form factor, even if it means blowing lots of air over them. CPU cooling isn't a concern at all in comparison. Although you won't see the peak Turbo/GPU Boost frequencies in most professional workloads, throttling isn't an issue for PNY's PrevailPro P4000. Performance is maintained, whether you're plugged into the wall or running off of battery power.

We don't see enough unique selling points to issue PNY's laptop an award. However, the notebook does exactly what it promises if you happen to need its Quadro graphics module on the road. That alone makes this a unique piece of hardware if you're in the target market for its professional GPU. A $4500 asking price is higher than we'd be willing to pay. But if someone in accounting gives you the green light for a big expense, there are legit reasons to favor it over gaming-oriented notebooks.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Introduction And Product Tour

Many of the laptops we’ve tested recently feature Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 1060 GPU, which offers excellent performance in modern games for a decent price. However, even a moderately priced gaming laptop is an investment. Trade-offs meant to hit lower price targets include lesser parts, namely memory, CPU, storage, and display quality.

But along came Nvidia’s GTX 1050 Ti, which lowers the price of gaming laptops further. We're testing Sager's NP6852, which includes almost all of the features of a solid, moderately priced laptop, but with an even more affordable GPU.

Specifications

Packaging

The Sager NP6852 is based on the Clevo N850HK1, so it arrives in Clevo’s generic packaging. Two closed cell styrofoam pads keep the NP6852 secure, and there’s a separate compartment just for the 120W adapter. You’ll find a disc containing drivers and manuals, a quick guide booklet, a screw to install a 2.5" drive, and an extra thermal pad for the GPU’s VRAM.

Exterior

The Sager NP6852 features a black plastic chassis with a matte finish. Matte surfaces are great because they don’t attract fingerprints as easily as brushed metal or glossy plastic. However, the plastic used on the NP6852 doesn’t feel premium at all, unlike that of the Sager NP8156 and its brushed metal finish. The NP6852’s surface scratches rather easily and flexes quite a bit, and we worry this may endanger the laptop’s display. There are four edged accents running on the top cover—two on the sides, one on the top, and one on the bottom—which give the NP6852 a bit of gaming flare. In the middle of the lid Sager has stamped its logo in reflective chrome.

Not much changes when you open the lid; you’ll find the surfaces surrounding the inputs constructed out of the same plastic as the top of the laptop. Light poking and prodding flexes the plastic, which doesn’t inspire much confidence in the NP6852’s durability. This is in stark contrast to the NP8156, whose two-tone metal and plastic finish is incredibly sturdy. You’ll find more aggressive gamer accenting around the keyboard and the power button, which gives the laptop some much needed style in what would otherwise be a plain, black chassis. The power button’s shape is stylized in an elongated pentagon.

The stylized gamer touches carry over to the NP6852’s front, back, and side edges, with no changes in construction. The back edge has super-car exhaust cutouts, with the middle of the backside featuring a subtle, glossy finish. A small hive pattern surrounds the exhaust cutouts; you’ll find the same hive pattern surrounding the speakers in the front lip. Another exhaust vent is on the right lip, albeit without stylization.

The laptop’s bottom panel is also constructed out of plastic, but it has a grainier surface than the lid and the area surrounding the inputs. There are two sets of air intake cutouts: one in the middle and one on the top-left side near the front lip. The top-right set of cutouts is just for looks and doesn’t actually have holes cut through the cover. There are large rubber feet on each corner of the bottom cover to keep the laptop stable. You’ll notice that one of the feet is actually on the battery’s housing. The battery is connected externally as part of the bottom panel and is secured with two sliding locks.

The two speaker cutouts are also on the bottom panel, a position that we’ve found to be problematic in the past. Downward facing speakers are naturally muffled and would serve the user much better if they were facing upward, such as how Sager's own NP8165’s speakers are placed.

The NP6852 has a rather stiff hinge that extends outward by about 135°. As another example of the questionable build quality, the plastic near the power button flexes when you swing the display forward or back.

Starting from the right side, the NP6852’s I/O includes a Kensington lock, a USB 3.0 port, a USB 2.0 port, a microphone jack, and a headphone jack. On the left you’ll find the DC power jack, an RJ-45 Gigabit Ethernet port, two Mini DisplayPorts, an HDMI 1.4 port, a USB 3.1 Type-C port, and another USB 3.0 port.

Display

The Sager NP6852 features a Full HD (1920x1080) 60Hz matte IPS display with excellent viewing angles. Up to three additional display can be connected via the two Mini Displayports and the HDMI port.

Input Devices

The Sager NP6852’s keyboard is almost identical to the NP8165’s keyboard; it uses scissor switches, it has a number pad, and features customizable RGB lighting. There are three areas of RGB illumination: left, right, and number pad. There are also four different brightness levels. Unlike the NP8165, the NP6852 will flex when you type. Even with light strokes, the surface will bend backward.

The NP6852 also has a similar trackpad. The trackpad is non-clickable and uses separate left and right click buttons. The tracking experience is decent, but nothing to write home about. In between the two click buttons is a fingerprint sensor for additional security. Setting up the sensor took less than a minute and makes logging into accounts easy.

Interior

To access the interior, you’ll need to remove 17 screws; 13 of the screws are readily exposed and four are hidden beneath the battery. Once the screws are removed, the bottom panel pops right off. The cooling solution consists of separate heatsinks, heat pipes, and exhaust fans for both the CPU and GPU. The coolers only have one heat pipe each, so heat might not be carried from the heatsinks to the exhaust fans efficiently. Above the CPU heatsink you’ll find the two memory slots, and next to those you’ll find the M.2 SSD slot for storage and the Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 for networking. Next to the GPU’s exhaust fan you’ll find a 2.5" SATA slot, which is unoccupied in our configuration.

Software

Pressing Fn + / on the number pad opens the Control Center software from which you can adjust keyboard backlighting, create macro profiles, and track key usage statistics. Lighting effects include spectrum cycling, breathing, flashing, wave effects, and more.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Synthetic Benchmarks

Sager targets the budget laptop market by outfitting the NP6852 with an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB, but includes a 7th generation Intel Core i7-7700HQ, 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory, a 256GB SSD, and a 15.6” Full HD (1920x1080) display.

We're comparing it with the Sager NP8165, which is almost identical, except that its graphics are processed by the more powerful GTX 1060 6GB GPU. It also features a 15’6” FHD display, but includes Nvidia’s G-Sync technology.

The biggest competitor among our test subjects—at least in price—is Dell’s Inspiron 15 7000 Gaming, which also features a GTX 1050 Ti 4GB GPU and a 256GB SSD. The Dell laptop's price is lower because it only contains an i5-7300HQ and 8GB of DDR4-2400 memory. The Inspiron has a 15.6” display, but it doesn’t have IPS technology like the two systems from Sager.

Finally, we’ve included the Acer Predator 17 to illustrate the performance of a system with a 2x price disparity. The Predator 17 features an i7-6700HQ CPU, but also a GTX 1070 GPU, along with 16GB of DDR4 memory and two 128GB M.2 SSDs in RAID 0, and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. The Predator performed well in our benchmarks.

3DMark

3DMark features a handful of taxing benchmarks. We use Fire Strike, Fire Strike Extreme, and Time Spy, which are primarily taxing on the GPU, save for a couple of scenarios, like the Physics scores. The Sager NP6852 falls into its expected spot, behind the overwhelmingly powerful Acer Predator 17 and the NP8156 with its stronger GPU. The NP6852 falls close to the Dell Inspiron 15 7000 because they share the same discrete GPU, but the Sager’s stronger i7 CPU brings its Physics scores closer to those of the NP8165, and help it exceed the Acer scores.

Cinebench R15

Cinebench’s single and multi-core tests produce better results with stronger CPUs, while the OpenGL shading test caters more towards GPU horsepower. The NP6852 benefits from its Kaby Lake Core-i7 CPU, scoring about as well as the NP8156 and beating the Predator 17 in the CPU-based tests. NP6852’s Core-i7 outright demolishes the Dell and its Core-i5 processor, especially in mult-core performance, scoring nearly 30% better.

CompuBench

On the other hand, CompuBench’s Video Processing and Bitcoin Mining tests are more GPU-based. This time, the two GTX 1050 Ti systems land in spitting distance of each other, whereas the NP8165 gets a considerable performance increase because of its more powerful GTX 1060.

IOMeter

We measure read and write speeds by running IOMeter on each laptop’s primary drive. Both Sager laptops come equipped with Sandisk’s X400 SD8SN8U-256GB-1122 M.2 SSD, so we should expect similar read and write speeds. The Dell laptop also employs an X400, but of the SD8SN8U-256GB-1012 variety. Finally, the hulk-like Acer features two 128GB LiteOn CV1s running in RAID 0.

The NP6852’s X400 matches the NP8165 in random and sequential speeds, which is to be expected. It’s also even with the Inspiron 15’s X400 in sequential speeds, but it handles small Windows files much more efficiently. The NP6852's sequential performance is dwarfed by the Acer's two CV1s, which gives the Predator an advantage in loading large files like games and videos.

PCMark 8

Instead of the typical pre-loaded tests that are included in PCMark 8, we use the Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative suites, which provide better real-world performance results. The updated Kaby Lake architecture provides an excellent performance increase in its mobile form compared to Skylake, so the NP6852 manages to surpass Acer’s behemoth during the Adobe Creative suite tests. Naturally the i7-7700HQ pulls far ahead of the Dell laptop’s measly i5-7300HQ in both Office and Creative tests.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

Gaming performance is where the Sager NP6852 will naturally hit a bit of a wall. The savings inherent in lesser parts means compromises in game play -- lower framerates, or lower settings. Luckily, our benchmark suite contains a variety of games, and Alien: Isolation is one that even the Sager NP6852 can master, delivering an impressive 94 FPS at maximum settings. Of course, a GTX 1060-based system will provide an extra 45 FPS, but this comes with an additional $300 price tag typically.

Ashes of the Singularity

On the other hand, we have the notoriously taxing Ashes of the Singularity, where even the Acer Predator 15 can't reach 60 FPS. The NP6852 falls below 30 FPS, but with some tweaking to Anti Aliasing and particle effects, you should be able to raise the frame rate into playable territory. Because Ashes demands more of the overall platform, the Dell Inspiron, with its Core-i5 processor, really struggles here.

Bioshock Infinite

Bioshock Infinite’s built-in benchmark scenes don’t require as much GPU horsepower as some of the other games we're using here, so the NP6852 lands in the comfortable 75 FPS range at max settings. The Dell laptop maintains around 65 FPS thanks to its GTX 1050 Ti, which is more than respectable, but its i5 CPU also makes this system prone to falling below the coveted 60 FPS threshold more frequently.

DiRT Rally

DiRT Rally’s benchmark puts even more stress on the GPU, and we witness the NP6852 in some troubled waters here. This can easily be resolved by dialing back the settings, but you’ll experience a bit of visual degradation as a result. The more robust NP8156 delivers just shy of 60 FPS, so the setting tweaks don't need to be as drastic here. You’ll need a system with at least a GTX 1070 to maintain an excellent framerate without graphical compromises.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V’s benchmark offers several scenes with varying degrees of complexity. The Del Perro Pier scene is manageable because it doesn’t have many objects or landscapes to render. Others, such as the Vinewood Sign scene, are much more taxing. Unfortunately, most of the scenes torture the NP6852, and only in Del Perro Pier does it manage to maintain a playable framerate. The NP8156 maintains a steady frame rate in most scenes because of its heftier GPU, but you’ll need a configuration similar to the Acer Predator to get anywhere near 60 FPS without dialing back the settings.

GRID Autosport

Our test subject's performance in GRID Autosport is similar to its performance inBioshock Infinite in that the NP6852 can deliver more than 60 FPS with quite a bit to spare. It also outperforms the Inspiron 15 by nearly 30% because of its stronger overall platform.GRID also rewards GPUs with high clock speeds, which typically puts GTX 1060-based systems closer to GTX 1070-equipped alternatives. Unfortunately, the GTX 1050 Ti sports a measly boost clock speed of 1392MHz (versus the GTX 1060’s boost clock of 1670MHz), so the NP6852 drags behind the NP8156 and the Predator 17.

Hitman

Back down to earth: Hitman demands more from the GPU, and we see the NP6852 and Dell Inspiron running neck-and-neck in this benchmark, at the bottom of the stack. An upgrade to a GTX 1060-based configuration would net you around 85% more performance, and push you past 60 FPS with a handful of frames to spare.

Metro: Last Light Redux

Metro: Last Light Redux isn’t very forgiving either, driving the NP6852’s performance even further below 30 FPS. Be prepared to turn back settings such as Anti Aliasing if you want to play at a decent frame rate. The NP6852’s i7 CPU only marginally helped the system's performance.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

It doesn't get easier inRise of the Tomb Raider,which is perhaps our most taxing game. The NP6852 is only capable of 22 FPS, and its i7-7700HQ provides virtually no benefit compared with the Dell laptop's lesser CPU. You’ll have to consider a system with at least a GTX 1060 if you want to play on high settings without feeling like you’re watching a slideshow. The NP8156, for example, offers more than 75% better performance, in fact.

The Division

The Division eases up on the torture a bit, but not by much; the Sager NP6852 is able to maintain a stable 32 FPS, which isn’t much, but a whole lot better than the sub-30 FPS frame rates you’ll find inMetro orRoTR. This time, the NP6852’s more robust i7 processor delivers a noteworthy performance increase, and that boost is the difference between playable and unplayable.

Thief

Ending on a good note, the i7-7700HQ is the star once again inThief, granting the NP6852 17% more performance than the Dell Inspiron. This places the NP6852 around 50 FPS, which is close enough to exploit minor graphical setting tweaks to reach 60 FPS.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Battery, Thermal, And Display Testing

Battery Test - Tomb Raider 2013 Battery Rundown

To test battery life, we set each laptop’s battery profile to Balanced while running Tomb Raider’s built-in benchmark at the lowest detail preset. The frame rate is locked at 30 FPS through GeForce Experience’s Battery Boost to limit the strain on the battery. Meanwhile, a script running in the background monitors and time stamps the system’s battery percentage. The laptops are set to hibernate once battery levels reach 5%. We test the battery life twice: at the laptop’s maximum brightness and at 200 nits.

The previously tested Sager NP8156 offers great performance, but we were unimpressed with its meager one hour and 30 minutes of battery life. Sager’s second offering delivers much more battery life, exceeding the Acer Predator 17 by five minutes and coming a few minutes shy of two hours. This should be more than enough life to last you through a short flight or commute, and we found that most of the laptops we've tested fall within this range. Still, nothing comes close to beating the Dell Inspiron 15 7000, the crowned king of battery-powered gaming. Naturally, both the Dell and our subject Sager are using lesser (and less hungry) components.

Thermal Testing

We use the Optris PI 640 infrared camera to measure the laptop’s thermal characteristics. For more information about how we test, be sure to check out our Measurement Science article.

The Sager NP6852 surprised us with its idle temperatures; the CPU and its associated cooler lingers around 44°C, which is normal, but the GPU hovers around a chilly 32°C. Our hopes were quickly dashed, because as soon as we raised the temperature with a 15 minute Furmark test, the GPU’s temperatures skyrocketed far past an acceptable range: 105°C. Our AIDA64 log confirms this absurd temperature, with an average of 92.6°C and a maximum of 100°C for the GPU. We witnessed similar issues with the NP8165, albeit with the CPU’s temperatures.

Display Testing

We used the SpectraCal C6 Colorimeter to measure the P37X v6’s display. Be sure to check out our Display Testing Explained article for a full description of our test methodology.

The NP6852 exhibits excellent white luminance at 0% brightness, but the black luminance is too high, which diminishes the contrast to a mediocre 622.7:1. Similarly, at maximum brightness the white luminance is adequately high and the black luminance isn’t low enough, resulting in a contrast ratio of 624.7:1. We're looking for something closer to 1000:1, and instead we’re treated to a flat looking image. The NP8165 delivers much better contrast.

The NP6852’s RGB balance is a different story. Almost across the board, the RGB levels stay close to 100%, with green levels rising slightly above 100% and red levels dipping slightly below. The NP6852 has the most balanced RGB levels out of all the laptop displays we've tested so far.

The average gamma point stays pretty close to the 2.2 we aim for, floating above 2.2 and surpassing 2.4 between 0% and 40% brightness, and slipping beneath 2.2 from 40%-80%.

Despite this system's excellent RGB balance, that doesn’t translate into low average color errors. We have yet to find a laptop with a low color error average. However, the NP6852’s grayscale accuracy is spot on. Values above 2.5 become visible to the human eye, and this laptop is the first to perform so well on this particular metric.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Price Analysis And Conclusion

The Sager NP6852 marks the second Clevo-based laptop to land in our labs, and we hope to see more. Sager aims at the budget-oriented gaming laptop market, and it hits the target in terms of performance, especially when compared to the lower-priced Dell Inspiron 15 7000.

The Intel Core i7-7700HQ provides a noteworthy performance increase over the i5-7300HQ in several benchmarks, particularly in multi-core performance (Cinebench). Even in the GPU-heavy, gaming-oriented 3DMark tests, the NP6852's effort is valiant, particularly in the Physics benchmarks. This is especially useful in gaming titles that have robust physics engines.

The Sager NP6852 only truly struggles when it comes to gaming, as you would expect from the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti GPU. Easy-to-render titles such as Alien: Isolation and Bioshock Infinite pose no threat to the i7-7700HQ and GTX 1050 Ti combo. However, games with punishing graphical settings, such asAshes of the Singularity and Rise of the Tomb Raider are problematic for the relatively underpowered GPU; you’ll be dialing back your setting knobs if you want to pass the 60 FPS threshold. Still, the i7-7700HQ makes all the difference in a handful of games, including GRID Autosport, where the i7 pulls the NP6852 from sub-60 FPS to over 70 FPS.

Synthetic and gaming performance fall exactly where we'd expect, so other determining factors weigh in. As a portable system, we expect decent battery life, and the Sager delivers with just shy of two hours. Longevity isn’t as extensive as the Dell, but it should be enough time to pwn some n00bs and slay the odd horde of monsters here or there.

Build quality, however, isn’t quite up to par, even for a laptop in this price range. The plastic construction doesn’t pick up nasty smudges as easily as the NP8152’s elegant brushed metal finish. However, the chassis is flimsy, which is non-conducive to gaming while on the go. Major weak points are the lid where the monitor is embedded and the area surrounding the keyboard and trackpad.

The NP6852’s display has its ups and its downs. For one, the RGB levels are well balanced and the grayscale errors are unnoticeable. In fact, the laptop has most balanced RGB levels and lowest grayscale DeltaE out of all of the laptops we’ve tested so far. On the other hand, the contrast is plagued with high black luminance, which spoils the adequately bright white luminance and flattens the image. Additionally, the color average error is easily noticeable.

Finally, a critical factor to consider when buying a gaming laptop is its thermal performance. Components like CPUs and GPUs produce a lot of heat, and this is exacerbated when they are crammed into a thinly-packed system. We previously found issue with the NP8165’s CPU temperatures, which broke 100°C. Similarly, the NP6852’s GPU rose above 100°C, which is unacceptable. While Sager isn’t the primary culprit in this matter, it (and other Clevo resellers) must be wary of poor cooling solutions from the original manufacturer.

The Sager NP6852 comes in at $1,300, which is $300 less than the company’s GTX 1060 offering. Both have the same configuration, save for the GPU, but the NP8156 has much better construction. Alternatively, the Dell Inspiron 15 7000 is a full $500 cheaper. The Sager laptop's Core-i7 CPU boosts performance in some games and applications, but in other games the benefit is negligible. The construction and cooling of the Dell laptop is also significantly better.

These are the trade-offs you'll find at such aggressive price points, and it's difficult for us to give the nod to the NP6852 with some of these disparities in mind. Better construction and cooling might justify this jump in price; conversely, the Dell laptop's price makes it that much more compelling, but it's still vastly underpowered and will demand quality compromises in most games.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Introduction And Product Tour

EVGA is relatively new to gaming laptops, having revealed the SC17's first iteration last year at CES. Since then, the company has released another version, featuring Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 1070 GPU. That appears to be the only change, and perhaps that's a good thing.

One of the SC17’s main selling points is its UHD (3840x2160) display, and we'll see if the Pascal GPU grants the SC17 enough horsepower to unleash it.

Specifications

Packaging

The EVGA SC17 arrived in a simple black box with a stylized image of the laptop and “SC17 Gaming” printed on the lid. The left and right sides also have “SC17 Gaming” stamped in silver, while the top and bottom sides show the company’s logo. A plastic moulding splits the box into compartments: one for the power adapter, two for the adapter’s wires, one for accessories, one for the user manual, and a large compartment for the actual SC17.

The accessories include a USB Type-C-to-Type-A adapter and a male 3.5mm-to-3.5mm output x2 adapter, the latter because there’s only one audio jack on the SC17. The SC17’s power adapter is slim, which lets you transport without introducing much bulk to your bags. Package presentation has absolutely no effect on a laptop’s performance, but we still appreciate a premium product experience; kudos to EVGA.

Exterior

The EVGA SC17’s lid features gorgeous, CNC-cut aluminum construction with a black, anodized finish. The clean finish is quite a sight to behold, but it’s easily blemished by smudges and fingerprints, which is trait we’ve found on virtually all laptops that fancy metal construction. However, we found these blotches much easier to clean off the SC17 than those we find on brushed metal finishes. In the middle you’ll find EVGA’s logo placed in the middle, and it glows white when the system is powered.

The same gorgeous finish carries over to the inner surface surrounding the keyboard and the touchpad, with the positive being a crisp finish to admire, and the negative being the blemish problem, which is exacerbated by how often you'll make contact with this surface. Keep a microfiber cloth handy. In the top right corner, you’ll find a circular power button, which, oddly enough, isn't illuminated when the system is powered. The company’s logo is stamped below the display in an understated gray.

The SC17’s speakers are located on the left and right edges below the keyboard. Most manufacturers place their speakers on the front lip, which means the audio isn’t facing you directly, or that your arms can easily block the speakers when you're using the keyboard and trackpad. The SC17’s placement is much better, but you still might find yourself blocking the speakers while using keys on either side of the keyboard. We've found the most ideal placement to be right next to the hinge.

The edges feature the same, luxurious aluminum finish. The clean, CNC-cut edges make the SC17 appear a lot thinner than it really is; in reality, the laptop measures 1.07" at the widest point. There are two small exhaust ports on the left and right side of the laptop, and two larger exhaust ports on the back edge that extend to the bottom of the laptop. Maintaining its elegant, minimalist aesthetic, the SC17’s rear exhaust isn’t designed like a gaudy, super-car exhaust. Instead, the exhaust features tastefully shaped cutouts with a gunmetal border to contrast the black aluminum finish.

The hinge in the middle is wrapped by a large, rubberized plastic bar with the company’s logo engraved on the back edge and "EVGA SC17 GAMING” printed in glossy black on the top edge. The hinge provides about 120° of movement. Many of the hinges we’ve come across in the past either feel jerky and stiff, or loose and unsupported. However, the SC17’s hinge is both supportive and, dare I say, buttery smooth [Ed. No, that phrase has been banned from Tom's Hardware.]

Don’t expect anything less from the bottom panel either. It also features an anodized aluminum finish and is quite rigid. There are three rubber feet to keep the SC17 stable: two small feet near the front and one large foot spanning the length of the back of the laptop. The large foot also has EVGA’s logo engraved into the rubber. There are several air intake cutouts on the bottom panel, two of which are located below the system’s fans. Metal grilles are bolted behind the intake cutouts to prevent large dust particles and debris from entering the laptop. Overall, the EVGA SC17 is one of the most well constructed laptops we’ve seen come through the lab; its anodized aluminum construction is only matched by the similarly constructed Razer Blade (2016).

EVGA keeps the I/O ports simple. On the right, you’ll find a USB 3.1 Type-C port, two USB 3.0 ports, a combination headphone/microphone out, and a Kensington lock. You can use included adapters to convert the Type-C-to-Type-A connector and the 3.5mm out to two separate 2.5mm out ports. The left side features another Kensington lock, the DC power input, an RJ-45 Gigabit Ethernet port, an HDMI 2.0 port, and two Mini DisplayPorts.

Display

The EVGA SC17 boasts a UHD (3840x2160) matte IPS display, outputting at 60Hz. The 4K display produces a crisp image, ideal for watching 4K videos and editing high-resolution photos. The HDMI and Mini DisplayPorts allows users to connect three additional displays. We don't see too many UHD gaming laptops come through, so it'll be interesting to see how well this model delivers on this lofty display target.

Input Devices

The SC17’s scissor-switch keyboard features a number pad and white back-lighting. There are six brightness levels, which can be adjusted with “Fn + F3” or “Fn + F4." The scissor switches in most laptops feel mushy, but the SC17’s switches feel relatively crisp for a laptop keyboard. The keys are spaced a bit too far from each other. Typing experience usually comes down to preference, but the SC17’s laptop might better suit users with large hands.

Unfortunately, the trackpad leaves much to be desired. Clicking isn’t uniform; the middle bottoms out at a more shallow point than the left and right sides, which bottom out deep enough for dust and debris to enter. Finally, the top half of the trackpad cannot be pressed down at all. Tracking isn’t much better either. Wide movements are fine, but the trackpad’s surface will drag your finger while trying to make small movements.

Interior

10 Torx head screws keep the bottom panel attached to the chassis. Underneath you’ll find two large heatsinks for the CPU and GPU, along with the associated heat pipes and exhaust fans. Above the CPU heatsink there are two DDR4 memory slots. Above the memory is the Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260, which handles the SC17’s Wi-Fi connectivity. To the left, there’s an M.2 SSD slot and a CMOS battery. On the top right corner, you’ll find the 2.5" SATA slot, which is occupied by a 1TB 7200RPM drive; the 2.5" slot has its own metal shroud. Finally, the 74.48Wh lithium ion battery is located at the very top.

Software

A mobile version of EVGA's PrecisionX software comes pre-installed on the SC17. With PrecisionX mobile, you can easily overclock the SC17's CPU and GPU by switching between Normal and SuperClock. You can also adjust the keyboard's backlighting intensity through PrecisionX Mobile, or toggle a backlight breathing effect.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Synthetic Benchmarks

The EVGA SC17 is expensive, with an MSRP of $2,799, which includes an unlocked Intel Core i7-6820HK (no, not Kaby Lake), an 8GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070, 32GB of DDR4-2667 memory, a 256GB M.2 SSD, and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. Those specs, coupled with the UHD display, reside at the higher end of the performance spectrum, so we’re comparing the SC17 to a few similarly priced laptops. We’ll also be testing this laptop at 3840x2160.

The first contender is the Asus G752VS OC Edition, which also features an i7-6820HK, a GTX 1070, a 256GB M.2 SSD, and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. The G752VS OC Edition also sports 32GB of memory, although its RAM is clocked to 2400MHz. As far as benchmarks go, the synthetic and gaming scores should be fairly similar, so the main competition will come down to battery life, thermals, and display.

Next in line is the Acer Predator 17. The specifications aren’t as robust as the SC17 or the G752VS OC Edition; it also features a GTX 1070 and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD, but uses a less powerful i7-6700HQ CPU and only 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory. However, storage is handled by two 128GB M.2 SSDs running in RAID 0.

Last, but certainly not least, is the MSI GT73VR Titan Pro-201. Like the EVGA and Asus laptops, it contains an i7-6820HK processor and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. Unlike any of the systems in this roundup, it boasts a GTX 1080 GPU, 64GB of DDR4-2400 memory, and a RAID 0 configuration consisting of two 512GB SSDs. Although the EVGA SC17 has a hefty price tag, the MSI’s MSRP dwarfs it by about $700.

Note: We have run these benchmarks on the EVGA SC17 in both stock and overclocked modes.

3DMark

3DMark benchmarks mostly illustrate graphical prowess. The EVGA SC17 bests the lower end Acer Predator 17 and goes toe-to-toe with the similarly configured Asus G752VS OC Edition. Using PrecisionX Mobile to overclock the SC17 grants it an ever-so-slight lead against the Asus laptop in graphics performance, but it raises the CPU-based Physics score significantly. However, nothing comes close to the MSI GT73VR Titan Pro in terms of raw graphical horsepower.

Cinebench R15

The Cinebench tests focus more on the CPU. At stock settings the SC17 produces results that are similar to those of both the G752 and the Titan Pro. Overclocking it will provide better CPU-based results than those of the MSI Titan Pro, which amounts to about 8% more single-core performance and nearly 15% more multi-core performance. On the other hand, the OpenGL shading test emphasizes the GPU performance, and here the Titan Pro’s GTX 1080 still holds an 11% lead.

CompuBench

On the other hand, CompuBench scores are impacted a bit more by the laptop’s GPU performance, particularly during the Bitcoin Mining test. In this case, the SC17 only scores about as well as the Asus G752VS at stock clocks, and only slightly better when overclocked. The Titan Pro doesn’t fare much better than the other systems during the Video Processing test, which is a bit more CPU focused, but it holds a massive 20% lead over the overclocked SC17 in Bitcoin Mining thanks to its GTX 1080.

IOMeter

We test storage performance using IOmeter on each laptop’s primary drive, measuring random and sequential speeds. The SC17 features a Toshiba XG3 THNSN5256GPU7 M.2 SSD, which is the same SSD found inside the Asus G752VS, so we can expect the two to have similar performance. The higher end MSI Titan Pro features two 512GB Samsung SM951 PCIe 3.0 SSDs running in RAID 0, and the Acer uses two 128GB LiteOn CV1 M.2 SSDs running in RAID 0.

Sure enough, EVGA and Asus laptops hit the same marks; the XG3 exhibits outstanding 4K random read and write speeds, which is probably the most significant metric overall, with the emphasis on small, pedestrian Windows files; application-based tasks will run more efficiently. On the other hand, during sequential performance testing, we're measuring how fast the drives can deal with larger files, like photos and video. The XG3 doesn’t perform as well compared with the massive 1TB SM951 RAID 0 array.

PCMark 8

Finally, we use PCMark 8’s Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative benchmarks to produce real-world performance results for home, creative, and office workloads. The Adobe Creative tests in particular give systems with strong GPUs a slight edge, so the Titan Pro scores a bit higher than the SC17 and its GTX 1070-based contemporaries. However, overclocking the SC17 proves to be fruitful, as the higher clock rates deliver better performance in both Creative and Office tests.

Game Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

In Alien: Isolation, the EVGA SC17 performs just as well as the Asus G752VS OC Edition, nearly delivering 200 FPS. The MSI GT73 Titan Pro-201 outperforms it by about 10%, but overclocking the SC17 boosts the frame rate past 200 FPS, thinning the gap to a mere 2 FPS. It should be noted that at Ultra HD, the SC17 is capable of maintaining over 60 FPS, even at highest settings. Overclocking doesn’t add much performance, but at such a high resolutions, every frame counts.

Ashes of the Singularity

Ashes of the Singularity is one of the more demanding games in our benchmark suite, and under-powered systems struggle to deliver playable frame rates at high settings. Luckily, the systems we're comparing here have formidable configurations, particularly our SC17. The EVGA and Asus laptops are a mere three frames apart, and at stock settings the SC17 still a handful of frames short of the 60 FPS threshold; but overclocking it brings the average a bit closer to 60 FPS. You might need to turn down anti-aliasing a notch to hit that number. Meanwhile MSI’s contender can achieve 60 FPS without compromise. At UHD, EVGA's laptop delivers 30+ FPS, but you might be better off sticking to a lower resolution, or drastically turning down some of the settings.

Bioshock Infinite

In Bioshock Infinite, the EVGA SC17 performs about the same as the G752 yet again, delivering outstanding performance at maximum settings. The Titan Pro is capable of a little more, outperforming the SC17 by about 5%. However, overclocking the SC17 grants a significant performance boost that roughly translates to 10% more performance than the Titan Pro. At such high frame rates, your resources would be best exercised by raising the resolution. Sure enough, the EVGA falls just a few frames shy of 60 FPS when we crank up the resolution; but that just means a small tweak in game settings to get over the hump—anti-aliasing is not a necessity at UHD, for example.

DiRT Rally

Unfortunately, the SC17 at stock speeds takes last place in DiRT Rally, even losing out to the Acer Predator 17. Still, all of these GTX 1070/Skylake systems are within spitting distance of one another, and an average of 80 FPS is plenty. But if you absolutely need more frames, overclocking the system will bring the average frame rate past that of both the Asus G752 and Acer Predator systems, and closer to the performance of the MSI Titan Pro. We don't advise playing DiRT Rally at UHD on the SC17 unless you’re willing to make major graphical concessions.

Grand Theft Auto V

Overclocking the EVGA SC17 for Grand Theft Auto V is worthwhile, because even incremental improvements push this system above 60 FPS, as evidenced by the Forum Drive and Chase scenes. However, those also aren’t the most demanding benchmark scenes. The Vinewood Sign scene takes the cake for that, and it brings even the formidable MSI Titan Pro below 60 FPS, despite the MSI's more powerful GPU. And let’s not even talk about running GTA V at UHD; the frame rate dips well below 30 FPS across the board, making game play look like a slideshow.

GRID Autosport

In the past, we’ve witnessed laptops with GTX 1060s give GTX 1070-based laptops a run for their money because GRID Autosport’s engine favors GPUs with high clock rates. The same can be said here, where at stock speeds the SC17 scores a few frames behind the MSI Titan Pro, but after overclocking the EVGA system improves its frame rate, best the MSI laptop by 11%. At UHD the SC17 pushes 60+ FPS easily, although overclocking it only provides an additional 6% performance.

Hitman

The SC17 exhibits outstanding performance in Hitman, surpassing the Acer Predator by 30% and the Asus G752 by 20% at stock speeds. It even comes to blows with the MSI Titan Pro when overclocked, but that overclock only exhibits a 4% increase in frame rate. This excellent performance translates well at higher resolutions, where dialing back a few settings can put the SC17 past the 60 FPS mark.

Metro: Last Light Redux

The EVGA’s hefty configuration delivers 60 FPS in Metro: Last Light Redux. with more than 10 frames to spare. Unfortunately, overclocking the SC17 only offers an additional 3% performance. Meanwhile, the MSI Titan Pro delivers a frame rate that is nearly 20% higher. And don’t even think about cranking the resolution up; UHD absolutely demolishes the SC17’s performance at these high settings.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Rise of the Tomb Raider’s caters to powerful GPUs, so the SC17 doesn’t quite catch up to the Titan Pro, even when overclocked. In fact, overclocking the system only provides an additional additional 2% performance. At around 53 FPS, you can easily pull back your graphical settings to reach 60 FPS; playing at this frame rate without visual degradation will require at least a GTX 1080. Additionally, the SC17’s GTX 1070 doesn’t perform well at UHD here, so it would be best to stay at 1080p if you want smooth game play.

The Division

The SC17’s situation improves significantly in The Division where its i7-6820HK and GTX 1070 deliver well over 60 FPS at high settings; overclocking it will bring the frame rate closer to 80 FPS. The MSI Titan Pro still outperforms it by over 10 FPS, so there’s room for improvement if you can afford it. At UHD, the EVGA struggles a bit to deliver playable frame rates, but this can be coaxed by turning down Anti Aliasing.

Thief

Thief likes a strong overall platform and gives a slight edge to strong CPU performance. As such, both the SC17 and G752VS get a boost compared with the Predator 17. The Titan Pro also enjoys a performance boost against the i7-6820HK/GTX 1070 configurations because of its GTX 1080, but the difference only amounts to 5% at best. On the other hand, overclocking the SC17 provides a more palpable increase of about 12%. Thief isn’t all that taxing to render, so playing at UHD is an option, although the SC17 can only deliver frame rates in the low 40s, which isn’t ideal.

Battery, Thermal, And Display Testing

Battery Test - Tomb Raider 2013 Battery Rundown

To test battery life, we set each laptop’s battery profile to Balanced while running Tomb Raider’s built-in benchmark at the lowest detail preset. The frame rate is locked at 30 FPS through GeForce Experience’s Battery Boost to limit the strain on the battery. Meanwhile, a script running in the background monitors and time stamps the system’s battery percentage. The laptops are set to hibernate once battery levels reach 5%. We test the battery life twice, at the laptop’s maximum brightness and at 200 nits.

Back when we tested the Asus G752VS OC Edition MSI GT73VR Titan Pro-201 a few months ago, we originally ran the battery rundown test at each laptop’s maximum brightness level, but we have since switched to testing each laptop at 200 nits for consistency. At this level, the EVGA SC17 delivers slightly more than one hour and 30 minutes, whereas the Acer Predator 17 comes in just shy of two hours. Even an extra 15 minutes can go a long way when you have limited outlet access; and 15 minutes of extra game time translates into much more than 15 minutes while web browsing or writing Microsoft Word documents, for example. However, at maximum brightness, the EVGA's battery is drained quickly, likely due to how bright the display can go (more on this during our Display Testing analysis.)

Thermal Testing

For our thermal testing, we used our Optris PI 640 infrared camera to measure the laptop’s thermals. For more information about how we test, be sure to check out our Measurement Science article.

Moderately stressing the SC17 seems to make the area around the keyboard and track-pad warm, so we were expecting thermal dissipation to be an issue. Our Optris camera illustrates the non-vital components getting rather toasty, but the actual heatsinks and heat pipes stay cool. Likewise, the keyboard area gets hot during gaming, but the cooling solution’s temperatures are well within acceptable ranges after a 15 minute Furmark stress test. The AIDA64 log confirms the SC17’s low detected temperatures, which are lower than the other three laptops we've included in this comparison set. That's a great result, and one we'd hope EVGA can implement for other components on this laptop.

Display Testing

We used the SpectraCal C6 Colorimeter to measure the EVGA SC17's display. Be sure to check out our Display Testing Explained article for a full description of our test methodology. Note that we've also calibrated the SC17 and we are providing both default and calibrated results. We've simply used the Windows color calibration tools, which are somewhat limited, but you'll see some improvement in the results.

At the lowest brightness settings, the black luminance is rather high, but you won't realize this because the white luminance is incredibly low. It’s so low, in fact, that it makes the display look almost pitch black at 0% brightness. The high black level and low white level results in an incredibly low contrast value of 66.9:1. Likewise, the black level is too high at 100% brightness, but the contrast is remedied by an incredibly high maximum brightness of 409 nits. This maximum brightness contrast isn’t as impressive as that of the other laptop displays in this comparison group.

RGB levels are relatively balanced; red and green levels drop and blue levels rise as brightness is increased, although not to dramatic effect. This means that you might see a slight blue tint at higher brightness settings. After calibration, red levels don’t dip as far down, blue levels are only slightly higher than 100%, and green levels remain at 100% consistently.

The SC17’s display exhibits a low grayscale error values compared with the systems from Acer, Asus and MSI, and at this level the errors will be unnoticeable to the human eye. Calibrating the display brings the grayscale errors even lower, to 0.7326 DeltaE.

Gamma levels are almost spot on as well. The average gamma undershoots the 2.2 value that displays usually target, but the gamma point stays pretty consistent throughout each brightness level. Calibrating the SC17’s display brings the gamma average much closer to 2.2, and the gamma value only drastically dips at 90% brightness.

Color accuracy is a different matter, and the SC17’s display produces a high average DeltaE of just under 4. However, this is low compared to the competition. Still, we'd like to push for some improvement. In particular, the SC17’s display produces fairly accurate blue and yellow, but red, magenta, cyan, and especially green are inaccurate. We’re able to bring down the red and magenta errors a bit, reducing the DeltaE 2000 to just above 3.

Price Analysis And Conclusion

With giants like Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, Razer, and now Acer dominating the gaming laptop market, and with boutique builders mostly sourcing Clevo designs, the EVGA SC17 brings a more luxurious alternative that’s sure to turn heads. This version of the SC17 is only EVGA’s second foray into the market, but we’re already looking forward to seeing more.

The SC17 performs about as well as similarly configured systems in our Synthetic benchmarks. However, using EVGA’s PrecisionX Mobile overclocking, the SC17 even gives the formidable MSI GT73VR Titan Pro-201 a run for its money. In particular, 3DMark produced higher CPU-based physics scores when the SC17 was overclocked, while PCMark 8 saw major increases in both Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative performance. The SC17’s excellent 4K random storage speeds stem from its Toshiba XG3, although its 128K sequential speeds weren’t quite up to par with MSI’s two 512GB Samsung SM951s in RAID 0.

The SC17 produced abundantly high frame rates at Full HD, and overclocking the system only sweetened the deal. In fact, the overclocked EVGA was capable of besting the GTX 1080-equipped MSI in a handful of games, including GRID Autosport and Hitman. The overclocked SC17 was also more than a match in Ashes of the Singularity and Rise of the Tomb Raider, two incredibly taxing games. Unfortunately, performance at UHD wasn’t as stellar as we hoped. The laptop can achieve respectable frame rates in easy-to-run games such as Bioshock Infinite or Thief, but in most cases, the FPS dropped below 30. This isn't incredibly surprising, given some of the results we've seen with other UHD systems, but since this display is part of what you're paying extra for, make sure the games you care about can exceed at UHD with minor graphical concessions. (Or maybe you'll be happy to game at 1080p and do other work at higher resolutions).

The EVGA SC17 features top-tier build quality that outclasses much of what we've seen come through our lab. The gorgeous CNC-cut aluminum gives the SC17 an elegant edge compared with some of the over-the-top, gamer-centric designs weve seen. At just over an inch, it is also considerably thinner than the Asus, Acer, and MSI in our comparison grouping. The only glaring issues are the easy-to-see blemishes and the poor trackpad, but these can be easily remedied with a microfiber cloth and a separate mouse.

The SC17 is not only sturdy, it’s also heavy, so you might not want to carry it around often. If you choose to, however, be prepared to deal with its poor battery life. With its display brightness limited to 200 nits, the SC17 offers a little over one hour and 30 minutes of non-stop game time. The Acer Predator 17, on the other hand, offers just short of two hours. We found that some systems are capable of two hours and 30 minutes, or more, so the EVGA’s longevity is on the lower end. Tradeoffs. (Sigh.)

EVGA’s cooling solution has its ups and downs. Running applications that are even moderately demanding will make the area surrounding the keyboard and trackpad warm, which worried us at first. However, our Optris camera only reported temperatures of up to 72°C, which is well within acceptable ranges; our AIDA64 logs reported even cooler GPU diode temperatures, so at no point was the EVGA SC17 ever in danger of thermal throttling. The true problem might stem from the EVGA’s premium aluminum chassis, which is likely trapping heat that otherwise would’ve escaped in a plastic body. So while you can rest easy knowing the SC17 won't overheat, you’ll still have to deal with toasty hands whenever you’re gaming.

One of the SC17’s main selling points is the gorgeous, UHD IPS display. While we noted that the i7-6820HK and GTX 1070 don’t have enough horsepower to play several games at this resolution, you can still admire the display’s well-balanced RGB levels and physically imperceptible grayscale errors. However, be sure to keep the display brightness nice and high, because contrast is almost non-existent at low brightness. Average color errors are a tad too high, but we were able to calibrate it to just above a DeltaE 2000 of 3.

The ultimate deciding factor always comes down to price, and the EVGA SC17 will cost a pretty penny. The MSRP is $2,800, but at the time of this writing we found prices as low as $2,300. In comparison, the similarly-configured Asus G752VS OC Edition has an MSRP of $2,500, but its current price is $2,400. Also, the MSI Titan Pro is still well over $3,000. The EVGA SC17 offers about as much performance as the Asus laptop, but at a better price and with arguably better aesthetics, and in some cases it gives the MSI Titan Pro a run for its money for several hundred dollars less.

In the end, $2,300 isn’t cheap, but EVGA never intended the SC17 to be a value-oriented laptop. The company’s goal was to deliver a well-built, deluxe laptop to compete against other high-end laptops, and we believe EVGA delivered on that promise.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Introduction And Product Tour

The gaming laptops we’ve tested have all been from the usual suspects: Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, Acer, and even Razer and Dell; all with design teams to customize and style systems with purpose. But some boutique systems shops source plain, barebones laptop shells or chassis from the likes of Clevo. Exhibit A: Sager. We're testing the company's NP8165, which comes equipped with an Intel Kaby Lake Core-i7 processor and Nvidia’s GTX 1060, and is based on the Clevo P650HP6-G.

Specifications

Packaging

Because the Sager NP8156 is based on a Clevo design, the packaging is really just a generic box. The laptop is secured with three pads of Styrofoam. You’ll find a disc with drivers and manuals, screws for your additional SSDs and HDDs, a (rather large) user’s guide, a warranty policy, and two extra thermal pads for the GPU’s VRAM. The 200W AC adapter is stored in a separate compartment inside the box.

Exterior

The crisp, minimalist lid design includes strategically beveled edges, giving the Sager NP8165 a clean, yet unmistakably gamer aesthetic. The exterior features a black, brushed metal finish. MSI’s laptops use brushed metal as well, but those models are a bit glossier, whereas the NP8165’s finish is much more muted, so fingerprints and smudges won’t be the issue they are on MSI’s laptops; but keeping the surface clean still isn't easy. Finally, Sager stamps its company logo front and center on the Clevo-based chassis.

Inside, on the bottom half where the trackpad is located, we see the same brushed metal texture, but the area surrounding the keyboard and upward uses a matte black plastic construction. This could be the result of some cost-cutting, but the plastic construction doesn’t feel cheap. If anything, you won’t have to clean the plastic bits as much as the brushed metal surfaces.

The front, back, and side edges all use the same plastic construction. There are two exhaust vents: one on the back edge and one on the left edge. The back edge features an ornate, chrome border surrounding the rear exhaust and I/O ports. The exhaust vents aren’t the flamboyant designs we’ve found on many laptops.

The Sager NP8165’s bottom panel is constructed out of plastic as well. There are abundant air intake cutouts on each side of the bottom panel, but this doesn’t compromise the panel’s rigidity. In fact, the panel is quite sturdy. There’s an additional exhaust vent on the left side of the chassis. There are four rubber feet at each corner and two plastic feet at the top and bottom edges of the panel to elevate the NP8165 slightly. Overall, the chassis construction is robust; there are no flex points, and even the areas constructed out of plastic don’t feel flimsy.

The Sager NP8165 (or rather Clevo’s design team) receives top marks for excellent speaker placement. Too many laptop manufacturers place speakers on the front lip of the system. Normal usage, such as typing and using the trackpad, will naturally block the speakers and inhibit the audio experience. The NP8165’s speakers are placed right next to the hinge, making it pretty difficult to block the sound.

There isn’t much to say about the NP8165’s hinge. It’s a bit stiff, and it swings back by about 135°.

The NP8165’s right I/O consists of a Kensington lock, an RJ-45 Gigabit Ethernet port, USB 3.0 port, two USB 3.1 Type-C ports, two card readers for MMC/RSMMC/SD/Mini-SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, a headphone jack, an SPDIF jack, and a microphone jack. The left side includes an HDMI 2.0 port, another USB 3.0 port, and two Mini Displayports. Finally, the backside has a final USB 3.0 port and the DC power input.

Display

The Sager NP8165 features a Full HD (1920x1080) matte IPS display with excellent viewing angles. The display also features G-Sync. The NP8165 can support three additional displays with its HDMI port and two Mini DisplayPorts.

Input Devices

The NP8165 features a scissor switches, a number pad, and customizable RGB lighting. The keys are well spaced and have a nice springy feedback. The RGB lighting features four levels of brightness, and the lighting areas are divided into the left and right hand sides and the number pad.

The trackpad is composed of several inputs. First is the trackpad, which is non-clickable. Tracking is decent, but the trackpad’s surface has a small bit of drag, and that introduces jerkiness when trying to make small, fine movements. Two separate buttons sit below the trackpad for left and right clicks. Separating the buttons from the trackpad eliminates issues like non-uniform clicking and dust traveling under the trackpad. Between the left and right click buttons is a fingerprint sensor for added security. The sensor is easy to setup, and logging in with it takes less than a second.

Interior

The bottom panel is secured to the chassis via 15 screws. Under the panel you get a clear view of the NP8165’s guts. Every laptop we’ve reviewed uses a unified cooling solution with heat pipes connected to both the GPU and CPU heat sinks. The NP8165’s cooling solution is split in two, with the CPU using one fan on the bottom left corner and the GPU using two fans on the bottom right. We'll see if that makes a difference.

There are two memory slots in the middle, two 2.5" SATA slots and one M.2 slot for storage on the top right, an Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 above the GPU’s exhaust fans, and a 60WH battery on the top. There are a few thermal pads attached to the bottom cover that are intended for the GPU's MOSFETs and inductors.

Software

Pressing Fn + / on the number pad opens the Control Center software, where you can adjust keyboard backlighting, create macro profiles, and track key usage statistics. Lighting effects include spectrum cycling, breathing, flashing, wave effects, and more.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Synthetic Benchmarks

The Sager NP8156 was the third Kaby Lake laptop to land in our lab this year (we have more on the way). It sports an Intel Core i7-7700HQ, a 6GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060, 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory, and a 256GB M.2 SSD. Unfortunately, this configuration doesn’t come with a 1TB 7200RPM HDD, which appears to be standard on all laptops around this price range. At 256GB, you’ll run out of space quickly if you’re the type of gamer who has your entire Steam library installed.

First up in our comparison group is the MSI GS43VR Phantom Pro, the first Kaby Lake laptop we reviewed. It also contains an i7-7700HQ CPU, a 6GB GTX 1060, and 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory. It features a smaller 128GB M.2 SSD but makes up for it with a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. In terms of raw performance, the NP8156 and Phantom Pro should be even, so the main differences will be found in thermal performance, display quality, battery life, and overall presentation.

Sager also offers the NP6852, which is a more value-oriented option. Its specifications are nearly identical to those of the NP8156 except for its 4GB GTX 1050Ti GPU. Comparing the NP8156 with the NP6852 will illustrate this GPU tradeoff. We'll review the NP6852 in full separately.

Finally, we have the GTX 1070-based Acer Predator 17, which is our top choice of GTX 1070 gaming laptops thus far. However, that model uses a 6th generation i7-6700HQ CPU. It also packs 16GB of DDR4 memory, two 128GB M.2 SSDs in RAID 0, and a 1TB 7200RPM HDD. The Predator 17 will show the extra power the GTX 1070 provides, and what—if any—upsides Kaby Lake brings to these systems.

3DMark

3DMark’s Fire Strike, Fire Strike Extreme, and Time Spy tests combine to exercise the entire platform. The results fall in line with our expectations, with the Acer Predator 17 flexing its GPU in the graphics portion of the test, and the three Kaby Lake systems neck-and-neck on the CPU-oriented parts of the benchmark (and ahead of the Predator 17 with its Skylake processor here).

Cinebench R15

Cinebench’s single core and multi-core tests are based on CPU performance, and the OpenGL shading test relies more heavily on the GPU. The NP8165, MSI Phantom Pro, and NP6852 score higher than the Predator 17 on the CPU parts, thanks to their Kaby Lake processors. That extra CPU performance also kicks in on the OpenGL portion of the benchmark, although its not enough to give the NP6852 and its GTX 1050 Ti the necessary lift.

CompuBench

Unlike Cinebench, which favors the NP8165’s i7-7700HQ, CompuBench performance is influenced by GPU horsepower, especially during the Bitcoin Mining test. Here the NP8165 falls behind the GTX 1070-based Acer. The performance difference between the NP8165 and the Phantom Pro is largely a toss-up, with only a minor gap. The GTX 1060 illustrates a considerable performance increase over the GTX 1050 Ti: about 45% when assessing the scores of the two Sager models side by side.

IOMeter

To test read and write speeds, we run IOmeter from the system's primary drive. Sager implements the Sandisk X400 SD8SN8U-256GB-1122 in both the NP8156 and the NP6852, so we should see similar performance. We'll compare the X400 with the Phantom Pro’s 128GB SK Hynix HFS128G39MNC-3510A and the Predator 17’s two 128GB LiteOn CV1s running RAID 0.

Sure enough, both X400s deliver similar performance in the random and sequential tests. The SK Hynix outperforms the X400 and RAID 0 setup in 4K random speed. The X400 performs a bit better than the SK Hynix drive in sequential speed, but the RAID 0 configuration of the Acer laptop is far better at loading large files like games, music, and other forms of media.

PCMark 8

We use PCMark 8’s Microsoft Office and Adobe Creative benchmarks to produce real-world workload performance results. Kaby Lake provides a performance boost, with the NP8156, Phantom Pro, and NP6852 holding a slight advantage over the Acer laptop, despite its stronger GPU. Content creators in the market for a mobile editing laptop should consider systems equipped with an i7-7700HQ for the best performance. 

Game Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

The Sager NP8156 goes head to head against the MSI Phantom Pro in Alien Isolation. This game isn’t very demanding, so the i7-7700HQ and GTX 1060 configuration is capable of superb frame rates. Alternatively, the Sager NP6852 delivers 94.35 FPS, or about 37% less performance. This is still a respectable frame rate, so you can invest in a cheaper configuration and save a few hundred dollars if this game is your jam.

Ashes of the Singularity

On the other hand, Ashes of the Singularity is much more taxing. The Sager NP8165 delivers a playable 37.7 FPS, whereas Sager’s low end offering isn’t quite capable of 30 FPS. The Acer Predator 17 performs much better because of its more powerful GTX 1070, but even then a smooth 60 FPS is still about 15 FPS out of reach. Whether you choose the NP8165 or go the GTX 1070 route, you’ll still need to dial back your settings if you want to enjoy 60 FPS.

Bioshock Infinite

Like with Alien: Isolation, getting good framerates isn’t out of the realm of possibility with a GTX 1060 in Bioshock Infinite. Our NP8165 easily surpasses 100 FPS, so feel free to keep your settings maximized. A GTX 1050 Ti can still deliver more than 60 FPS.

DiRT Rally

The Sager NP8165 comes so close to 60 FPS in DiRT Rally at maximum settings, so just a little tweak to the game settings will push this system over the 60 FPS threshold. On the low end, the NP6852 manages to deliver playable frame rates, but you'll need to make more severe compromises to bring it anywhere near a more robust GTX 1060 configuration.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V’s varied benchmark scenes stress our gaming laptops to different degrees. Some scenes are manageable and others downright demolish your framerate. Thus, the NP8165’s performance is a mixed bag, netting decent performance in most scenes at this price tag. The killer scene is Vinewood Sign, which drops the NP8165 to less than 30 FPS. You’ll need at least a GTX 1070-based laptop to exceed 30 FPS here; in fact Acer’s configuration comes close to 60 FPS in several scenes and surpasses it in Del Perro Pier. Note how tight the two 1060-based laptops are, performance-wise.

GRID Autosport

We’ve found that GPUs with high base clocks receive a considerable boost in GRID Autosport. The GTX 1060 is clocked higher than the GTX 1070 (1670MHz vs. 1645MHz), so the performance difference between the two is slimmer than you'd expect. Investing in the higher priced system only delivers 2% more performance, so you can safely choose the NP8165 if GRID Autosport is your game of choice and price is a major factor.

Hitman

Hitman is heavily impacted by GPU performance. The NP8165 delivers with a handful of frames to spare, but the stronger Predator 17 grants gamers that extra ounce of confidence. The NP6852 doesn’t fare as well because of its under-powered GTX 1050 Ti; it's almost 50% slower.

Metro: Last Light Redux

Metro: Last Light Redux is a heavier hitter than Hitman, so the NP8156’s performance falls below 60 FPS. The Acer Predator 17 offers about 37% additional performance, pulling the frame rate comfortably above 60 FPS. Still, this isn’t as bad as the underpowered GTX 1050 Ti, which cannot even deliver 30 FPS. Potential buyers will either have to live with the GTX 1060’s limitations and turn back the settings, or consider a more powerful, but higher priced system.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

If you thought Metro: Last Light Redux was tough on these laptops, think again. Rise of the Tomb Raider inflicts a heavier performance drop, landing our NP8156 down to about 39 FPS. Even the Acer laptop cannot handle RoTR’s demanding benchmark, so upgrading to a GTX 1070-equipped system won’t pull your frame rate above 60 FPS unless you dial back a couple settings. If you don't want to compromise here, you have to be willing to buy a GTX 1080-based system such as the MSI GT73VR Titan Pro.

The Division

The Division’s benchmark is a sigh of relief for the Sager NP8165, which is capable of 53 FPS; that'll easily translate to 60+ when you turns a few of the settings down. But of course, the Predator will offer just as much performance without a decrease in visual fidelity.

Thief

The Sager NP8165 delivers excellent frame rates in Thief, which is relatively easy-to-run title. Comparatively, the lower-end Sager performs 33% slower, or well below 60 FPS.

Battery, Thermal, And Display Testing

Battery Test - Tomb Raider 2013 Battery Rundown

To test battery life, we set each laptop’s battery profile to Balanced while running Tomb Raider’s built-in benchmark at the lowest detail preset. The frame rate is locked at 30 FPS through GeForce Experience’s Battery Boost to limit the strain on the battery. Meanwhile, a script running in the background monitors and time stamps the system’s battery percentage. The laptops are set to hibernate once battery levels reach 5%. We test the battery life twice at the laptop’s maximum brightness and at 200 nits.

The Sager NP8156 has demonstrated excellent performance so far, making its battery life scores a bit disappointing. It finishes in last place, lasting a little over 1 hour and 30 minutes. Comparatively, the more powerful Acer Predator 17 can game for an extra 15 minutes. On the upper end of the scale, the MSI Phantom Pro—packed with the same components—offers 20 more minutes of game time compared with the NP8156.

Thermal Testing

For our thermal testing, we use our Optris PI 640 infrared camera. For more information about how we test, be sure to check out our Measurement Science article.

At idle the Optris detects GPU heatsink and heat pipe temperatures hovering around 42°C while the CPU’s respective cooling solution (remember these are separate on this laptop) emits a warmer 48°C. After a 15 minute Furmark stress test, the GPU’s heatsink and heat pipes remain within an acceptable range of 71°C; our AIDA64 temperature log supports this with a maximum detected temperature of 72°C. On the other hand, the CPU's cooling doesn't handle the stress test very well. Furmark raises the heatsink’s temperature into dangerous territory, and the corresponding heat pipe doesn’t do much to alleviate the problem. The separate cooler design is refreshing to see, but it unfortunately it doesn't seem to help (or worse). Longer heat pipes spanning across both heatsinks and exhaust fans may have provided much better thermal dissipation. Admittedly, Furmark is an incredibly strenuous torture test, but a CPU shouldn't get this hot.

You'll also notice that the area around the GPU inductors and MOSFETs are incredibly hot as well, but our thermal tests are conducted without the bottom cover of the laptop attached in order to get a clear view of the GPU. The thermal pads will keep these components cool when the bottom cover is attached to the NP8165. The same cannot be said for the CPU.

Display Testing

We used the SpectraCal C6 Colorimeter to measure the NP8156’s display. Be sure to check out our Display Testing Explained article for a full description of our test methodology.

The NP8156 has a G-Sync display, which is useful for smooth framerates, but that hardly matters if the display  is inadequate. Luckily, our Colorimeter reports excellent contrast values; the white luminances are adequately bright while the black luminances are nice and dark. The crisp contrast creates a vibrant image that earns the NP8156 first place among this comparative set, although a handful of laptops have exhibited greater contrast levels in the past—the MSI GT73VR Titan Pro's display contrast exceeded 1200:1.

RGB balance is decent, but there's certainly room for improvement. From 0-30% brightness, the RGB levels are balanced, but you’ll begin to notice color errors as you turn your brightness higher. In particular, the green levels slowly drop while the red and blue levels stay relatively constant, creating a purple tint. At 100% brightness, the blue levels increase dramatically, adding more blue to that purple hue.

The NP8156’s gamma levels fluctuate wildly, rising above 2.2 until 30% brightness, and plummeting to around 1.8 from 50-90% brightness. This drags the average gamma far below our target of 2.2. The DeltaE 2000 values are quite high, which translates to abundant color errors. The NP8156 exhibits poor grayscale and average color accuracy; unfortunately Sager (or rather, Clevo) isn’t unique in this regard. Almost every laptop we’ve received struggles with grayscale and color accuracy.

Final Analysis And Verdict

It’s refreshing to see a system like the Sager NP8165. Its updated Intel Core i7-7700HQ grants the system additional performance in several of our synthetic benchmarks, including a notable improvement over the Acer Predator 17’s i7-6700HQ in single and multi-core performance in Cinebench. The 7th generation processor also demonstrates improved scores in workloads using PCMark 8’s Adobe Creative and Microsoft Office suites. Storage speeds are adequate as well, but the Sandisk X400 doesn’t deliver quite as much random read and write performance as the MSI’s SK Hynix drive, or the blistering sequential speeds of the Acer laptop’s LiteOn RAID 0 configuration.

The Sager NP8165 provides exceptional gaming performance for its price, and right on par with, or slightly better than the MSI Phantom Pro in almost every game. Nvidia’s GPU technology has improved to the point where previously demanding titles such as Metro: Last Light Redux can easily be run in excess of 60 FPS with minimal, or no graphical tweaking. However, as GPU technology improves, so does game quality and the demands of those more powerful game engines; our NP8165 struggled in new titles such as Rise of the Tomb Raider and Ashes of the Singularity.

The NP8165’s build quality is top notch as well. The brushed metal construction is solid and robust, but what’s most impressive is how rigid the plastic parts of the chassis are. We’ve found the bottom panels on several laptops to be points of weakness in the past, but the NP8165’s panel is quite sturdy. The only downside stems from one of its major upsides: the brushed metal finish easily attracts smudges and fingerprints.

One of the major compromises to owning a gaming laptop is battery life while gaming. A gaming laptop lets you play wherever you want, but a good gaming laptop lets you play for longer, and the upper limit we’ve found has been around 2 hours and 30 minutes. Unfortunately, the NP8165 delivers little more than 1 hour and 30 minutes, which is about as low as we've seen.

Another major consideration is the extra heat generated from the laptop’s closely packed components. A good cooling solution should be able to keep both the CPU and GPU cool, even at full load. The laptops we've tested use a unified cooling solution connecting heat pipes between both the CPU and GPU heatsinks and the exhaust fans, but the NP8165’s CPU and GPU cooling solutions are kept separate. This doesn’t appear to have any effect on GPU cooling during Furmark, but the CPU’s temperature skyrockets well into dangerous territory.

The Sager NP8165 has a decent Full HD IPS display with G-Sync. The display’s low black luminance and decently bright white luminance result in crisp contrast. However, RGB balance is slightly hampered by low green levels, making the NP8165’s display look more purple than normal. The grayscale and average color inaccuracies are rather high as well, and the gamma levels dip well below 2.2 at medium to maximum brightness.

The Sager NP8165 comes in at $1,600, making it a direct competitor to the MSI Phantom Pro, which is priced at $1,500. The two have nearly identical specifications, making performance strikingly similar. For an extra $100, you’re paying for the NP8165’s robust build quality, which the MSI laptop seems to lack, but you’re also sacrificing much needed storage space. The Sager has a 256GB SSD, which will fill up quickly, and while the MSI laptop only has a 128GB SSD, it also has an HDD for large media files and games. The Phantom Pro doesn’t have the best cooling or battery life either, but it is still significantly better than the NP8165 in that regard.

And such are the trade-offs at this price point.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Hands-On And First Impressions

[Editor's Note: The following content is intended to be a first look, with some hands-on impressions and a few benchmarks.]

Over the past year, we saw a renewed interest in desktop replacement laptops, which were made more practical and powerful by Intel's sixth-generation Core (Skylake) host processors and Nvidia’s Maxwell-based GPUs. The announcement of the GeForce GTX 980 MXM module was met with skepticism, but the benchmarks we've run demonstrate that the mobile component packs as much performance as its desktop counterpart.

Companies like MSI and Asus offer desktop replacements of their own design. Other brands purchase a common laptop shell and outfit the internals with their choice of storage, memory, graphics, and more. One such barebones platform is Clevo's P870DM-G. AVADirect doesn’t even pretend to call it something else; the company maintains that model name with its Avant P870DM-G.

We’ve seen the P870DM-G once before (or at least something very similar to it). The first massively powerful (and equally expensive) desktop replacement I tested was Origin PC’s beastly EON17-SLX. On paper, that's the same laptop I have in front of me today. However, AVADirect comes about as close to the stock Clevo configuration as you can get. It simply adds a company logo to the chassis.

Specifications

The real stars of this show are the Avant's desktop-class components. A Z170-based motherboard hosts an Intel Core i7-6700K processor and an Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 8GB module, offering the kind of horsepower only rivaled by dedicated gaming desktops. In comparison, the other subsystems are rather mundane.

The M.2 slot in this particular configuration is populated with a 250GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD running at SATA 6Gb/s data rates. Enthusiasts will likely groan at the lack of NVMe-based storage, and AVADirect’s product configurator doesn’t even give the option for PCIe/NVMe SSDs. A 1TB SSHD still provides plenty of space for user data.

AVADirect's Avant P870DM-G came with 16GB of DDR4, which seems a little entry-level for a desktop replacement. However, there's an option to upgrade to 32GB if you'd like. The stock memory featured exceptionally tight 13-13-13-35 timings. We don’t typically see laptop vendors stray from the standard DDR4-2133 CAS 15 SO-DIMMs (although there are a few exceptions, such as EVGA), and the lower latency yields a welcome speed-up for anyone working in throughput-sensitive applications.

The P870DM-G’s five USB 3.0 ports provide plenty of connectivity for peripherals and external storage. You can even connect a VR HMD (this configuration is VR-ready, after all). The USB Type-C port features Thunderbolt 3 connectivity with up to 40 Gb/s transfer rates in addition to USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10 Gb/s) data rates, but it lacks video output. For that, there are two mini-DisplayPort outputs and an HDMI 2.0 interface.

This isn't the lightest laptop at 10.6 lbs. You won't want to carry it on your back or set it on your lap for long. At least its weight is supported by the sturdy construction you'd expect from a premium device, with firm hinges and a solid chassis.

The on-board speakers in the hinge and underneath the cover provide clear sound thanks to built-in Sound Blaster X-Fi MB5 audio. The experience is decidedly above par compared to other laptops I've tested.

Display

The Avant P870DM-G features a 17.3-inch IPS display with Nvidia’s G-Sync technology, smoothing out graphics performance by synchronizing the panel's refresh rate to the GPU's output. This lets you increase detail settings, even if it means pushing frame rates below 60 FPS, without experiencing screen tearing or stutters.

With a GeForce GTX 980 inside, the P870DM-G’s 1920x1080 panel is slightly underwhelming. The GPU would be a better match to a QHD display. After all, Nvidia's GM204 processor is known for its ability to drive 2560x1440 desktop monitors deftly. Still, you can imagine that the Avant's frame rates are unreal, even in the latest AAA games at their highest detail settings. And if you really want to get the most from this laptop's graphics subsystem, try connecting an external monitor or two to its HDMI 2.0 port and mini-DisplayPort interfaces.

Input Devices

The multi-color backlit keyboard is comfortable for a gaming laptop. Creating profiles, recording macros and changing the LED colors is made easy with bundled Flexikey software, which can also record keystroke statistics.

Although most of us seldom game on touchpads, it's hard to avoid them during daily use. Fortunately, this one is fairly responsive, and its buttons react to minimal pressure. The fingerprint scanner between the left and right mouse buttons becomes increasingly obtrusive when you're using the touchpad, though.

MORE: All Laptops Articles

MORE: Laptops in the Forums

Benchmarks And Conclusion

Once again, we turn to an abbreviated version of our test suite to evaluate the Avant P870DM-G's performance, including 3DMark Fire Strike and Unigine Valley for synthetic gaming, PCMark 8 for productivity, and in-game metrics from Metro: Last Light Redux and Bioshock Infinite. We borrowed a technique directly from Nvidia to test battery life, running Tomb Raider’s in-game benchmark to drain the power source as a batch file collects the usage data until hibernation mode is forced.

Wait, No Overclocking?

We started testing the Avant by running our benchmarks at the laptop's stock settings. Afterwards (and because the notebook ships with an unlocked host processor and potent GPU), we loaded Intel’s XTU software and nudged the multiplier up a few notches in an attempt to procure additional performance. Instead, our results tanked in the face of lower-than-stock clock rates caused by throttling. Even after reverting to stock settings, the CPU encountered hobbled frequencies in a number of tests.

We reached out to AVADirect for guidance with our overclocking issues and were surprised to hear that the company doesn't support tuning on its P870DM-G. This is largely due to the system’s stock Clevo BIOS, which doesn’t support overclocking. The XTU software attempts to override this limitation, but mistakenly identifies the Core i7's default multiplier as 22x, which would slow the i7-6700K to 2.2GHz instead of the 4GHz it normally sustains. Moreover, the BIOS doesn't expose custom fan curves or even just a static rotational speed.

It may be possible to locate and load a BIOS capable of handling overclocking better (other vendors do this with the same platform, after all). However, that'd assuredly void your warranty. In the interest of giving you a full set of performance results, we removed the XTU software and re-flashed the BIOS to restore stock operation.

For comparison, we put the AVADirect P870DM-G against its nearly-identical counterpart, the EON17-SLX. Origin PC’s version of the same Clevo platform features a custom BIOS for overclocking and increased memory capacity and storage speed (a Samsung 950 Pro NVMe SSD). Naturally, it's more expensive at over $3300. We also used EVGA’s SC17 and the MSI GT72S Tobii (provided by Xotic PC), both of which come close to the Avant's price point. I also used a similarly-equipped desktop sporting the same chipset, CPU and GPU as the P870DM-G for a baseline. The components used in this desktop counterpart are detailed below.

Synthetic Benchmark – PCMark 8

AVADirect’s Avant beats its competition in PCMark 8, validating the company’s productivity-oriented customer base with narrow wins over Origin PC's EON17-SLX in the Home and Work modules. Given many similarities otherwise, lower-latency memory seems to be the differentiator. AVADirect enjoys a more significant lead in the Creative module, again helped by memory performance.

The Tobii sneaks into third place over the desktop configuration, which was tested with Intel's HD Graphics driver installed. Certain portions of the PCMark 8 tests automatically default to the integrated GPU if it is detected, and the desktop doesn’t reach its full potential in this benchmark as a result.

Synthetic Benchmark – 3DMark Fire Strike

The Avant P870DM-G scores a second-place finish in 3DMark Fire Strike, but it bests the first-place desktop configuration in the Graphics test by four points. Origin PC’s EON17-SLX also hangs tough with the GTX 980-equipped systems, and the SC17 and Tobii trail the pack.

The Physics and Combined scores of the desktop replacements fall short of the true desktop largely due to lower sustained Turbo Boost frequencies. Although the CPUs never drop below their specified clock rates, they simply can't maintain the same aggressive Turbo Boost states.

Battery Test – Tomb Raider 2013

Battery life (at least for gaming) is not a strong suit of any desktop replacement. Away from the wall, the Avant achieves about 1:24 of run time with Nvidia’s Battery Boost technology enabled, limiting the frame rate to 30. It’s not much of a surprise that the desktop components in AVADirect’s P870DM-G don’t last as long as laptops with mobile CPUs and GPUs, despite the big system's eight-cell, 89Wh battery. Of course, in basic productivity tasks, it lasts a lot longer.

Synthetic Benchmark – Unigine Valley

Unigine Valley primarily stresses the GPU, and it’s not a coincidence that the GTX 980-equipped systems all score within a few points of each other. AVADirect finishes in second place again, though the difference between the top three systems is negligible.

Gaming Benchmark – Bioshock Infinite

Although the Avant achieves the best average frame rate in the Town Center, Raffle, and Monument Island portions of the Bioshock Infinite benchmark, it places second in the Overall result due to the desktop’s significantly higher peak frame rate. Once again, the GeForce GTX 980s all fare similarly, while the laptops with more mobile-oriented components take a back seat.

Gaming Benchmark – Metro: Last Light Redux

The Avant P870DM-G places first again with a better minimum frame rate than its similarly-equipped competition. Although the desktop configuration and EON17-SLX achieve a higher peak than the Avant, their averages drop behind AVADirect’s system slightly. The Tobii and SC17 also hit higher peak frame rates than the Avant, but their averages and minimums more closely reflect the difference between GTX 980 and 980M.

Conclusion

AVADirect’s Avant P870DM-G holds its own against similarly-equipped competition, including a true gaming desktop. It readily beats the MSI GT72S Tobii and EVGA SC17 across the boards. Those laptops aren't on our charts because we thought they could outperform the Avant, though. Rather, they offer premium features (a 4K display on the SC17 and Tobii eye-tracking technology on the GT72S) and are priced in the same ballpark as the P870DM-G. The comparison speaks to the Avant’s price-to-performance ratio. It's faster than similarly-priced systems and sells for a few hundred dollars less than similarly-equipped laptops.

The Avant sports plenty of premium features of its own. G-Sync makes a huge experiential different in the latest games, and the desktop components offer superb performance. LED backlit keys and accent lighting really stand out; this thing looks the part of a true gaming laptop, and you'll certainly turn heads at a LAN party.

AVADirect’s lack of support for overclocking is going to turn off overclockers who want to squeeze every bit of headroom from their hardware. But the Avant consistently bests Origin PC’s overclockable counterpart at its stock settings. The margin is always small, but a slight lead speaks to AVADirect’s ability to provide a stable, high-performance machine. The lack of faster M.2 storage options is disappointing, though perhaps that'll invite the upgrade crowd to add their own drives, saving some money on a marked-up SSD.

The Avant P870DM-G keeps things simple with a Clevo platform free from the frills (and extra cost) of souped-up hardware. It provides exceptional desktop-class performance though, and appears to be one of the least-expensive mobile powerhouses out there.

MORE: All Laptops Articles

MORE: Laptops in the Forums

Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

AVADirect says it's the first retailer in the USA to offer Clevo's new Haswell-based gaming laptop, the P375SM. The portable rig promises the performance of a desktop solution but with a lower power draw than what was seen on the previous model, thus providing more battery life and more plug-free game time.

"The AVADirect Clevo P375SM Gaming Notebook is a direct example of the way in which mobile solutions must adapt to hold and win the interest of the growing enthusiast population," the company states. "[It] is designed for the gamer on the go, with little to no access to an outlet; the battery life will easily speak for itself."

With a starting price of $1995.74, the Clevo P375SM is powered by Intel's latest HM87 chipset. Configurations include the Core i7 Extreme, Core i7 and Core i5 "Haswell" processors, and up to 32 GB of DDR3-1600 SODIMM dual-channel memory. GPU options consist of Nvidia's GeForce GTX 780M 4 GB, GTX 765M 2 GB or ATI Radeon HD 8970M 4GB graphics from AMD – SLI and CrossFire options available.

The laptop also supports up to two SATA HDDs or SSDs with RAID0 and RAID1 capabilities, and an optional mSATA SSD mini-card. Also thrown into the mix is a built-in DVD±R/RW Dual Layer Burner, Wireless N and Bluetooth connectivity, and Gigabit Ethernet. There's even a Thunderbolt port, HDMI 1.4a output, four USB 3.0 ports (one powered for device charging), and a 9-in-1 card reader.

"The integrated speakers are powered by Onkyo, and have the ability to power an external 7.1 surround sound speaker system. Implemented due to popular demand, backlight keyboard, touchpad, and front bezel features are prominently displayed while the notebook is powered, presenting no challenge for the immersed gamer and their nightly gaming binges," the company states.

The laptop also comes with an integrated 2MP camera, a built-in fingerprint reader, an eSATA connector, and an optional TV tuner with remote, allowing users to plug in their cable or satellite feed and turn the portable rig into a full-fledged mobile entertainment center. Operating system options include Windows 7 and 8, Kubuntu, Fedora, CentOS and Debian.

For more information about the new Clevo P375SM gaming notebook, head here.

Meet Dell's XPS One Touch 27

Windows 8 represents Microsoft’s first earnest effort to bring mobile users back to the desktop (Ed.: Or is it the other way around?), where they can find huge quantities of local storage and vast computing resources to be more productive, create content, and game in a truly enveloping environment. A 5" screen just can't hold a candle to three 1920x1080 displays for any of those tasks.

For those of us glued to our desktops, not necessarily concerned about a convergence of phones, tablets, game consoles, and PCs, the Windows 8 interface is jarring. We saw it from your comments as soon as the operating system debuted. But we've been using it since last year and navigate around it fairly smoothly, particularly on multi-monitor configs that circumvent that interface almost entirely.

What about the folks using Windows 8 on a PC with a single screen? That's where the operating system seems to run into most of the resistance. The one thing hurting Microsoft the most with its touch-based interface is the lack of PCs with touchscreens.

Dell saw that coming.

If you have a mobile device with Windows on it, you already know that consistency between interfaces is nice. Really, though, you want functionality to match. A touchscreen turns Dell’s XPS One 27 from a device that resembles a super-sized tablet to a device that actually works a lot like one. And that capability adds only $200 to the price of the most entry-level $1,399 model.

Of course, Dell wants to show off. So we're testing something a little (lot) more deluxe.

The extra $1,000 brings with it a slew of upgrades, including the Core i7-3770S CPU, 16 GB RAM, the 32 GB SSD cache drive, a 2 TB hard drive, and Blu-ray reader/DVD burner.

Getting To Know The XPS One 27

The familiar Windows 8 UI is where we get the most touch functionality from Dell’s fabulous QHD (2560x1440) WLED TFT LCD panel. An 89° viewing angle and approximately 60° of tilt help you get more up close and personal to a device you'd typically look at from a foot or more back, while edge-to-edge glass reduces the likelihood that small spills might enter a seam and damage its electronics.

Height adjustment is this PC's biggest limitation, with the upper arm's narrow range of motion stopping the vertical screen approximately 1.75” above the desk. Tilt it back, and the arm lowers enough to give nearly 5.5” of drop. These constraints keep weight centered over the base to keep the system from tipping over.

A power button and hard drive activity LED are found on the chassis model 2710’s right edge, while touch controls occupy the lower-right corner of its face. The touch control all the way to the right operates a slot-loaded optical drive, with Blu-ray read support on our review unit.

The left edge hosts microphone and headphone jacks, USB ports, and an 8-in-1 media card interface. If you didn't already look at the spec table on page one, you might be surprised to learn that the USB ports are 3.0-compliant, even though they don't bear the standard's familiar blue color. The media drive also adds a feature—xD capability—to the expected SD, MMC, and MS standards.

Do you worry about spy software hijacking your camera? Dell’s mechanical shutter should help alleviate those concerns by physically hiding the 2 MP sensor's lens.

The 2710’s rear panel provides four USB 3.0 ports—again without the expected blue color coding—along with a gigabit Ethernet network jack, digital optical audio, HDMI out, HDMI in, and a full-sized PC power jack. HDMI input is pass-through-only, allowing the unit to act as a standalone display.

Though not present on this unit, Dell also offers an internal mini-PCIe TV tuner card on all four XPS One 2710 models.

Inside The XPS One 27

Yeah, you knew we were going to take this things apart. According to the service manual, all four XPS One 2710 models look the same inside. The base mount covers a single 3.5” hard drive bay, while a separate EMI shield covers the most-sensitive components.

With those two pieces removed, we see the 2 TB Seagate Barracuda ST2000DM001 in the center, a slot-loading version of HL-DS' 6x Blu-ray/8x DVD±R combo drive on the left, and the system board on the right.

Dell’s proprietary motherboard supports two DIMMs, one mSATA card, two mini-PCIe cards, and an LGA 1155 processor. Only one of the PCIe slots is open on this sample, though the mSATA slot is also vacant on cheaper versions that lack SSD caching. A mini-PCIe TV-tuner card is the only internal addition offered separately by Dell; all other options are package-specific.

Intel’s 65 W Core i7-3770S desktop processor is replaceable, but Nvidia’s GeForce GT 640M GPU is soldered directly onto the board.

Dell’s sturdy KM713 keyboard and KM632 weighted optical mouse are included with all 2710 packages.

The support kit includes a quick start guide, standard power cord with flat cable, and utility disk.

Test System Configurations

The XPS One 27 might be a simple concept, but its combination of desktop processor and notebook graphics make it hard to pigeonhole from a comparison standpoint. The closest notebook model we’ve recently tested was an SLI-equipped Sandy Bridge-E-based behemoth—not exactly a fair fight. And that review used defunct hardware.

The XPS One 27’s desktop CPU must instead go up against the top two contenders from our recent System Builder Marathon. Its tiny GeForce GT 640M graphics is forced to face off with the supersized Radeon HD 7970M of recent P170EM tests. And its combination of mechanical hard drive and fast cache drive gets compared to the storage subsystems of various machines from this line-up. Though it’s not in the same league from a quality or features perspective, the $600 SBM machine represents our target for “average” performance.

Results: 3DMark And PCMark

The XPS One 27 is no gaming PC. But then again, neither are most gaming notebooks, at least from the perspective of a hardcore PC gamer. On the other hand, our $600 System Builder Marathon machine offers roughly two times the performance of what we typically consider entry-level. Perhaps Dell's XPS One will produce half of its 3DMark GPU score?

For me, entry level gaming starts with medium-high detail levels and a low 1280x720 resolution. My entry level expectations aren’t very high, but a GPU score of only 1831 3DMarks is worrisome. Perhaps this all-in-one's proficient CPU will assist a few of our platform-limited games, such as Skyrim?

PCMark is heavily storage-focused, and this top-configuration XPS One 27's SSD cache drive helps it a great deal. Productivity still appears strangely low compared to the previously-tested notebook, though.

A 32 GB SSD cache is large enough to boost to the XPS One's individual storage scores.

Results: SiSoftware Sandra

This top-end XPS One's Core i7-3770S has a huge advantage in Sandra Arithmetic, though even the older notebook's Core i7-3610QM beats the Core i5-equipped desktops.

The XPS One 17" falls behind a bit in Sandra's Cryptography, which we know to be indicative of a memory bandwidth disadvantage since AES-NI feeds the processor instructions as fast as they can be loaded from RAM.

And as suspected, our bandwidth numbers are slightly lower than the platforms we're using to compare. That raises the question why so many SO-DIMM-equipped machines employ DDR3-1600 CAS 11, when DDR3-1600 CAS 9 is really quite economical now?

Results: Battlefield 3

The XPS One 27 is a general-purpose PC, and this high-end configuration is designed primarily to work through productivity-oriented applications with ease. We still think that a general-purpose performance PC should be able to produce playable frame rates at low resolutions, though. Fortunately, the Dell's 56.1 average FPS at 1280x720 using Medium quality settings in Battlefield 3 settings is actually pretty good. On the other hand, the notebook’s lead is surprisingly large.

Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

Skyrim is often seen to be platform-bound, but that’s because we often run the game on extreme graphics hardware. With minimal frame rate fluctuation in this title, a 44 FPS average at 1280x720 using the High detail preset appears super-smooth.

Results: F1 2012

Our notebook dropped out of this test, due to its issues with AMD's Enduro technology. While that also prevents the game from appearing in our overall performance charts, it’s nice to see that the XPS One 27's weaker mobile graphics processor can push this title up to the screen’s native 2560x1440 resolution.

Results: Far Cry 3

Our Far Cry 3 benchmark is too new to show up in notebook evaluations from last year, and the fact that we don't have data for all systems means we need to leave it out of the overall performance evaluation. But we still wanted to see if the XPS One's mobile discrete GPU could still handle this title competently at 1280x720. That setting appears smooth, in spite of its mediocre 33.4 FPS frame rate. Lower quality settings are always an option, though we specifically like this title for its lush detail.

Results: Audio And Video Encoding

Our single-threaded audio transcoding benchmarks don't benefit from the Core i7's Hyper-Threading technology, but we thought that the XPS One's slightly higher clock rates would put it on top. Instead, we find that the best this system can do is to tie the $800 PC’s Core i5.

Conversely, our video transcoders do benefit from the Core i7 four physical and logical cores, yielding enough of a speed-up to put the XPS One in first place.

Results: Adobe Creative Suite

Adobe After Effects tends to favor platforms with lots of RAM, which appears to be true: the XPS One 27 and Clevo notebook, both armed with 16 GB of memory, finish in first and second place.

Between our Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and Acrobat tests, two of which are well-threaded, one of which is single-threaded, and one of which exploits graphics processing, it's clear that the Dell system holds its own as a productivity and content creation machine. That's impressive, given its all-in-one form factor and low-power components.

Results: Productivity

Again, we see the XPS One's Core i7 processor, 16 GB of memory, and fast storage subsystem come together and skate past several of our recently-built desktops, plus a Core i7-equipped notebook. As a platform for productivity tasks, Dell's setup does well.

Results: File Compression

We know from experience that 7-Zip is well-threaded, exploiting physical cores and benefiting from Hyper-Threading, too. The command performance from our Core i7s corresponds with our experience yet again.

In contrast, WinRAR's algorithms don't appear quite as well optimized. So, the Core i7s aren't set apart from the Core i5s we're using to compare in that workload.

The XPS One's Core i7 also appears to help in two of our WinZip tests, though the difference primarily reflects its slightly higher clock rate.

Average Performance Dissected

Available across a wide range of price points, all of the 27" XPS One systems share a few characteristics in common. Unfortunately (though perhaps necessarily, given strict thermal limits), one of those things is Nvidia's GeForce GT 640M, which is soldered directly onto Dell's motherboard. If the GT 640 is entry-level by desktop standards, then we know the GT 640M must be fairly low-end by notebook standards. That means the XPS One isn't going to be a very capable gaming platform. On the bright side, though, a very fast Core i7-3770S helps with performance, particularly in platform-bound games like Skyrim and F1 2012. The result is a system able to handle medium detail settings at 1280x720.

The XPS One 27 passes our entry-level gaming minimum requirement, which is as much as we can expect from a machine that isn't really built for gaming anyway. Better still, its CPU is fast enough to rock every system we threw at it (even the gaming notebook we used as a frame of reference).

While it appears that the thermal constraints of an all-in-one chassis remain an obstacle to a truly well-balanced configuration, Dell's reliance on a 65 W quad-core processor gives us productivity and content creation performance that rivals and then exceeds the best efforts of Intel's mid-range Core i5 CPUs, which commonly show up in our budget-minded System Builder Marathon boxes.

Power, Heat, And Efficiency

The 27" XPS One's display is amazingly efficient, with a 16 W delta between it turned off completely and running at maximum brightness. That helps this platform achieve a similarly-amazing 53 W idle power consumption result, which includes a desktop CPU, a mobile GPU, and the monitor. Incidentally, this also forced us to add monitor power to the consumption results of our System Builder Marathon setups.

The Clevo notebook uses far less power, but also has a less-potent CPU and a far smaller screen.

The 27" XPS One runs really hot due to its fan profile that favors pleasant acoustics over comfortable thermals. We could have forced the fan to ramp up a little sooner at higher ambient temperatures, though. Doing so would have taken those temperature results down at the expense of more fan noise.

Unfortunately, low-end graphics performance hurts the XPS One's efficiency rating compared to the gaming notebook, which wields better gaming performance at lower power use. If we factor out the graphics portion of our overall performance evaluation, minimizing the emphasis on gaming, we can point to a larger display and a more powerful CPU for the -17% delta that remains.

A Productivity PC For Windows 8

Dell’s XPS One 27 isn't a workstation, per se. But the flexibility to support high-end processors makes this Core i7-equipped, 16 GB-enhanced, SSD-cache improved all-in-one a performance monster in non-gaming applications. With its huge 27” ten-point touchscreen, it might even be the perfect product for collaborative creation.

But we're not seeing this thing marketed as a serious creativity tool. Instead, I went to Dell’s website and found this pumped-up rig next to the other, less expensive versions of the 27" XPS One, positioned as the world's most powerful personal gadgets. 

That angle makes sense when you start with the entry-level $1,400 model, but when we start playing around with $2,600 machines, we're well out of the realm of general-purpose playthings. For that amount of money, you want a serious workstation or a potent gaming box. Because our flagship XPS One is still stuck with an entry-level discrete GPU, work is the only place left for this top-end configuration to excel. And that it does.

As a desktop user, I’m still frankly more productive using previous Windows versions, even after growing accustomed to Windows 8’s idiosyncrasies. Perhaps that's because I'm on a next-gen operating system using the same keyboard and mouse inputs I've been using for decades. Yet, every day, fewer people are staying tethered to their desktops. They're using their fingers to navigate their mobile devices. And Dell is betting that when they get home, they want the same sort of experience.

That means factoring in the cost of a gorgeous 27" QHD screen into what we expect to pay for a capable machine. Even if we set aside $1,000 of the budget for Dell's display, $1,600 for the rest of the system is fairly steep. Take a look at one of more mainstream models, though. Paying $1,600 total for the entry-level touch-enabled model is actually pretty fair for a Core i5-3330S, 6 GB of DDR3-1600, a 1 TB hard drive, wireless networking, and a keyboard and mouse. Yes, you step down to Intel's HD Graphics engine in the process, but if you're willing to sacrifice gaming for a less expensive workhorse, the compromise seems smart.

Dell trades blows with the 27" iMac at its $1,600 price point, selling for $200 less and including a touchscreen display, while Apple gives you GeForce GTX 660M graphics and more memory. Those subtleties are probably less important to most folks than the fact that Dell keeps you in the world of Windows, while Apple shifts you over to OS X.

The Better Half: A Mobile Device User's Perspective

As a desktop enthusiast who spends most of his time in the office, switching between PC hardware on the test bench and my personal workstation, I'm hardly the best person to pass judgement on Windows 8's touch-based experience. Between Tom's Hardware staff, I've argued that the best description of Dell's XPS One 27 would come from someone whose primary link to technology came from mobile devices. I didn't need to look very far to find such a person. Meet my wife.

I’m your average (mobile device) consumer, who wondered what it would be like to own a large touchscreen-enabled PC. Instead of pleading with my husband to buy one, I visited his office to check out the technology he had for review. Lo and behold, there was Dell's XPS One 27. He knew I had been watching CES 2013 coverage, and he already knew I wanted to try out the latest round of Windows 8-equipped all-in-ones. He also knew I was going to have my way on this one.

So, he gave me the opportunity to take the XPS One with me to my office for a few days, as long as I gave him my impressions for today's story.

First of all, because this is an all-in-one, the weight of the system and the display are combined, so it's pretty heavy. Elegant as it is, don't make the mistake of thinking it's mobile. You won't want to lug it around. Second, consider that although Dell bundles a mouse and keyboard, the inclusion of a touchscreen display means you're going to spend more time (some) with your hands on the monitor than before (none). Keep glass cleaner and a cloth handy, because finger prints are unavoidable and distracting. 

Aesthetics are important to me, and this computer has many qualities I find attractive. Because I'm using a wireless network connection, the only cable I see is for power. Gone are all of the wires typically associated with a desktop PC. Also, you can reorient the screen to lay down, like a podium. The display itself is incredibly sharp. And because I'm not as jaded as my husband when it comes to high-end hardware, the combination of fast processor, copious memory, and tiered storage means performance, in my opinion, is unlike anything I've ever seen. 

-Alisa Soderstrom

Portable Gaming On A 17.3" Screen

While the contest between mobility and performance rages on, most enthusiasts will probably be fairly satisfied with some of the mid-size solutions out there. A combination of Intel's Ivy Bridge and Nvidia's Kepler architectures first took us by surprise in Eurocom Racer 2.0 Review: Intel's Ivy Bridge Meets Nvidia's Kepler, where those two worlds collided to give us stunning performance and reasonable portability.

But what would happen if a company combined the moderate thickness and weight of a mid-sized notebook with the larger screen of a desktop-replacement? And how might buyers respond to such a configuration, packed with high-end 3D graphics, at mid-market pricing? Digital Storm thinks it found a winner in Clevo’s P170EM.

Part of the value in Digital Storm’s custom-built x17 notebook comes from its reliance on AMD’s high-end Radeon HD 7970M graphics, a part that exhibited fairly strong performance in Xotic PC NP9150: Striking Back At Kepler With Radeon HD 7970M. But some folks rightly mentioned in the comments section that the graphics module's performance in a few games appeared weak, purportedly an issue with the company's Enduro technology.

We approached AMD about the issue and got the full story: its drivers were afflicted by a bug that bottlenecked the GPU, keeping it from being fully-utilized, particularly in situations where high frame rates were expected. The company promised a hotfix, but shied away from putting a date on it.

The company sort of fulfilled its promise by rolling the hotfix into its Catalyst 12.11 Beta release (now up to version 8)...on the desktop. We still haven't seen an official update on the notebook side, though, so part of today's story is going to require Digital Storm proving that AMD's Radeon HD 7970M was the right GPU to put in its x17 as the Pitcairn ASIC goes up against Nvidia's GK107 and GF114 parts. The company is off to a good start with a less expensive Ivy Bridge-based processor, but will AMD pull its weight in this competition, too?

Digital Storm’s x17 is available in four basic configurations, and each can be further customized based on your needs. We received the $1777 configuration, which is a step up from the baseline build, with no further customization.

In addition to the flexibility Digital Storm allows on its parts list, the company also offers three warranty levels. An extra $126 gets you four years of labor and two years of parts protection, while a $247 premium secures five years of labor and three years of hardware coverage. The firm’s labor plan also honors manufacturer-backed component warranties above and beyond the plan you purchase.

Getting To Know The x17

A total weight of 11 pounds, including the adapter and power cord, sounds pretty heavy. But that's actually a fairly big achievement for a 17.3” gaming notebook, which often weigh anywhere from 12 to 18 pounds. Part of that slim-down can be credited to Clevo’s chassis design, but a big chunk of the x17’s weight savings come from more efficient CPUs and GPUs. This newer notebook model gets by with a smaller power brick and lighter heat sinks than many of the gaming notebooks we've reviewed in the past.

Clevo supplies the lightweight LED-backlit screen that helps to keep the notebook itself under nine pounds.

A clean front edge make it easy to work with the x17 on your lap, though we suspect it wouldn't be comfortable to game like that for very long.

The x17’s left edge includes gigabit Ethernet connectivity, three USB 3.0 ports, and a flash media interface slot. As you can see, the third USB port integrates eSATA support, too. Meanwhile, the media slot supports most SD, MMC, and MS formats.

The x17’s right edge adds digital audio output and analog input to the familiar headphone output and microphone input, along with a single USB 2.0 port. If you so desire, Digital Storm will upgrade stock 8x DVD burner to a 6x Blu-Ray burner for $89.

DisplayPort connectivity updates a rear panel that also includes HDMI and DVI outputs. In theory, the platform should support three simultaneous outputs (the panel, plus two external screens). One of those would need to be hooked up via DisplayPort.

Though you can use one if you have it, the outdated DVI-to-VGA adapters is not part of Digital Storm's bundle.

The support kit does include an OEM-packaged Windows CD, driver disk, and CyberLink Media Suite 8, along with the power brick, AC cord, and a low-cost notebook bag.

Inside Digital Storm's x17

On the previous page, we suggested that heat might limit the amount of time you'd want to spend gaming with the x17 on your lap, and fan location is the primary reason for that. With intake vents almost perfectly aligned to your legs, starving the cooling subsystem of airflow seems like it'd be easy to do on accident.

Once we pull off the bottom covers, we see the hard drive and half of the notebook's memory. Those parts can be removed without unscrewing anything else.

A second 2.5” drive bay is exposed by sliding out the optical drive (right). CPU and GPU fans are mounted directly to the chassis, and can be left in place if you need to pull off their corresponding heat sinks.

Four #1 Phillips screws secure the CPU heat pipe, and are easily removed. The GPU and graphics memory sinks are held in place by smaller #0 screws. The CPU socket latch and GPU module stand-offs are slotted for a thin flat-head screwdriver.

The x17's baseline 750 GB hard drive saves $80 compared to the 120 GB Intel SSD 520 found on Xotic PC's NP9150. The hard drive also adds a bunch of storage capacity, though it's naturally quite a bit slower.

Also shown in the above photo are the secondary drive tray and the optical drive that covers it. If you want both capacity and speed, add an SSD to one of the system's two bays.

Hardware And Test Setup

Even though the x17 is larger, it relies on the same P150HM battery as the competing mid-sized models in today’s review. Its 220 W power brick is carried over from larger-sized predecessors.

Benchmark Results: DiRT 3 And F1 2012 Problems

DiRT 3 has a history of being more easily bottlenecked on platforms backed by AMD graphics solutions. That's why we thought nothing of it when we saw low performance numbers from this title in Xotic PC NP9150: Striking Back At Kepler With Radeon HD 7970M. It turned out, however, that DiRT 3 was suffering from AMD's Enduro graphics bug.

We installed AMD's Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3 build and immediately saw significantly higher average frame rates, giving us a good indication of just how driver-limited the original driver from Clevo really was.

When we really tax the graphics subsystem with DiRT's Ultra quality preset and 8x MSAA, the Radeon HD 7970M stomps Nvidia's GeForce GTX 675M.

But then we stumble across another problem. We're in the process of updating our testing suite from an old set of games, which included DiRT, to a new set, which includes F1 2012. For some reason, Enduro doesn't work with Digital Storm's configuration and F1 2012 using the original Clevo driver, Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3, or even Beta 4. We know it worked on a different notebook using the same driver from Clevo, so the problem appears specific to this platform. In essence, when we configure the game to run on AMD's graphics module, the game tries to launch, is visible as a running process consuming resources, but never shows up.

For now, the solution in F1 2012 is to run the game from Intel's HD Graphics 4000 engine. That's good enough to get us through 1280x720 using the High quality preset. But of course, anything more demanding is simply unplayable.

Also, you'll notice that we mentioned the Beta 4 build of AMD's Catalyst 12.11 driver, but tested using Beta 3. The newer version was unstable on this hardware, and became increasingly unstable over time. Fortunately, the latest Beta 8 release gets us back to Beta 3 performance levels without the stability issues of Beta 4.

Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 And Metro 2033

AMD's Radeon HD 7970M already established its dominance in Battlefield 3 using Clevo's bundled driver, so we were surprised to find that this title was also affected by the Enduro bug. Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3 uncorks what initially appeared to be a platform bottleneck, but turned out to be a lack of data making its way to the Pitcairn GPU. Low-resolution performance enjoys the largest speed-up, though there's even a quantifiable gain at 1920x1080 all the way up through Ultra quality detail.

New drivers help the Radeon HD 7970M at our lower Metro 2033 settings, but slow the game slightly at our more taxing profile.

Benchmark Results: Skyrim And StarCraft II

Though the performance improvements in Skyrim appear small (since this title is actually platform-limited), AMD's new drivers with fixed Enduro functionality still propel Core i7-3610QM-equipped Digital Storm x17 past the Core i7-3820QM-enhanced Xotic PC NP9150.

Nvidia's GeForce GTX 675M appears rather weak, making it pretty obvious that we still haven't had a notebook with the company's GeForce GTX 680M come through the lab yet.

New drivers accelerate Digital Storm's x17 through StarCraft II at all settings.

Benchmark Results: Audio and Video Encoding

A faster processor helps both Core i7-3820QM builds beat Digital Storm's Core i7-3810QM. No play-by-play analysis is needed here. If these workloads are important to you, buy a faster host processor, plain and simple.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

Again, we see the Core i7-3820QM's higher clock rate serve up an advantage compared to Digital Storm's baseline x17. Will the cost of a pricier CPU play out in the efficiency charts? That's what we'll figure out on the next page...

Power Consumption, Battery Life, And Efficiency

The x17's idle power consumption is slightly lower than the rest of the field, and yet its full-load draw is nearly identical to what we measure from the NP9150. That also means Digital Storm's machine gets about the same gaming battery life, which is a respectable 45 minutes (give or take a few).

Battery Eater Pro concurs with our battery-backed gaming tests, showing the x17 and NP9150 with nearly identical battery life at medium load.

Efficiency compares energy to work, so we use average performance to begin its calculation. Xotic PC's NP9150 was first notebook in our lab with AMD's Radeon HD 7970M inside, so it sets the basis for comparing Digital Storm's competing model.

Remembering that the x17 is less expensive and armed with a larger screen (something we certainly consider valuable), a modest 7% performance shortfall sets it up for great overall value rating. But before we get to that, let’s see how its performance compares to its power consumption.

The original graphics drivers were optimized for Clevo's Radeon HD 7970M module, so we’re not surprised to see it take a small lead in overall efficiency. We’d ignore the performance average, though, and go straight to gaming performance when is comes to choosing the right driver for a gaming notebook. Efficiency goes down a bit, we're sure, because AMD's GPU is no longer starved for data, leaving it underutilized. By fixing Enduro, the Pitcairn chip uses more power, but serves up better performance in return.

Does A Fixed Radeon HD 7970M Help Digital Storm?

Digital Storm surprised us by taking on its competition's expensive CPU and SSD with lower-cost parts in an attempt to improve value.

The cheaper CPU offsets the difference in system price, while the conventional hard drive gives Digital Storm an extra $80 to spend on a chassis with a larger screen. The company ends up with a 6% overall value lead before we even begin to consider how much more its 17.3” display is worth (actually a little comparison shopping on Digital Storm's site tells us that the display is worth $54).

A few more configuration changes allow us to create the same system on Digital Storm's page that we received from Xotic PC, and we end up with roughly the same price, within a few dollars. Digital Storm isn’t what we'd consider a low-cost builder, but the company knew how to pick the parts that'd make its setup appear as price-optimized as possible. Bravo!

Getting back to the primary purpose of these notebooks, we wanted to see how each one compared in terms of gaming performance-per-dollar.

Most of our games are not CPU-bound (particularly when they're backed by a 3 GHz+ Core i7). So, processor performance isn't a major factor in the frame rates observed for our gaming value chart. Digital Storm's original x17 configuration comes within 1% of Xotic PC’s average performance at 1920x1080, and the processor’s lower price boosts the system's overall value significantly. When you arm it with a Core i7-3610QM, the x17 has 13% more gaming value than Xotic PC's smaller notebook with the faster CPU.

The big number is where AMD's Radeon HD 7970M rides in on a white horse. Performance enhancements to a somewhat-better driver (remember, we're still seeing problems in F1 2012, even with Catalyst 12.11 Beta 8) combine with Digital Storm's good processor choice to give it a commanding 29% lead. We can only hope that a final version of AMD’s Enduro-patched driver is released soon, and that a Clevo-specific version is able to fix the issues that remain.

The Eon17-SLX sells from $1,858 and can be ordered with CPUs up to Intel's Core i7-3940XM processor overclocked to 4.5 GHz, Nvidia's GeForce 680M or AMD's 7970M graphic cards in SLI or CrossFire configurations, up to 32 GB of DDR3 memory. There is also an option that lets users upgrade the 17.3-inch 1080p display to a 3D version with Nvidia's Vision 2 3D glasses for $305.

If there is a downside, then it is that this Eon17-SLX is based on a whitebox design that is sold by Clevo as the P370EM3. The difference between the bulk and the Origin PC shell is Origin's logo on the lid. There is a good chance that other variations of the notebook design will emerge or already exist in the market. Clevo sells the P370EM3 as a "high-end mobile solution" that is the "thinnest 17.3-inch laptop with Dual 100watt VGA in the world".

The 3D version of the Eon17-SLX is priced from $2,163 and a fully decked out model with two GTX 680M GPUs, an overclocked 3940XM CPU, 32 GB memory, a Blu-ray burner, and two 480 GB SSDs will send you into the $6,000 neighborhood.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}

Can Xotic PC Provide More Value?

The gaming notebook market is divided between tier-one manufacturers, customer-direct distributors, and boutique builders. The biggest reason to buy from one of the first two options is a warranty on hardware that comes straight from the hands that built your machine. Most of them last from one to three years, and many can be extended right at the point of sale.

Custom notebook builders generally offer a larger range of component and software options, add-on peripherals, chassis customization, and enhanced technical support. Often, that comes at a price premium that enthusiasts are reluctant to pay. Yet, not every builder charges the same rate for its bespoke services.

Xotic PC is out to offer its customers the best of the custom-built market at the smallest markup possible, going so far as to add lifetime labor to the phone support offered by most of its competitors. Power users still get the manufacturer’s full range of warranty options, too.

Today we see if Xotic PC can really deliver on its value promises.

AMD's Radeon HD 7970M, Exposed

We already examined Clevo’s P150EM in Eurocom Racer 2.0 Review: Intel's Ivy Bridge Meets Nvidia's Kepler, though Sager, a distributor of Clevo's whitebook designs, renames it to the NP9150 before it gets to Xotic PC. Aside from the logos, it’s the same chassis.

Opening up the machine reveals very similar cooling to what we saw on Nvidia's GeForce GTX 660M. The Radeon HD 7970M has the same basic cooler design as the GeForce, but with custom-matched contact surfaces.

The Radeon HD 7970 GPU is composed of nearly three billion transistors, and it takes up much of the graphics module's real estate, even in light of TSMC's 28 nm manufacturing process. But isn't AMD's Radeon HD 7970 supposed to have 4.3 billion transistors?

The Radeon HD HD 7970M obviously doesn't boast the Tahiti core with which its model name is most commonly associated. Rather, it's a more power-optimized version of the same Pitcairn GPU found in the desktop Radeon HD 7870. It’s not all bad that AMD chose a smaller die for its flagship mobile GPU, we just wish it had picked a more appropriate name. At least they’re both current-generation parts based on a 28 nm node.

By comparison, Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 675M isn’t even part of the same generation. Its GeForce GTX 560 Ti (based on the Fermi architecture at 40 nm) was a top value in its day, but even that card was replaced long ago by a more-powerful 448-core version. We’d like to come down harder on AMD for its naming tomfoolery, but Nvidia is the guiltier party in this specific case.

System And Benchmark Configurations

We have no clue why Eurocom chose a three-module memory configuration for its dual-channel notebook, and we certainly wouldn’t have asked Xotic PC to do the same for comparison purposes. These two configurations are otherwise well-matched, except for the graphics modules that are the focus of today's comparison.

Even though the same motherboard and CPU is used by both systems, changes in memory configuration and GPU overhead caused us to include a mid-sized battery of non-gaming applications in today’s benchmark suite.

Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 And Metro 2033

Xotic PC’s custom-configured NP9150 starts with a huge lead over the higher-priced Racer 2.0 with its GeForce GTX 675M in Battlefield 3, obliterating the more closely price-matched configuration with a GeForce GTX 660M build in the process.

This leadership remains strong through our Ultra quality preset testing. Only the Radeon HD 7970M-based system is able to push a playable frame rate.

Metro 2033 scales a little differently than Battlefield 3. Even the Radeon HD 7970M-equipped NP9150 needs lower resolutions to get through the game with a depth-of-field filter enabled.

Xotic PC continues to demonstrate big leads at every Metro 2033 setting, but only the title's High preset is completely playable at the screen’s 1920x1080 native resolution.

Benchmark Results: DiRT3, StarCraft II, And Skyrim

AMD's architectures have a history of affecting CPU scaling in certain games. We've seen this in a few of our older system builds, but occasionally in other graphics comparisons. We certainly didn’t expect this issue to affect a notebook employing Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture, even though the mobile models are slower than the desktop versions.

Paired with AMD's Radeon HD 7970M, the Core i7-3820QM limits DiRT 3 to around 73 FPS. Higher detail levels shift enough of the workload to the GPU that it becomes our bottleneck, and that’s where Xotic PC’s custom-configured NP9150 excels.

Xotic PC’s Radeon HD 7970M continues its overall dominance through our Skyrim tests.

StarCraft II is Xotic PC’s gaming coup de grace, having overtaken its competitor in a broad majority of 3D benchmarks.

Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding

The bottlenecks that we mentioned on the previous page should only affect 3D applications that push very low GPU loads. Productivity and content creation applications aren't affected.

The trend in audio and video encoding performance appears to favor Xotic PC’s NP9150 configuration, despite their similar CPUs. We can think of one possible reason for this: Eurocom built its notebook using three 4 GB modules, while Xotic PC used four. It makes most sense to install memory in pairs, since the mainstream-oriented Ivy Bridge architecture has a dual-channel controller.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

Adobe Photoshop shows both notebooks performing comparably, which doesn't surprise us since they leverage the same processor and motherboard. Xotic PC’s four-DIMM memory array, which operates in a true dual-channel mode, provides no benefit here. Though, even a single channel of DDR3-1600 is probably adequate for most programs.

Autodesk 3ds Max and ABBYY FineReader appear to benefit from Xotic PC’s memory configuration, though none of our compression benchmarks are affected.

Power Consumption And Battery Life

Apart from their graphics modules, the Xotic PC NP9150 and Eurocom Racer 2.0 are nearly identical.

Desktop enthusiasts might wonder how AMD's Radeon HD 7970M and Nvidia's GeForce GTX 675M happen to have similar power requirements, and the easy answer is that both are designed to fit into the same chassis. Any power consumed is dissipated as heat, and both modules are designed to operate under similar cooling capabilities.

Battery Eater Pro shows that the NP9150 takes a little less time to discharge, and a little more time to charge. Since the same battery model is used by both machines, it's possible that the NP9150’s battery may have been used before, though it's hard to say for sure.

We also tried a little gaming on battery power, and discovered that the Xotic PC machine's performance dropped by about two-thirds when it was unplugged. That loss is completely correctable through configurable power settings, and the specific option we needed to change is also shown in AMD's Catalyst Control Center.

Changing the PowerPlay battery-use setting to “Maximize Performance” brought back all of the expected 3D performance, but also significantly shortened the length of our gaming experience. The NP9150 with a Radeon HD 7970M is roughly tied with the Racer 2.0's GeForce GTX 675M in game time at approximately 25 minutes. Meanwhile, the Kepler-based GeForce GTX 660M extended our session to around 43 minutes, though its performance is also quite a bit slower.

Average Performance, Efficiency, And Value

Xotic PC promised us better gaming performance at a lower price compared to its competition. We were the ones to specifically ask for the same CPU and SSD so we could focus on comparing AMD's and Nvidia's current-gen graphics modules. The crew at Xotic PC did (wisely) add a fourth memory module, however, and that change slightly boosts the performance of our encoding and productivity applications.

A huge speed-up in gaming performance will be partially reduced in our efficiency chart, since that measurement uses the average of all benchmarks and power tests.

Since the previous GeForce GTX 675M-equipped configuration set the performance mark that Xotic PC was hoping to beat, we also used it as the basis of our efficiency evaluation. An average performance gain of 11% combines with an average power savings of 6% to give Xotic PC an average efficiency increase of 17%

Priced nearly 8% less than its competition, the NP9150 also generates a huge 21% value lead.

Did AMD's Mobile Graphics Lead Xotic PC To Victory?

Xotic PC is determined to undercut its largest competitors, and it did this time around by pairing a higher-cost GPU with a lower final price. The company did this without dropping customer support, by including limited lifetime labor and a free telephone hotline with the same one-year basic component coverage as its competition, and still offering two- and three-year service upgrades similar to those available from other vendors in the industry.

But we picked this setup for a gaming value shootout against another boutique builder, and we wanted to know how each configuration stacked up at the panel’s native 1920x1080 resolution.

When you buy it with AMD's Radeon HD 7970M, the Xotic PC NP9150 provides around 56% more gaming value than its GeForce GTX 675M competitor. Much (if not most) of this credit goes to AMD. We recalculated the NP9150's value using the GeForce GTX 675’s $100-lower price and 28%-lower performance, and showed that its lead would have dropped to only 14%.

Indeed, AMD helped lead Xotic PC to gaming performance and much larger value victories. Though the company's processors continue to struggle balancing performance and power, AMD’s graphics guys have recently found relatively smooth sailing from the isles of Tahiti to Pitcairn.

By now you’re probably wondering, “but what about Nvidia's GeForce GTX 680M?” We asked the same question, but came up empty-handed in our search for hardware. Price was probably part of the problem, since the GeForce GTX 680M costs about $245 more than the Radeon HD 7970M. We think Xotic PC was looking for the big value score, and our research shows the company probably made the best choice.

Portability remains a notebook’s killer feature, so we’re moving forward to test an even more compact gaming notebook, in spite of our curiosity about the GeForce GTX 680M. Perhaps the next model after that will have Nvidia’s flagship mobile GPU?

Update: Taking AMD To Task On Enduro

I’ll be the first to admit that it’s difficult to keep up with everything that goes on in technology. While our eyes are turned to the latest tablet, a new SSD, or an upcoming processor, a bit of news surfaces, causes a brief stir, and disappears again. For anyone affected, a misbehaving piece of hardware remains a thorn that everyone is expected to be aware of. So, we understand the frustration when a vendor is allowed to get away with slow support for a high-end (expensive) component.

In the case of AMD’s Radeon HD 7970M, GPU underutilization issues were simply something we hadn’t seen before. They certainly didn’t hamper Thomas in today’s story.

But what you should expect out of us is that, when an issue does come up, we’ll be on top of it. And when readers started linking to forum posts about a problem with AMD’s newest flagship and its Enduro switching technology, we jumped.

On a phone call with company representatives earlier today, AMD admitted that its current implementation is indeed affected by a driver bug that prevents the hardware from being fed data fast enough, causing it to go underutilized, particularly at high frame rates. This is specific to Enduro-equipped configurations because the Radeon GPU is operating through integrated graphics, utilizing the PCI Express bus as a display engine. As a result, there’s a balance issue between data coming in and data going out you wouldn’t see from a notebook equipped only with discrete graphics.

Alienware’s M17x can be made to work around this problem. How? The notebook has a hardware-based multiplexer that, after a reboot, can turn off Enduro and make the Radeon HD 7970M a standalone GPU.

Why didn’t the issue come up in our story to begin with? Two reasons. First, if you look at our gaming benchmark results, there are only a couple of instances where the Radeon HD 7970M doesn’t scale quite as we’d expect, and those are in games already known to be fairly platform-bound. This could have easily been attributed to the Core i7-3820QM. Second, by AMD’s own admission, the degree of underutilization is most pronounced at low resolutions and high frame rates, but can affect frame rates from anywhere between 10 to 35%. Our emphasis is on higher resolutions and more demanding settings.

Now, what’s being done on AMD’s part to fix all of this?

According to the company, it has a hotfix that will go live first—purportedly in October. I’m working to get readers access to an early build earlier than that, but AMD is naturally apprehensive about the potential support ramifications of this. Representatives claim that the fixed driver will alleviate the bottleneck entirely, and the only performance hit you’ll be able to measure will be the expected 1 to 5% attributable to going through integrated graphics.

So, there we have it. An issue does exist, AMD is aware of it, a fix should be showing up in less than a month that rectifies the bug, and we’re working to get you early access. Of course, as we see in the benchmarks, even with the bug affecting performance, AMD’s Radeon HD 7970M has little trouble distinguishing itself.

And by the way, if you’re encountering weak performance on a 64-player map in Battlefield 3, consider that the workload is more CPU-bound than anything, and that a stock-clocked mobile processor is probably your weak point, not the GPU. We do read the comments, after all. ;)

Cheers,
Chris Angelini

Mobile Model Shenanigans: What's In A Name?

Power consumption is the big neutralizer when it comes to separating desktop and mobile component design. As you know, power is dissipated as heat, and heat is public enemy number one. We certainly can’t walk around with three-inch-thick notebooks that consist of more copper than component space and require desktop-sized power supplies. Even if such a device were portable, we surely wouldn't want it resting on our...laps.

So, we're not unreasonable here. The idea that certain pieces of hardware have to be downclocked before they're deemed suitable in notebooks is acceptable to us.

But then came the naming games. The earliest any of us can remember a mobile part being upgraded (in spirit, at least) to an inflated model name was when ATI’s Radeon 9600 XT magically turned into the much larger Mobility 9700. ATI could have excused that move with the explanation that the Radeon 9600 XT outperformed an underclocked Radeon 9700 desktop GPU at similar power levels, but that was just the beginning of a long journey down the rabbit hole.

Stranger the naming became, until we finally ended up with underclocked upper-mainstream gaming GPUs getting the names of their extreme counterparts in the Radeon HD 6970M and GeForce GTX 580M. But all of that paled in comparison to one of AMD’s most recent mobile releases, the single-GPU Radeon HD 6990M.

You might expect the 6990M to consist of two Radeon HD 6970M GPUs, since that's how we get a desktop-class Radeon HD 6990.

Instead, we see AMD switch from an underclocked version of its Radeon HD 6850 to an underclocked version of its Radeon HD 6870. Whereas the desktop Radeon HD 6990 has almost two times the raw computational power of the Radeon HD 6970, the 6990M gains less than 25% over AMD's 6970M.

Both AMD and Nvidia excuse this naming disparity by affixing their flagship desktop model name to their flagship mobile products. However, we see this as a great way to deceive uninitiated notebook buyers. After all, the performance profile of each desktop GPU is trumpeted to the masses before the notebook GPUs with similar names are introduced. So, “common knowledge” works against the partially-informed buyer.

Man, just imagine if Intel called its mobile flagship the Core i7-3960XM. Though, at $1050, the four-core, 2.7 GHz Core i7-2960XM is only one digit away from following along...

Amidst all of this, some say that the other limitations of mobile computing make additional GPU power unnecessary. Notebook screens are relatively small, with moderate resolutions that typically don’t require as much graphics horsepower to drive. Although they exist, we haven't yet tested any mobile gaming platforms capable of spanning across three screens via Eyefinity or Surround, and single-screen resolutions as high as 1920x1080 aren't particularly taxing on today's graphics processors.

Nevertheless, today we’ll we compare the real performance differences between desktop and notebook GPUs while testing within the limits of a real high-end desktop replacement notebook.

Test Settings And Benchmarks

Although a desktop builder could put two dual-GPU Radeon HD 6990 graphics cards into a single system, notebook builders are stuck with two GPUs at most. MXM modules are simply too small to accommodate two large GPUs, let alone the power circuitry and doubled-up memory resources. So, we're going to put AMD’s mobile graphics in the best possible light by comparing two of its mobile Radeon HD 6990M modules to a single desktop Radeon HD 6990.

Nvidia isn’t getting a pass for its own indiscretions. We're also comparing a pair of its GeForce GTX 580M graphics cards to a single GeForce GTX 580. Nvidia's solution can't be included in as many of the tests, since we no longer have access to the mobile modules we'd need in order to run some of our newer benchmarks. That also explains why the older 280.26 display drivers were used. But it's worth noting that Nvidia is guilty of the same naming practices.

Fortunately, our legacy gaming suite include GPU-busters like Just Cause 2 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat.

Notebook motherboards are generally pretty limited with regard to their features. So, a budget desktop motherboard using the same chipset makes for the most accurate comparison. ASRock’s X58 Extreme3 fills the need for desktop graphics connectivity.

Benchmark Results: Crysis

Retired immediately after our previous GeForce GTX 580M review, Crysis has shown us bottlenecks in everything from GPUs to storage subsystems. GPU performance scales a little faster than CPU performance, which is one of the reasons we began looking for newer benchmarks to stress our graphics configurations.

This could be the perfect example of why so many owners of AMD cards insist they be tested on overclocked Intel platforms: the Radeons appear more CPU-bottlenecked than the GeForce solutions, and even the stock Core i7-990X CPU used by all configurations isn’t enough to overcome that shortcoming.

Big spenders don’t want to play their games at 1680x1050. But, if they had to, they’d find both of the single-GPU mobile configurations to be unacceptably slow using High quality details and 4x AA. The dual-GPU setups remain CPU-bottlenecked, for the most part.

Our highest 1920x1080 settings are where AMD's Radeon HD 6990M CrossFire finally catches up to the GeForce GTX 580M in SLI. The desktop card needs even higher resolutions to prove its superiority, but this is the point where we run out of scalability on the notebook's panel.

Both AMD and Nvidia demonstrate a single desktop card outpacing two of their notebook-oriented modules named too similarly for our comfort, which starts to illustrate our point about customers potentially being led astray as they spec-out their notebooks. A higher available resolution would have simply driven this point home more definitively.

Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2

Just Cause 2 applies a lighter CPU load than Crysis, giving every configuration a chance to achieve higher frame rates based on unfettered GPU muscle.

Desktop cards begin to show their might at 1920x1080. However, this application still leaves us wanting a higher test resolution to further illustrate the differences between mobile and desktop graphics models. Note that a single Radeon HD 6990 is more than twice as powerful as a single Radeon HD 6990M, even at the medium resolutions supported by notebook displays.

Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

The Call of Pripyat benchmark shows the desktop 6990’s superiority over its notebook namesake, even at a low 1280x720 resolution.

The GeForce GTX 580M SLI setup's advantage over one desktop GeForce GTX 580 sibling might appear a little strange, if not for the knowledge that the GF114-based GeForce GTX 560 Ti (on which the mobile part is actually based) does really well in SLI.

As expected, the desktop Radeon’s performance advantage grows as resolution increases. SLI continues to scale well in this benchmark. So, we're left looking at the AMD cards, wishing for even higher resolutions to push up to.

Benchmark Results: DiRT 3

We added DiRT 3 testing to our notebooks only after returning the mobile platform with GeForce GTX 580Ms installed, leaving AMD to stand on its own in this desktop-versus-notebook graphics comparison.

Ouch. We would have expected 1280x720 to be CPU-bottlenecked, but the single desktop card is already outpacing a pair of notebook modules bearing the same model number (minus that very important M, of course) by a wide margin. Buyer beware!

We think its both sad and wrong that two Radeon HD 6990Ms can’t beat one Radeon HD 6990 when complemented by the same CPU, memory speed, and chipset. Pathetic.

Benchmark Results: Metro 2033

AMD’s Radeon HD 6990M CrossFire solution is again decimated by one Radeon HD 6990 in Metro 2033.

There’s not much left to say as resolutions increase. But we can summarize by saying that the 6990M isn’t powerful enough for our highest Metro 2033 test, even in CrossFire, and even at a modest 1920x1080 resolution. Although partially-informed buyers can only blame themselves for insufficient research, in their shoes, we'd still be demanding a refund.

Benchmark Results: StarCraft II

What's wrong with our StarCraft II results? Both the dual-GPU desktop and mobile CrossFire solutions are CPU-bottlenecked, and the game appears to have a slight tendency toward the Clevo-built platform.

Cutting Through Mobile Graphics Naming

With Nvidia’s mobile solution no longer available to us when we started adding newer games to our notebook suite, we were forced to break today’s benchmarks into two groups. Performance differences in the older collection of tests were tightened by CPU bottlenecks in Crysis, while StarCraft II caused the same phenomenon in the newer group.

With a mix of resolutions starting at a unrealistically-low 1280x720, the desktop Radeon HD 6990 outpaces a pair of Radeon HD 6990Ms by around 10%. However, most readers will really want to see is how these solutions perform at a high-end notebook’s 1920x1080 native resolution.

A few folks tried telling us that CPU bottlenecks would make 1920x1080 results meaningless for pair of Radeon HD 6990M graphics modules. And still, the dual-GPU desktop card still outpaces the notebook solution by around 13% on average. And that’s with a known CPU-bottlenecked game thrown into the mix for both gaming suites.

Nvidia is only slightly less-guilty than AMD since it doesn’t give any of its mobile modules a model number equal to one of its dual-GPU desktop cards. In other words, its fastest mobile product wasn’t forced to face-off against a GeForce GTX 590. Though we don't witness the same bloodbath suffered by the AMD mobile-to-desktop comparison, it still takes two GeForce GTX 580Ms to approach the performance of a single GeForce GTX 580.

AMD rates its Radeon HD 6990 at nearly four times the power consumption of its mobile counterpart, while Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 580 desktop card draws 2.5 times the wattage of its mobile sibling. We've already heard the arguments from both AMD and Nvidia in justifying the deception: "these are our fastest mobile products, and we can't deflate the names so long as the other side is doing it too." Our assertion (and cautionary benchmark results) stand, though. Today's naming is marketing-driven, spurred by AMD and Nvidia trying to one-up each other in promoting mobile architectures, and it only continues to worsen over time. 

While the performance of these mobile solutions with dual GPUs often appears wonderful at 1920x1080, anyone who expected one Radeon HD 6990M or GeForce GTX 580M to facilitate adequate performance is going to be sorely disappointed. One desktop card can certainly shoulder those loads, though, so we remain dissatisfied with the way mobile naming continues to be handled.

Better? Faster? Cheaper?

Always ready to scrap, Nvidia was quick to respond to AMD's Mobility Radeon HD 6970 In CrossFire On Eurocom's Panther by pointing to lower-cost vendors selling dual-module versions of its solution at a lower price. It was finally time for us to put the whole “AMD vs. Nvidia” mobile performance supremacy debate to rest, at least when it comes to this generation of cards.

With the sole goal of testing both performance and value claims, AVADirect supplied a configuration identical to its competitor’s except for three items: the HDMI input device included by Eurcom was removed, the Bluetooth feature removed by Eurocom was replaced, and the pair of GeForce GTX 485 graphics modules in SLI would take the place of the previously-tested Radeon HD 6970 CrossFire solution.

AVADirect’s GeForce GTX 485M-based solution is several hundred dollars cheaper than its competitor’s offering based on Radeon HD 6970M, in spite of its identical processor, memory, operating system, and storage. Even the Bluetooth module AVADirect supplied is priced similarly to the HDMI input modules supplied by its competitor (according to that competitor’s price sheet), making today’s system appear a better value than the one previously reviewed. Our benchmarks will reveal whether that apparent increase in value rings true.

Taking It To The Limit, One More Time

Gamers might be better served by Intel’s latest Sandy Bridge-based mobile processors, but Clevo’s LGA 1366-based X7200 remains the only chassis capable of supporting Nvidia’s hottest graphics modules in SLI. Capable of holding both Core i7 and Xeon processors with up to six physical cores, AVADirect equipped this workstation-class notebook with an enthusiast-class Core i7-980X Extreme.

Regular visitors will notice the recycled images. Nothing has changed about the X7200 since last year’s introduction, though AVADirect made the thoughtful move to include a second power supply with today’s configuration.

Remembering that each of these 300 W power units is larger and heavier than a traditional facing brick, we were happy to find that the second power adapter is only required under unrealistically-extreme use scenarios (such as using FurMark and eleven threads of Prime95 simultaneously).

We’ve even discussed how the GeForce GTX 485M’s specs resemble those of an underclocked GTX 560 Ti, though we’re told it uses the older GF104 core with power-optimized BIOS and software. This power-saving design compares favorably to AMD’s Barts-based Radeon HD 6970M, at least on a specifications sheet.

With no new parts to show, let’s see how this new configuration of previously-reviewed components performs!

Test Settings

We retained the GeForce GTX 470M performance data from our previous Radeon HD 6970M review to help gauge Nvidia’s performance spread. Though it appears to use a newer driver, Nvidia has not yet developed a single driver that supports both mobile modules.

Notice that significant differences between builds are limited to the installed graphics modules. Because of that, anyone looking for “interesting” results will probably want to jump directly to game test results.

Benchmark Results: PCMark And Sandra

Although many folks use synthetic benchmarks as a primary metric for performance evaluation, we put our faith in real applications whenever possible. Readers who compare test results between different online sources should find the specific results more useful, though no more revealing.

PCMark shows that the only real difference in performance is small, and primarily limited to drive throughput. Differences of less than 10% are usually due to drive conditioning, adding little to the discussion.

Large difference in Sandra 2011 would have most likely been caused by configuration issues or excessive overhead for a component. Fortunately, that level of deviation does not exist.

Benchmark Results: Non-Gaming Applications

Graphics modules are the primary differentiator in today’s test configurations. Non-graphics applications should confirm the performance parity of other components.

An average difference of less than one second in timed applications should be good enough to qualify these as “equivalent” builds, apart from graphics modules.

Benchmark Results: Crysis

This generation of GeForce mobile graphics modules is potent at our lowest Crysis setting, with a single GeForce GTX 485M exceeding the performance of a CrossFire pair of Radeon HD 6970Ms. The GeForce GTX 470M’s single win was likely a fluke, yet the system is no longer available for re-testing.

CrossFire rises to the middle at 1680x1050. Our test notes show that dual GPUs are required to play this resolution at Very High details and 4x AA.

The GeForce GTX 485M SLI-based setup keeps its crown through the notebook panel’s native 1920x1080 resolution. Our test notes suggest that only the two top solutions were able to play the game at our highest setting without noticeable stutter.

Benchmark Results: F1 2010

AVADirects’s GTX 485M SLI configuration beats the 6970M CrossFire competition at our lowest F1 2010 settings, though most high-end hardware buyers wouldn’t choose this resolution.

The Radeon HD 6970M CrossFire’s good AA performance stands out at higher F1 2010 resolutions. On the other hand, our test notes show that even the weakest graphics configuration maintains minimum performance greater than 20 FPS.

Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2

Our toughest Just Cause 2 settings limit the single GeForce GTX 470M to a low 1280x720 resolution when smooth game play and super-high quality are required. The single Radeon HD 6970M isn’t much better, but superior multi-GPU scaling makes a CrossFire pair supreme.

All three multi-GPU configurations are adequate for our highest-end test, while single-GPU configurations require a reduction in quality to generate smooth play at the panel’s native resolution.

Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

The S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat benchmarks’ preference for Nvidia hardware puts AVADirect’s GTX 485M SLI configuration on top, yet even the weakest single-card is good enough to run this demo smoothly at 1280x720.

While the single cards survive our test at 1680x1050, SLI or CrossFire is required to reach 1920x1080 smoothly when using the benchmark’s Ultra quality preset and 4x AA.

Benchmark Results: 3DMark

We put 3DMark at the end of today’s benchmark set because of its issues with SLI and, more specifically, our unsanctioned solution.

3DMark 11 didn’t support SLI from the outset, its publisher claiming issues with Nvidia’s drivers. Nvidia’s recent 266.66 desktop graphics driver adds SLI support to 3DMark 11, but doesn’t work with notebooks. Furthermore, the firm’s notebook driver development is typically several weeks behind its desktop software.

The easiest workaround we could think of would be to install desktop drivers on a notebook. Potential problems with that solution include possible overheating and crippled power management, but other than fried GPUs what’s the worst that could happen?

Because our “modified drivers” are unsanctioned and not used for the rest of today’s test, we placed the added results at the bottom of our charts. Comparing the single GeForce GTX 485M’s sanctioned (notebook driver version 265.77) and unsanctioned (desktop driver version 266.66) results, we see very little change. Yet, the unsanctioned drivers make a huge difference in SLI, where AVADirect’s configuration is roughly equal to its competitor’s CrossFire configuration.

Thus, we’ll treat the modified driver results as a preview of “fixed” 3DMark performance as we wait for an official release from Nvidia (as of March 24, 2011, there is a new driver posted to Nvidia's site, though there is no mention of SLI support for 3DMark in its release notes). At 3DMark’s Performance preset, the GeForce GTX 485M SLI setup with modified drivers falls only slightly behind the 6970M CrossFire solution.

Positioning remains consistent through 3DMark’s Extreme preset, with the 485M SLI a close match to the 6970M.

Though we haven’t seen any recent games with the SLI issue, ubiquity of 3DMark scores should have prompted Nvidia to shift into high-gear when it came to mobile driver development.

Power Consumption And Battery Life

AVADirect’s build appears to have lower idle power consumption than any of its competitor’s configurations. Though we have serious doubts about the GeForce GTX 485M’s ability to run 17 W lower at idle than the GeForce GTX 470M, improved GPU power-savings techniques could account for at least part of this improvement. Other system optimizations, such as an improved BIOS from Clevo, an improved CPU stepping from Intel, or even a “luck of the draw” CPU with lower gate leakage could account for the remaining idle power differences.

The GeForce GTX 485M uses far more power than either the GTX 470M or HD 6970M at full load, but appears slightly more miserly at low load. Battery Eater Pro is a great application for applying a low load, and could help us to reveal more about the single 485M’s power behavior.

The single 485M’s big lead in idle power use is seen as a noticeable improvement in battery life. The 485M SLI’s smaller power advantage over the 470M SLI is seen as a far smaller improvement in battery life. That is to say, the battery life chart proves the usefulness of the power consumption chart, at least at idle.

Jumping back up to the top, we also see that FurMark pushes the 485M SLI system to 336W at the wall while using only one CPU thread. Previous tests have shown that a 420W draw trips the power supply’s 15A protection circuit, and that continuous loads of 400 W activate heat protection after several minutes. The possibility that some users will attempt to push both CPU and GPU power limits simultaneously explains why AVADirect supplied this unit with two power bricks. The more-miserly (at full load) Radeon HD 6970M CrossFire configuration gets by (barely) with only one.

Because the Chicony PA09-022A 300 W power brick is roughly twice as big and far less efficient than SilverStone’s 450 W SFX unit, we’re going to make the unprecedented recommendation that Clevo should either design or contract a specialized, 350 W power unit for its next workstation-class notebook using the highest-efficiency components it can find. While high heat in a sealed power supply normally decreases efficiency, a custom design could use an extruded-aluminum, finned housing to cool its components. People who pay thousands of dollars for the “best” hardware would likely tolerate an extra $20-50 added to the notebook’s price in exchange for the added portability of a single power unit.

Nvidia Returns

Nvidia didn’t take long to respond to AMD’s Radeon HD 6970M CrossFire threat, firing back with its own high-end mobile part in SLI. AVADirect was standing at the ready, armed with Clevo’s X7200 and ready to take on ammo from its willing supplier Nvidia.

Using the same X7200 notebook and non-graphics hardware, AVADirect's GTX 485M SLI machine provides around 6% better average gaming performance at around 10% lower cost than its competitor's 6970M CrossFire solution. That sounds like improved value to us. Yet that value is vulnerable, attacked with a simple price cut on high-margin parts. Once this review was written and posted, AVADirect updated its pricing, listing its own Radeon HD 6970M CrossFire configuration for several hundred dollars less than the tested GeForce GTX 485M. Adding a reduced-cost 6970M option to its configuration sheets allows AVADirect to retain its price leadership, while potentially handing the graphics value crown back to AMD.

Our trepidation over weight is universal across today’s test candidates, with the dual-GPU X7200 package weighing 17 pounds, including its AC adapter. Adding a second power brick pushes this thing to 20.6 pounds, which is more than some gaming desktops weigh. And even though a 20.6-pound notebook still packs up much more conveniently than a desktop and peripherals, most of us will likely wait for a lighter Sandy Bridge-based model before making any financial commitments.

Bigger Bang In A Smaller Package?

As the mobile vendors who specialize in DTRs try to prove their battery-equipped workstations can replace performance-oriented desktops, many appear to have forgotten that most people like to carry their portable devices farther than the distance from their office to their car. Due to the extra cooling and energy needs of high-performance components, any effort to reduce weight has come at a huge cost in capability.

That is, until now.

The recent launch of Intel’s Core i7-2920XM CPU, which brings massive efficiency gains to the table, puts desktop-class performance into mid-sized notebooks, addressing exactly one half of a “high-end” notebook’s typical shortcomings. The other half of the middleweight performance problem is graphics, to which Nvidia thinks it has an answer in its GeForce GTX 485M.

The combination of these latest components looks good on a spec sheet, but we had to find out how well these worked in actual games and applications. MALIBAL was ready to help us find out, sending its mid-sized Lotus P150HM for evaluation.

The configuration we received adds over $2000 over the base model, including the $895 CPU upgrade from the standard Core i7-2630QM and a $495 upgrade from the GeForce GTX 460M. While many of these upgrade rates seem at least somewhat reasonable, substituting Intel’s 120 GB X25-M for the base model costs $5 more than purchasing the drive separately from Newegg. Though reinstalling the OS would have been a nuisance, there’s little chance any of us would pay someone $5 to take the standard 320 GB drive off our hands.

MALIBAL’s Lotus P150HM

With a combined notebook and power brick weight of only 8.8 pounds, the Lotus P150HM is different from every other Clevo-based design we’ve tested. Those differences aren’t limited to weight, as the entire unit is given a grippy texture that feels like rubber, rather than the traditional polished or anodized aluminum panels for which the manufacturer is known. MALIBAL’s logo is proudly displayed below a 1920x1080, LED-backlit panel.

A 2.0 MP webcam is situated in the familiar location, within the display panel’s bezel.

Two USB 3.0 ports are surrounded by gigabit network and a USB 2.0 ports. Clevo’s 9-in-1 flash media drive is standard.

An IR receiver cover is found on the P150HM’s front edge, but this version didn’t include a remote to use with it.

A second USB 2.0 port is found on the right edge, along with the optical drive and audio ports.

HDMI, dual-link DVI, and eSATA connectors are all conveniently placed on the P150HM’s rear edge.

We were surprised to find CyberLink’s BD and DVD solutions bundled separately in the Lotus P150HM’s support kit. Clevo includes the platform driver CD and a DVI-to-VGA adapter, while MALIBAL adds the OS and upgraded wireless controller disk.

Inside The P150HM

We were a little disappointed to find no ExpressCard slots on the P150HM, especially after opening the unit to discover an empty PCIe x1 slot. Yet, it appears the absence of any external card slots is meant to make additional room for a larger battery. MALIBAL upgraded from the standard Wi-Fi combo adapter to Intel’s high-end Ultimate-N 6300, losing the standard adapter’s Bluetooth functionality in the conversion.

Beneath two heat sinks are the parts that make the P150HM a potential desktop-slayer, its Core i7-2920XM CPU and GeForce GTX 485M GPU. MALIBAL filled every memory slot in its Lotus P150HM to push total capacity to 16 GB, and even the graphics module is upgradeable using standard Clevo graphics modules.

A plastic sleeve with foam strips holds the drive firmly in place, but we have to ask Clevo why it didn’t just put the foam strips on the bay cover…and avoid the plastic sleeve?

A 77 watt-hour battery looks fairly large for a notebook this small, and gives us hope that we may be able to use the seven-pound P150HM as “more than a portable desktop."

Fortron Source’s 180 W power brick is much smaller than the ones used for Clevo’s larger models, yet weighs almost as much at 1.8 pounds. At least the smaller size makes it easier to pack away.

Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 485M

Nvidia’s GTX 485M looks almost exactly like its most recent preceding product, and there’s a good reason for that.

It appears that this is a different version of the same IC, with the added memory expanding its bus width from 192- to 256-bits. We pressed further to see exactly how this GPU stacked up to its relatives.

We had heard that the GeForce GTX 470M would have the “fully functional” version of the desktop GeForce GTX 460’s GPU. But as it turns out that honor was reserved for the GeForce GTX 485M. The GTX 460 was a great card for its time, even winning our coveted awards for both its single-GPU performance-value and its amazing SLI scaling. Naturally we have high hopes for it here.

Notice that the GeForce GTX 485M’s main specs closely match the GeForce GTX 560 Ti. Nvidia remains mum on whether the GTX 485M is based on the GTX 460’s original GF104 core or GTX 560 Ti’s revised GF114 (Ed.: all indications point to this being GF104), but we’re certain that the clock-optimizations made in the GTX 560 Ti conversion are not needed at the GTX 485M’s lower frequencies.

Nvidia is going further to enhance the power-to-performance of its top-end notebook model. Though, like all of Nvidia’s notebook parts, value has been forcefully thrown kicking and screaming out the top-floor window of a 32-story building, its remains stamped into dust by Nvidia’s marketing department.

According to the price sheets of various Clevo partners, this bare module costs approximately four times as much as a theoretical 2 GB desktop GeForce GTX 460 with all of its insides turned on. We blame neither Clevo nor MALIBAL, as this appears to be specifically related to Nvidia’s mobile GPU pricing structure. To be fair, AMD employs a similar practice, marking up its own mobile parts to cost significantly more than their desktop equivalents.

We're sure both companies would try to justify the increase with discussions of thermal engineering and volume. But it's hard to ignore the naming that at least suggests you're getting something as fast as a GeForce GTX 480 (there is no 485 on the desktop) or Radeon HD 6970, when in fact these are lower-performance versions of derivative chips (in Nvidia's case) or completely different architectures (in AMD's). This is one of those situations where it certainly pays to educate yourself before buying. Customers who don't, and end up drawing those parallels between mobile and desktop model names, are setting themselves up for disappointment.

Test Settings

Benchmark Results: Crysis And F1 2010

XoticPC’s G73JW has been retained in today’s benchmarks to reflect the capabilities of a previous-generation, high-end gaming notebook of similar weight. The firm already has a Sandy Bridge alternative that we hope to test soon.

Yes, the GeForce GTX 485M can play Crysis at the panel’s native resolution and a high level of details, so long as AA is disabled. An elder game, this has become more of a system-wide benchmark, as other engines have been optimized for newer graphics architectures.

1280x720 is a viable option for anyone who really wants to crank up Crysis details on a 16:9 panel, but we’d probably prefer to play the game at the previous settings and 1920x1080, if we still played it.

The GeForce GTX 485M appears CPU-bottlenecked at our lower F1 2010 settings, even though it’s paired with Intel’s awesome Core i7-2920XM. Fortunately, that bottleneck occurs well beyond the minimum FPS needed to experience smooth game play.

F1 2010 apparently prefers AMD's architecture, though the GeForce GTX 485M-equipped Lotus P150HM is still perfectly playable at our highest settings. We even recorded minimum FPS and found that the slowest system in today’s comparison pulled at least 20 FPS throughout the test.

Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2 And S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

Just Cause 2 appears to approach a CPU limit at 1280x720, yet the GeForce GTX 485M in MALIBAL’s Lotus P150HM pulls ahead at more-desirable resolutions.

Adding even more detail in Just Cause 2 puts enough strain on the GTX 485M to make the game choppy in some scenes, yet it retains its position over the Radeon HD 6970M. Rather than drop to 1280x720, we’d more likely reduce details to the previous settings and play at the panel’s native resolution.

MALIBAL’s GeForce GTX 485M-equiped Lotus P150HM leads through the Call of Pripyat benchmark’s highest settings, and a look at our test notes reveals that it’s the only configuration to maintain at least 20 FPS throughout the most difficult scenes. This could be the only hardware configuration to meet both the quality and the portability needs of some gamers.

Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding

We threw our complete applications benchmark suite at the Lotus P150HM simply to see if there were any problems. Of course, there weren’t, so most readers will probably want to jump forward to our power and battery tests.

Retaining the data from a Core i7-940XM-based notebook hammers home the performance advances of Intel’s latest mobile processors.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

As was the case with our previous applications, we didn’t see any CPU-related performance problems when comparing MALIBAL’s Lotus to an unbranded model with different graphics cards. The performance advantages of Intel’s Core i7-2920XM over its previous flagship remain stunning.

Benchmark Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

We saw that most games prefer the Lotus P150HM’s GeForce GTX 485M, yet 3DMark11 prefers the competing AMD solution.

PCMark Vantage has a similarly-small preference for Nvidia graphics.

Driver overhead can have some effect on CPU performance, but Sandra shows minimal difference. The elder Core i7-940XM loses badly.

Sandra's Memory Bandwidth test shows that little, if any, of the new CPU’s performance is attributable to advances in its memory controller.

Power, Efficiency, And Battery Life

Intel’s latest mobile CPU is designed with efficiency in mind, but that’s not necessarily going to put a notebook with class-leading GPU on top.

The above chart appears to show that Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 485M has lower idle power, in spite of its higher full-load consumption. Perhaps its improved performance will still allow the Lotus P150HM to have higher efficiency?

Lower idle power should also help in our battery life test, since Battery Eater Pro has fairly-light CPU and GPU loads.

Though road warriors would likely sacrifice any gaming capability in exchange for longer battery life, a gaming notebook that can last at least an hour and a half away from the wall gets this editor’s approval. Gamers will still need a wall outlet to enable the unit’s full performance, but at least they can use it for typical notebook tasks when AC power isn’t available.

True Portability In A Gaming Powerhouse?

While portable gaming machines have been capable of producing acceptable frame rates in modern titles for a while, most of those machines made huge sacrifices in portability by using desktop-class processors and a pair of graphics modules in CrossFire or SLI. Intel’s latest high-end mobile processor solved half the problem, but how did Nvidia’s new GPU stack up?

While a single GeForce GTX 485M may not be a substitute for putting a couple of slower cards in SLI (you can do SLI with the GTX 485 too, in the right chassis), its overall performance level is well-suited to most gaming needs. We were able to play a variety of tough 3D titles at moderately-high or better settings using the panel’s native 1920x1080 resolution and the best part is, we did that on a notebook that weighs only seven pounds.

Performance wins for Intel and Nvidia add up to a big win for any notebook that has both of these, such as the Lotus P150HM from MALIBAL. We look forward to the responses of its competitors.

A Better Starting Point?

Limited portability is one of the biggest weaknesses attributed to modern gaming notebooks, with comparisons to professional bowling balls typically favoring the more sports-oriented device. High-performance business notebooks that can’t game at all weigh half as much, and most models that attempt to fill the void have small screens.

The problem, of course, is that most “big” gaming notebooks are designed with the flexibility to host multi-GPU configurations and even desktop processors. Customers not interested in such opulent customizations typically look to off-the-shelf solutions from Asus and MSI to fulfill their basic gaming needs. XoticPC asks the question: “why not customize one of those?” And so the company did.

The same processor interface that allows Asus’ G73JW to host a low-cost Core i7-740QM is used by XoticPC to incorporate the much more power user-friendly Core i7-940XM Extreme Edition, while two memory slots left empty in the base model get filled by XoticPC to expand total memory capacity to 16 GB. An 80 GB Intel X25-M SSD, custom-overclocked graphics module, and custom lighting round out a bill that roughly doubles the G73JW’s original price tag, while maximizing its performance potential.

This configuration’s processor upgrade cost nearly as much as a bare CPU, though we must admit that Asus’ design makes the process something most users wouldn’t want to attempt themselves. Enthusiasts looking for the same zing with less bling can save a few hundred dollars by using Asus’ stock lighting. This particular build was simply designed to show off most of what XoticPC has to offer. Let’s take a closer look.

The Xotic Solution

In addition to its performance-enhancing mods, XoticPC offers custom lighting options that really make its version of Asus’ hardware stand out. Most apparent is the custom “flag” pattern keyboard lighting under Asus’ premium LED-backlit, 1080p, 17.3” LCD.

A two-megapixel webcam along the G73JW’s top edge makes video conferencing easy.

Asus left a clean front edge on this design, placing only a few activity lights in a non-obtrusive fashion.

A gigabit Ethernet port, headset jacks, and two USB 2.0 ports frame the 4x Blu-ray reader, which is also capable of writing DVDs at up-to 8x speed.

The G73JW supports only analog and HDMI output for added displays, limiting external monitor resolutions to a maximum 1920x1200 resolution. That’s still better than the official 1920x1080 the HDMI interface was designed to enable.

Also found on the right edge are a multi-format card reader, a USB 3.0 port, a USB 2.0 port, and the power jack corresponding to the included AC/DC adapter.

Inside XoticPC’s G73JW

There’s not much to see under the G73JW’s cover, as Asus’ proprietary GeForce GTX 460M graphics module is half-covered, while the system's CPU interface is on the other side. One of the unit’s memory modules is also on the opposite side, and XoticPC fills the two empty slots in its 16 GB upgrade.

XoticPC charges $45 for the GeForce GTX 460M’s 20% overclock. Unlike user-applied overclocks, this one is guaranteed stable and backed by the seller.

The G73JW is available from retail with Seagate’s 500 GB Momentus 7200.4, but XoticPC adds an 80 GB Intel X25-M to speed up program launches.

Our benchmark load isn’t particularly heavy, yet it is a bit larger than the 80 GB system drive added by XoticPC. Additionally, Asus’ pre-loaded software combined with Windows to consume around 30 GB of the drive before we added a single program. With only 50 GB remaining, we had to uninstall some programs before we could test others, and that’s why we usually recommend a 120 GB starting point for the SSD drives of gaming PCs. Loading benchmarks to the 500 GB storage drive was an option, but that method could have resulted in lower benchmark results that'd result in the question: “Why bother adding an SSD if you can’t use it?”

An amazingly small battery provides 75 Wh of power to keep the G73JW running for nearly an hour in “wide awake” mode, in spite of its high-performance hardware.

Weighing less than two pounds, Asus’ power adapter is amazingly small given the performance intentions of this notebook. Manufactured by Delta Electronics, this part is rated at 150 W.

All of that nice hardware needs to go somewhere, so Asus includes a backpack with its G73JW. Asus even adds its own laser gaming mouse, though this unweighted part is likely to get replaced by any serious gamer.

Test Settings

Benchmark Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

XoticPC’s overclocked GeForce GTX 460M puts graphics performance roughly half-way between the GeForce GTX 480M and Mobility Radeon HD 5870 in 3DMark Vantage. This particular benchmark will be replaced as soon as we have enough comparison to make the switch.

The X8100 leads in PCMark when equipped with the Mobility Radeon HD 5870.

XoticPC takes both Sandra CPU benchmarks in spite of its comparable processor.

Differences in the Sandra Memory Bandwidth benchmark are impossible for us to explain, since the X8100 has the same memory in both configurations. We’ve never tied this particular benchmark to graphics hardware, though drivers might make a tiny difference.

Benchmark Results: Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 And Crysis

The best news for gamers who love Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is that XoticPC’s G73JW can play it at maximum graphics resolution and details, falling between the mighty GeForce GTX 480M and Mobility Radeon HD 5870.

Crysis players have always been in a somewhat unfortunate position given the title's extreme demands, but they’ll surely be disappointed that recent high-end-gaming notebooks can’t run this game at the panel’s native resolution.

Benchmark Results: DiRT 2 And S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

DiRT 2 looks great on the XoticPC G73JW, its overclocked GeForce GTX 460M beating the stock GeForce GTX 480M at the panel’s native resolution.

Enabling AA kills any hope of smooth game play in DiRT2, on any single-GPU notebook, at any widescreen resolution above 720p. The overclocked GeForce GTX 460M again falls into its customary position between the stock 480M and Mobility Radeon HD 5870.

The overclocked GeForce GTX 460M beats everything at most Call of Pripyat benchmark settings, though AA must be disabled to facilitate smooth 1080p frame rates.

Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding

Even though all three configurations use the same processor, Apple iTunes gives a slight nod to the X8100-based platform.

That slight X8100 advantage continues through HandBrake.

DivX and Xivd also prefer the X8100, though MainConcept shows the expected performance parity.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

With the same processor used for all three configurations, the dead heat in Photoshop and 3ds Max is unsurprising.

AVG is a little quirkier: it might be favoring XoticPC’s added SSD, but that performance spread shouldn’t be this large.

The G73JW falls behind slightly in both WinRAR and 7-Zip.

Power Consumption, Battery Life, And Efficiency

XoticPC’s G73JW is barely heavier than Asus' original, since its added memory and SSD add only a few ounces. That means it's far ahead of the X8100 behemoth in terms of portability and, as a non-SLI design, also uses a smaller and lighter power adapter. Can it outperform the heavier models in power consumption as well?

While the GeForce GTX 460M appears to give the G73JW a small power consumption lead in 2D mode, overclocking the GPU pushes it past the GeForce GTX 480M in 3D mode!

The lightweight battery still performs well, giving the G73JW a similar run time as the Mobility Radeon HD 5870-equipped X8100. Charge time is longer with its smaller power adapter.

Overall, XoticPC’s G73JW falls around halfway between the performance levels of the two X8100 builds.

An overclocked GPU helps XoticPC in games, but hurts it in average power consumption. Comparing that data, the efficiency differences of just over 1% is still barely noticeable.

Conclusion

By overclocking its GeForce GTX 460M, XoticPC brought us a G73JW-based gaming platform at a modest weight that stands up well against its heavyweight rivals. The added SSD proves less beneficial in our particular benchmarks, but we can tell you from experience that boot and application load times are certainly improved. Anyone who multitasks with RAM-intensive applications will certainly enjoy the upgrade from 8 GB to 16 GB as well.

While those upgrades are certainly things that most enthusiasts can do on their own, getting an overclock that’s supported by the seller adds a safety net not found in do-it-yourself tuning. Likewise, several more advanced customizations, such as added or upgraded background lighting, go beyond the mods most owners could easily implement on their own, giving this G73JW an appearance that stands apart from most user-upgraded systems.

The strongest and weakest points in XoticPC’s argument are price. While XoticPC charges $200 less than Newegg for a matching 8 GB RAM configuration, upgrades add up quickly. Lighting mods alone add up to $247, and big changes like the $1105 CPU upgrade and $211 for added RAM sent us back to Newegg to price shop. XoticPC charges nearly full price for its hard-to-replace processor, without a credit for the removed part. But the company still has to pay its technicians. On the other hand, memory is easy to install, and XoticPC charges double the market price for similar parts.

XoticPC offers performance and visual enhancements not available from the G73JW’s manufacturer, Asus. Yet, as with any custom build, buyers must carefully choose between the components they’d like installed by the seller and those they might be able to install themselves. After all, we're reminded that any time you pay someone else to install parts, overall value can take a hit.

A Little More “Less Is More”

Power and heat have long been the biggest obstacles to achieving smoking-fast performance on a portable device, as the larger enclosures needed to support high-performance hardware often leaves them less than mobile. It’s no small wonder that we had big concerns when Nvidia re-purposed its power-hungry GF100 GPU as a notebook component.

The fastest “portable” GPU ever produced, the GeForce GTX 480M was already beaten by a CrossFire'd pair of Mobility Radeon HD 5870 modules when it was launched. Most extra-large notebooks couldn’t support an SLI'd pair of GeForce GTX 480M modules, and the one notebook that does support these still has some power problems in such a demanding configuration. Price was another barrier for many customers, since big pieces of silicon cost big money.

A bit of additional refinement on its desktop 400-series allowed Nvidia to re-evaluate its portfolio in an effort to find a new, more energy-efficient Radeon HD 5870-killer.

That new product, the GeForce GTX 460M, should fit into the majority of chassis that formerly hosted such big-ticket parts as its competitor’s flagship, as well as its previous mobile performance star, the GTX 285M, in dual-GPU configurations.

Before we go into the new GPU’s specifics, let’s take a quick look at the system we received to host Nvidia’s latest SLI-capable modules.

While the desktop-based CPU in AVADirect’s X7200 build left us with a few questions about which of our previously-tested notebooks might make this a fair comparison, its $3142 price will at least allow a performance-per-dollar analysis.

Nvidia's GeForce GTX 460M

With a die size less than half that of the GeForce GTX 480M, the GTX 460M’s 1.5 GB memory configuration could leave some users confused about its origins. A little poking around with GPU-Z helps shed some light on the internals.

Like the mobile parts that came before it, Nvidia sources its GTX 460M GPU from the desktop lineup, in this case the now-familiar GF106 previously found on the GeForce GTS 450. But how did the desktop card end up with 1.0 GB memory if capacities are limited to bus width multiplied by exponents of two?

The desktop GeForce GTS 450 has been handicapped by Nvidia, in spite of what we were told at launch. The back-end was formerly limited to 16 ROP units and a 128-bit interface. The memory capacity difference now makes sense, because 128 x 8 equals 1024, and 192 x 8 equals 1536.

The added ROP units make it appear as though the GeForce GTX 460M might be a little more powerful than the desktop GeForce GTS 450, but a lower clock speed on an identical number of stream processors more than makes up the difference. The GTX 460M ends up short of the GTS 450, in spite of its extra bandwidth. But that’s probably fine with Nvidia since the desktop part often performs on par with the super-expensive GeForce GTX 480M.

Aside from what appears to be a huge performance deficit compared to the desktop GeForce GTX 460, the best reference point for GTX 460M performance could be the GTX 480M. With twice the memory bandwidth and twice the die size, Nvidia's GTX 480M undoubtedly costs more to manufacture than the GTX 460M. We checked the prices of two major vendors to find out how much a single-card to dual-card upgrade costs, in an effort to determine the cost-per-card built into each notebook.

Before we even begin testing, the smaller part looks like it could provide a huge value benefit. The GeForce GTX 460M costs less than half the price of a GTX 480M, though higher yields on the smaller part could potentially account for the difference.

AVADirect’s X7200

With the exception of its desktop background, AVADirect’s sample looks like many of the other Clevo-based X7200 enclosures we've tested, complete with its 1920x1080 LED back-lit screen, black-anodized aluminum palm rest, lighted touchpad, fingerprint reader, and three-megapixel Webcam.

Images from our previous review show the two USB 3.0 and three USB 2.0 ports, HDMI and DVI video outputs, eSATA and networking jacks identical to the product we’re reviewing today.

AVADirect uses the same 300 W power brick, a part that exceeds its namesake in both size and weight.

The real difference is on the inside, where we find AVADirect’s build with a Core i7-950 desktop processor and two GeForce GTX 460M mobile graphics modules.

Because this notebook has a Blu-ray combo drive, AVADirect includes CyberLink's BD Solution in addition to two driver disks and an OEM version of Windows 7.

More photos of Clevo’s X7200 can be found in our previous review.

Test Systems Configuration And Driver Issues

A drop from the previous six-core to four-core processor meant we couldn’t use the performance data from our last X7200-based review, and were instead forced to try to find the fastest previously-tested four-core models in today’s comparison. That’s unfortunate, since its Core i7-950 desktop processor has a higher non-Turbo Boost clock than the Core i7-940XM mobile processor used in Eurocom’s X8100. Of course, any performance gained by using a desktop processor will turn into energy lost in our efficiency comparison.

Two GeForce GTX 460M modules cost less than a single GTX 480M, so that’s the most logical Nvidia GPU match-up. Alienware’s super-performing M17x takes up arms for AMD’s Radeon series, its dual Mobility Radeon HD 5870 modules in CrossFire mode.

Also notice that the X7200 was tested twice, using the as-delivered 259.51 graphics drivers and specially-patched 260.99 “Verde” versions. The 259.51 driver often crashed when the cards dropped out of 3D mode at the end of a game test, and we found that the 260.99 drivers fixed it. The only problem for notebook buyers is, the public 260.99 drivers would not install without a little prep work.

Because Nvidia has not yet validated Clevo’s cards, the public driver INFs don’t list the card’s ID. We found three methods to enable “Verde” driver installations on AVADirect’s Clevo notebook.

The easiest method is to patch the public driver’s NVAM.INF file, finding the lines that refer to the GTX 460M device ID “0DD1” and replacing the ID of one card with that of another. We found six instances of this code, representing three cards on two different driver models. Replacing both instances of the first card listed (20401043) with the ID of our card (72001558) allowed the drivers to install without a hitch, including the Nvidia HDMI audio drivers. Because the installer removes all HD audio codec drivers before updating Nvidia’s audio drivers, the Realtek driver must also be reinstalled.

Nvidia used a different method in its own 260.99 preview driver for Asus’ G73Jw notebook, adding the lines %NVIDIA_DEV.0DD1.02% = Section017, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0DD1&SUBSYS_71001558 and %NVIDIA_DEV.0DD1.02% = Section018, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0DD1&SUBSYS_71001558 to the appropriate places in NVCV.INF. We tried changing Asus’ customized driver to match our card (72001558), and the graphics drivers installed without updating the Nvidia audio drivers.

Users who know a little bit more about INF structure can do to the public driver what Nvidia did to the Asus driver, adding %NVIDIA_DEV.0DD1.02% = Section017, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0DD1&SUBSYS_72001558 and %NVIDIA_DEV.0DD1.02% = Section018, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0DD1&SUBSYS_72001558 to the appropriate places in NVCV.INF. The results are identical to using the modified Asus driver, and we tested all three methods to make sure they worked.

In all three cases, the 260.99 driver fixed the stability problem previously found in the 259.51 driver. Nvidia tells us to expect an official update in early December that will make manual driver hacks unnecessary for its unified software package.

Benchmark Results: Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 And Crysis

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is usually CPU bottlenecked, though we have found situations where it’s also limited by memory performance. AVADirect’s X7200 desktop processor benefits from a slightly faster clock and a triple-channel memory controller, yet barely edges out Alienware’s Mobility Radeon HD 5870 solution in CrossFire.

Higher settings put more of the strain on graphics, and that’s where the GeForce GTX 460M begins to pull ahead of its AMD rival. Perhaps we’ll see a little more of that graphics performance superiority in Crysis?

The GeForce GTX 460M SLI configuration lays waste to the CrossFire competition using Crysis' “High” settings. AMD’s graphics solution looks far more competitive at “Very High” details and 4x AA, though it still loses.

Benchmark Results: DiRT 2 And S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

DiRT 2 loves the GeForce GTX 460M SLI configuration using its “High” quality preset, and increasing to “Ultra” quality with 4x MSAA barely diminishes that lead.

The Call of Pripyat Benchmark shows the GTX 460M in a slight lead once again, making this a clean sweep for Nvidia. Reflecting our previous experience in going from 258 to 260 series drivers on desktop systems, the notebook “Verde” drivers see their sole big gain here.

The Ultra quality preset and 4x MSAA further spreads the performance differences, with a reduction in frame rates that force us to reconsider the minimum frame rates to assure playability. The 460M SLI configuration is playable under both driver versions with a minimum of 21 FPS, while the others couldn’t reach our recommended lowest minimum of 20 FPS.

In other words, you really do need the 460M SLI configuration simply to play this game at its highest details.

Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding

Apple iTunes pushes maximum frequencies from Intel Turbo Boost-enabled processors by putting a high load on a single thread. The X7200 and X8100 have the same 3.33 GHz top frequency, yet the 3.20 GHz M17x stays in the running.

HandBrake pushes all cores simultaneously, dropping them to non-Turbo speeds. The higher non-Turbo clock of AVADirect’s desktop processor easily wins here, but it may surprise some readers to see the X8100’s -940XM losing to the M17x’ -920XM. The most likely reasons we can think of for those results are thermal and/or power management issues on the higher-model mobile processor.

Power or thermal management issues again appear to plague the X8100’s -940XM using both DivX and H.264 encoding, while the X7200’s desktop processor has no such handicaps. We’re hoping a BIOS update might help the X8100, and will be receiving some new samples soon to find out.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

Adobe Photoshop is another multi-threaded application that diminishes a Core i7 processor’s Turbo Boost ceiling. The M17x’s Core i7-920XM continues to outpace X8100’s -940XM, while the X7200’s desktop processor reigns supreme.

We’ve never been able to track down all of AVG’s performance limitations, and all three systems perform similarly in this bench.

WinRAR and 7-Zip both reflect the same performance patterns seen in Photoshop and 3ds Max, in spite of large differences in the way they operate.

Benchmark Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

3DMark shows similar results for the GeForce GTX 460M SLI and Mobility Radeon HD 5870 CrossFire configurations, with the Nvidia solution leading on average. We looked through our test notes for the GPU scores and found them consistent with the overall scores in spite of different processors.

AVADirect’s PCMark score dropped slightly during every run, resulting in a lower score during the later “Verde” driver test. As with many end users, AVADirect relies on Microsoft’s AHCI drivers rather than Intel’s. We tried Intel’s drivers and got a higher score, but kept the original score for consistency's sake.

Intel’s desktop processors have a higher non-Turbo Boost frequency, allowing the X7200 to take a clear lead in the eight-thread Sandra Arithmetic benchmark.

The higher clock speed keeps AVADirect’s desktop-based notebook in the lead through Sandra’s Multimedia tests.

Triple-channel mode helps the X7200 in Sandra's Memory Bandwidth test, but its motherboard’s inability to set non-reference memory speeds kept its DDR3-1333 running in DDR3-1066 mode.

Energy, Efficiency, And Battery Life

The use of a desktop processor is certain to hurt the X7200’s power consumption, though increased performance could help its efficiency.

A single graphics card helps the X8100/GeForce GTX 480M combination place first in power consumption, while a desktop processor hurts the X7200 by more than many people might have thought. Let’s see how these stack up in performance.

Using the CrossFire-equipped M17x as our high-end graphics baseline, we see that the single-GPU GeForce GTX 480M falls far behind, while the dual-GPU GeForce GTX 460M SLI setup surges ahead. Remember that, at the beginning of this article, we pointed out that the computational power of the 480M exceeds that of the 460M by only 15%, so this outcome is no surprise.

Dividing performance by power gives us an efficiency baseline of 100%. Since no electronic device is 100% efficient, we subtracted the baseline from all scores to focus only on the efficiency difference. The Core i7-940XM’s low 55 W TDP puts the X8100 in the lead here, while the Core i7-950’s super-high 130 W TDP drops AVADirect’s X7200 to the bottom of our efficiency chart. The processors have such vastly different power specifications that any reasonably-accurate assessment of graphics efficiency is impossible.

The X8100’s lower energy use is also seen in its superior battery life, which makes any of these notebooks capable of doing a few “notebook things” on-the-go. Of course you’ll need a wall outlet for high-end games, but any of these gaming notebooks is still at least 300% more portable than a similarly-capable desktop gaming system.

Conclusion

AVADirect’s GeForce GTX 460M SLI-based machine presented us with a great opportunity to compare the latest mobile GPUs, as well as a bit of a testing dilemma. While its Core i7-950 processor was matched by the previously-tested Core i7-940XM in lightly-threaded applications like games, its multi-threaded application performance makes it a beast in encoding and productivity tests.

Yet, we were most interested in how well its new GPU configuration would perform, so we accepted the configuration, even in light of its mismatched host processor. Shortly afterward, someone (Ed.: I'm guilty) suggested comparing it based on price-per-performance in a chart that looks like this:

The problem with the above chart is that it doesn’t account for features, such as the X8100’s larger 18.4” display and HDMI pass-through device (with added screen-grabbing capability). It doesn’t even account for smaller improvements, such as Alienware’s enhanced-resolution 1920x1200 display. And it certainly doesn’t account for the thinner design, lower heat, and longer battery life of its mobile CPU-based competitors. In fact, notebook CPUs cost more than the desktop part used to improve the X7200’s performance at the expense of cooler thickness, heat, battery life, and power supply weight.

Thus, we have two conclusions, and the first one is in regards to GPU alacrity. At less than half the cost and armed with most of the performance of Nvidia's GeForce GTX 480M, the GTX 460M becomes our preferred notebook GPU at this time. A pair of these easily smashes the performance of AMD’s fastest CrossFire-based solution. So take two now, and then call the doctor in the morning if you find yourself suddenly addicted to gaming at full detail levels on a laptop.

Second, the X7200’s use of a desktop processor sets it up as a value leader, but only if you don’t value having a notebook that’s less than 2.8” thick or less than 17 pounds heavy, with adapter. Had we been building our own GeForce GTX 460M SLI-equipped notebook, we’d have likely picked the X8100 chassis for its lower weight, lower power use, and larger screen.

But we’re not notebook builders; that’s AVADirect’s job, and the company focused on providing the most performance for the money. This is the point where AVADirect gets our kudos for topping the above chart, and we’re sure its builders are willing to assist any buyer in reaching their ultimate portability and performance goals.

Incomparable Performance?

The fact that Intel's Core i7 adds an incredible level of performance to semi-portable notebooks won’t come as news to most people, with examples like the i7-720QM-powered G51J and i7-820QM-powered W860CU arriving a year ago. Yet, when Intel’s fastest mobile processor couldn’t match the performance level of its earliest desktop CPU, many enthusiasts were left to wonder, “is that it?”

Not quite.

Going back even farther, we saw Clevo making notebooks for the Core i7 architecture even before Intel was ready to announce its mobile version. These desktop-based machines certainly wouldn’t thrill the ultra-mobile crowd, yet “mobile workstation” performance makes no apologies for heft. That tradition follows through in Clevo’s latest power monster, its X7200, supporting Intel’s high-flying six-core Core i7-980X Extreme and up to two of the fastest-available mobile graphics modules.

If you want one, you’re going to have to buy it from somewhere, and white-box builder MALIBAL wants to be your source. It sent a fully-configured ultimate-performance configuration for Tom’s Hardware to look over, complete with SLI graphics and a RAID 0 configuration of two SSD drives.

Not a configuration for lightweights, this 17-pound (with adapter) behemoth “weighs in” at over $5000, yet even the least-expensive $2600 version carries MALIBAL’s three-year extended-service warranty. Far more portable than any desktop PC competitor, enthusiasts with extra heft in both their arms and wallets will definitely want to take a closer look at its performance.

MALIBAL Nine X7200 Features

One might have expected a machine with such powerful hardware to require an oversized chassis and wider screen, but Clevo managed to pack everything into a 17.3” form factor. Flogged as “THD” (for True HD)--as if that were an improvement over the older 1920x1200 resolution--LED-backlighting is the true advancement of its 1920x1080 panel.

The base includes a fingerprint scanner to allow biometric login, while the raised-bezel top adds a three-megapixel camera.

Audio jacks, a trio of USB 2.0 ports, and a Kensington Lock hole occupy the right side of the X7200 chassis.

The real business happens on the left, where a DVI-I, RJ45 network, HDMI-out, two USB 3.0, and eSATA 3Gb/s ports are found. The antenna jack supports an optional tuner card, while the IEEE-1394 jack supports an optional FireWire module, not included in this installation.

MALIBAL also didn’t add the HDMI-in feature, which adds video pass-through for the 1080p panel, but the 9-in-1 memory card interface is standard. Below those, a 6x Blu-ray Disk reader, 8x DVD writer combo drive addresses most optical media needs.

The X7200 front panel is fairly clean, having only vents and indicator lights, while the back panel centers a power connection between its exhaust grilles.

Standard for the X7200 is the carrying bag, a power brick, an owner’s manual, and a cleaning cloth. MALIBAL adds the software, depending on hardware configuration, and left-over thermal compound from its $40 IC Diamond 7 installation option.

Inside The Nine X7200

The MALIBAL Nine X7200’s Core i7-980X six-core, 12-thread desktop processor requires a great amount of cooling, which Clevo accomplishes with its twin-fan twin-radiator heat sink.

Each GeForce GTX 480M graphics module gets a separate cooler, differentiated from lesser designs by its added thickness.

Under those sinks are two enormous GF100 graphics processors and an equally-imposing desktop CPU socket. Three hard drives are supported above the system board, two in a double-drive cage and one in a basket under the battery.

MALIBAL loaded this X7200 with two Intel X25-M drives, using the ICH10R RAID controller in striping mode to achieve the highest level of performance with no loss in drive capacity.

The power brick is actually a little larger than its namesake, the massive size responsible for outputting 300 W without the benefit of a cooling fan.

A super-thick, yet otherwise compact, battery boasts an enormous 7844 mWh capacity.

Test Settings

We included the fastest of our previously-tested notebooks in today’s comparison, though it’s really not a fair fight when the X7200 uses a desktop CPU.

In order to make this a fair fight, a desktop platform had to be added to the mix. Gigabyte’s X58A-UD3R was chosen for its comparable quality and features, and we even used MALIBAL’s hard drives and CPU to test it. Manually selecting a 133.0 MHz base clock disabled Gigabyte’s auto-overclock method while simultaneously underclocking that frequency by 1/3 of 1 MHz compared to reference specification.

Here’s where things get a little strange: we didn’t have three matching 4 GB modules on hand, so we used three unmatched DDR3-1600 modules from a previous roundup to match MALIBAL’s DDR3-1333 CAS 9-9-9-24 configuration. Identical internal organization between all three modules made triple-channel mode possible in spite of the differing brands.

Yet, that’s not where the oddness ends. Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 480M graphics processor is nothing other than a 2 GB version of its GeForce GTX 465, underclocked so excessively that no high-end desktop part is slow enough to compete. Since the responsibility for this performance-to-naming disparity rests purely on Nvidia, we didn’t want to punish MALIBAL or its supplier Clevo by comparing it to a vastly-superior GeForce GTX 480 desktop card. Instead, we chose the GeForce GTS 450 for the desktop’s SLI configuration. MSI and ECS’ GTS 450 cards were paired because of their identical clock speeds.

We’re sure that some readers will view this mishmash of components as an intentional crippling of the desktop platform, but we’re equally sure that our benchmark set will prove the validity of these choices.