Acer 1710 PC Mark Results [Archive]

View Full Version : Acer 1710 PC Mark Results

WizzerToys

03-23-2004, 12:15 PM

I am trying to decide between the 8790 and the 1710 :confused:

In PC Mark 2002, the Aspire 1705SCi’s CPU and memory scores were amongst the very highest we have seen with scores of 7196 and 4690 respectively. But this was nothing when compared to the hard drive which scored an incredible 1265, more than doubling anything we have seen in a notebook to date.

17" SXGA/120g/3.0p4/1g for 2k...its a tough one but here is the info, I have seen alot of people ask for it.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=716&head=36

Wizzer Resellers Wanted!

WizzerToys

03-23-2004, 12:22 PM

You can find all the tests results by following the next links...PS. That was an older post with the old video card. New models are shipping with the NVidia GeForce FX Go5700.

http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=588828

If you were comparing the two models, these are good links.

Wizzer Resellers Wanted! Join the team!

Diesel

03-23-2004, 02:00 PM

15.7 lbs? you've gotta be ****ting me, that's really stretching the definition of "notebook"

angryshoe

03-23-2004, 06:24 PM

It looks like a great system. It would be nice to find out a little more about the go5700.

HoofHearted

03-23-2004, 07:44 PM

What about the important tests ... GAMES ... any 3dmark scores. UT4K bar charts, etc etc

WizzerToys

03-23-2004, 08:44 PM

you can find all the results by following the next line on the bottom of each page, and i do agree, it is heavy, but the screen is awesome.

Gratto

03-23-2004, 11:14 PM

from what I seen it only comes with the 9200 ATI, won't be all that great for games thou.

Brn2Crz

03-24-2004, 04:55 AM

The NVidia card is a far, far behind the ATI 9700 Mll.

HoofHearted

03-24-2004, 06:48 AM

Specifically I am looking for charts or such on thg, anadtech, etc that compare NVidia GeForce FX Go5700 to Ati 9700. My internet is slow right now (at work) so I will have to research this later.

Brn2Crz

03-24-2004, 07:55 AM

Hoof do a search on the forum. I found a thread with a link to the comparison. It was either anatech or Tom's. The ATI smoked the 57. I was surprised.

ransaak

03-24-2004, 08:06 AM

They used the "performance" version of the 5700, not the desktop replacement version. It's clocked about 100 mhz lower than it's capabilities.

It wasn't exactly "smoked" either. The tests were DX9 heavy which ATI, IMO, has proven to be the leader but they only won out by about 5% in most tests. Add that 100 mhz to the 5700 and things would be different.

Also, if you're planning on using 3ds max, after effects, particle illusion or just about any other 3d desktop application, I'd bet anything that the Nvidia will smoke the ATI in these opengl apps.

We've yet to see the 5700 in a real world machine. So most of what we know is just an educated guess.

angryshoe

03-24-2004, 08:56 AM

:D It is simple. Somebody needs to buy one, and write a review :lol:

angryshoe

03-24-2004, 09:03 AM

ransaak

03-24-2004, 09:11 AM

+ the aspire 1710 is a regeared 1700. It looks like they are going for the gameing community. They used alot lot of ATI cards in other systems, so i am trying to figure out why the went with the go5700 on this one. If they were going to use a desktop replacement version on a laptop this would be it, Right???

I'd assume so. But who knows? No one has actually seen one yet.

Kesh

03-24-2004, 01:00 PM

Kesh

03-24-2004, 01:11 PM

oh waaahhhh 15-16lbs, heck I have regular notebooks over 20 lbs not computer notebooks... besides all I heard about my machine is its heavy... dude I just carried it several weeks on my messed up shoulder and it wasn't that bad... note: that I don't dare carry it on my good shoulder becouse thats right over my bad leg and fall down allot when carrying on the good shoulder.....

anyways... this thing even being lower on the totem pole by the release of the 8790 its still a good machine, more powerful that my desktops, xcept for all my hard drives, and weights less than my desktops plus 19" crt's........ hm lets think about this shall we........ 109 lbs or more versus 12-15 lb units....

if its that bad, get a rolly, or go hit the gym, or just don't get....

jpg71

03-24-2004, 01:16 PM

ok you know what makes me jellous?

they have 120GB1 or 80GB1 (see models) ATA/100 hard disk drive, 7200RPM

I woulda taken the 120 gig 7200 rpm in a heart beat and made two partitions, my progies run better under partitioned drives then just a whole drive.... not to mension the room...
What is it about your programs that make them run better under two partitions? The drive mechanics are still that of a single drive - I'm not sure how anything would run better just because it's logically set up as a different drive letter.

Kesh

03-24-2004, 01:59 PM

angryshoe

03-24-2004, 02:22 PM

If you really wanted to you could take out the 120GB HD and put a 300gb one in

jpg71

03-24-2004, 02:51 PM

adobe and macromedia products use alocated scratch disks, if you alocated to a separate logical drive it will increase spead of filters and effects with preview, of course if you have a seperate independant hard drive alocated as the scratch disk the spead and overall performance increases drematically.... I am still almost tempted to reformat this one cuz my hun forgot to partition this to two hd's.... and believe me there is a difference.... small though it maybe for a partitioned hd, but every lil bit helps specially while waiting for a filter to aply and just tapping your foot saying comeon get it done already.....
Learn something new every day - thanks for the explanation. I wonder what's happening at the OS level that makes it faster with two logical partitions... Perhaps by just keeping all the scratch data close together and your data files close together helps it out rather than having everything fragmented together? Hmm.

Kesh

03-24-2004, 04:43 PM

yeh I am not a programmer, but they themselves even sugest it... But it really is pretty noticeble... ok the tests I worked on is my desktop 1700 xp+ with 1 gig of 2100 ddr ram fsb is only 266 crudy lil mobo really with a good msi geforce 3 128 meg pro vid card and a tv tuner capture render card for support... Both hd I tested on are 5400 rpm 2meg buffer... This was back when I found out about the scratch disks and that my mobo doesn't support video encoding weird piece of crud..

anyways take an image 800x600 pixels with a dpi of 600...
create image layers 32 deep with elements on each layer....
then select 1/3 the image and click on the smudge tool and select all layers with a dither brush of 322 px size...

40 gig 5400 rpm 2meg buffer unpartitioned takes 2 minutes just to quick swipe the area, then 12-16 minutes just to apply the rest of the effect after you have released the brush...

120 gig 5400 rpm 2meg buffer partitioned into 4 logical drives with adobe programs installed on c: drive and scratch disks set to d: drive take 1 minute 43 seconds to complete quick swipe of the area, then anouther 9-11 minutes to apply the rest of the effect after you have released the brush...

now take the 40 gig 5400 rpm 2 meg buffer and set it as primary hard drive install os and adobe products on it, then take the 120 gig 5400 rpm 2meg buffer set it as slave and partition into 4 logical drives with adobe programs scratch disks set to the slave d: drive... It takes just under a minute to complete quick swipe of the area, then anouther 4-6 minutes to apply the rest of the effect after you have released the brush...

and this is on the crudy mobo... the higher end machines of course are way faster at rendering filters, but this is the machine that I actually tested the difference on... I work with extreamly complicated imagery and layers and compositing... I completed these tests last year after an instructor kept argueing with me that no way my crudy desktop out performed the imacs and going so far as to say even good pc's can't keep up... was like oh its so easy since I macs only have one hard drive and they are not partitioned into logical hard drives, not to mension how they allocate memory ussage.. blah blah blah oh btw the imacs to complete same process I would go out smoke two smoke bs with people come back and it would still be working on it, I smoke cloves, thats well over 25 minute break...

Hope this helps by comparison, yes I really wish I had 300 bucks for the 8790 but I don't so just need to site down and reformat and partition hard drive and live with the lil boost in render times and deal with the wait... shrugs....

WizzerToys

03-24-2004, 04:45 PM

+ the aspire 1710 is a regeared 1700. It looks like they are going for the gameing community. They used alot lot of ATI cards in other systems, so i am trying to figure out why the went with the go5700 on this one. If they were going to use a desktop replacement version on a laptop this would be it, Right???

they had another card in it for those tests, (the one in my earlier link). The card they went with for mass production was the nVidia which when overclocked would be a big improvement.

angryshoe

03-24-2004, 05:24 PM

ransaak

03-24-2004, 06:03 PM

yes, they used the performance version, not the desktop replacement version. The desktop replacment version is about 100mhz faster. I don't think this card will beat the 9700, but maybe it will at least be very close. If they used the desktop version in this laptop, and if you can upgrade the ram to 800Mhz, peformance wise i think it could stand up to the 8790. Just think, the high end model only cost $2000

It also will feature a desktop hard drive which are far faster than mobile hard drives and a 17" SXGA TFT screen. It should be faster and better looking then any other notebook around.

angryshoe

03-24-2004, 07:39 PM

http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0%2C1583%2Ca=120495%2C00.asp
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20031117194401.html
some links about the go5700

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 12:33 AM

yes...but that damn sager looks mighty purty...

decisions decisions...

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 12:35 AM

and acer welds the chip to the mb, i dont like that.

but that 4 bulb 17" screen...

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 01:30 AM

hey, one other question to anyone, am i breaking any forum rules by posting comparable computers for feedback? i know sager is the best but need the sxga screen and am trying to weigh the odds if i can hold out with the acer until sager releases the new screen (if). this board is about honest comparison, right?

angryshoe

03-25-2004, 01:32 AM

You can download the users manual for the origanal 1700. I don't think it is too differant than the 1710. In it, it says that you can ugrade the cpu and shows how. So i don't think it is soldered on this time. It also shows how to upgrade the HD, Ram and CD/DVD. The 1700 never supported an 800Mhz FSB, but the 1710 did, so my biggest question is will you be able to upgrade the ram to DDR400???

http://csd.acer.com.tw/acer/URMUL1.NSF/1af87a750eeeb70f0825628f006e0bfc/efe81f14acd1cc4248256ce8000ccb33?OpenDocument

angryshoe

03-25-2004, 01:49 AM

One more thing, i think it uses the Intel 865G chipset, so it should support dual channel ddr400 right???

http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets/865G/

Shaolin

03-25-2004, 02:11 AM

Yes, about memory DDR400 is written here :

http://global.acer.com/products/notebook/as1710.htm

Kesh

03-25-2004, 07:21 AM

yeh honest comparison for product is allowed, just no spacific resellers... that way it will keep bogus planted threads and flames to a minimum...if you go read the rules you will see....

also I think should be noted that the acer's 17" screen is 3:4 ratio and not widescreen, just in case someone misinterprets...

from what I see they have a few features that are not offered by sager that I wish they were... also acer is offered at my local geek club store.... but ultimatetly they only had the 15.4 widescreen and they did have a pro video card 128 meg at the time I was looking... I will have to read more on the 1710 before giving more of my honest opinion, but remeber its just my opinion.... your needs are what count....

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 02:10 PM

i was so set on the 8790 but i think this needs to be looked at.

one bad thing is that cdw said they wouldnt offer the upgrade to ddr400, but i guess you could do it yourself. it should support it. they didnt know if the chip was soldered in or not. i suppose i could change that also if so inclined. also, it appears as though the tracking buttons are realy stiff and the button layout in general sucks.

it has the built in sub and for ground instead of fed ex i can can the external tv tuner

i dunno...

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 02:11 PM

but that 8790 looks sooooo sweet!

ransaak

03-25-2004, 02:23 PM

Wow! They finally have them in stock over at CDW. I'm going to wait until someone reviews the 1712 before I rush in. It looks pretty amazing though.

WizzerToys

03-25-2004, 05:14 PM

just ordered both. 1712 and 8790. fully geared. i am still in too much shock to talk about it.

also, FYI, i am designing a new gaming chair with my parners in korea. can i get some good, honest reliable feedback from hardcore gamers if i post the early designs and pictures under a new thread?

Petriu

03-27-2004, 12:10 PM

Hello

I found a benchmark for 5700go.

http://cgi.butler.edu/cgi-bin/gate2...AAlu9r=UaUatjnD

Seems like it is not as fast as Radeon 9600 and 9700.
:confused:

Hope to see some benchmarks from the Aspire 1712smi and the 1714smi.

The 1714smi is coming to Finland where I live,in a couple of weeks time.

I would like to order the Sager 8790,but the VAT to get it to Finland is so high.

Petri

Kesh

03-27-2004, 12:14 PM

Yes wizzer you can get honest opinions...

Adam@PCTorque

03-27-2004, 12:28 PM

Benching one right now. The video results in benchmarks look to be a little behind the Sager 4780. This thing makes the 8790 look like a pocketPC lol.

Kesh

03-27-2004, 12:55 PM

hey Adam,

are you going to do a full comparison between the units including video encoding/rendering?

You know cuz we want to know.... I have some people including digital video instructors interested in these machines...

tanks...

angryshoe

03-28-2004, 10:43 PM

Adam- can't wait for your review

angryshoe

03-29-2004, 11:54 AM

Damn, I was really hopeing the review or maybe some benchmarks would be up by now. I hate waiting :). Come on Adam give us a something, i am on the edge of my seat.

Adam@PCTorque

03-29-2004, 11:58 AM

Sorry, I've been talking with Acer over some policies and things. I'll try and have it up by tonight.

Adam@PCTorque

03-29-2004, 12:01 PM

Teaser pic of it next to a 19" CRT (Dell).

ransaak

03-29-2004, 12:06 PM

Can;t wait for that review. Man that thing is huge. Screen looks pretty nice.

angryshoe

03-29-2004, 01:23 PM

Thanks, can't wait. :cheers:

Let the party begin
:smash: :smash: :smash: :smash: :smash: :smash:
:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

Shaolin

03-29-2004, 05:09 PM

WWW Adam !!!

Please, if possible can you write in you review these infos ?

- The go5700 is in the Performance or Desktop version ?
- Hardware specifications of the lcd (rise/fall times, what do you think of it compared near a 8790, what gives the 4 lamps inside, display quality, ...)
- Is possible put instead the standard 120GB hd, a 250GB ATA 100 without problems of controller or max capacity not enabled ?
- The Cpu is upgradable and the default is a Prescott or not ?
- Do you think that the nvidia card is upgradable for future upgrade ?
- The Firewire are one or two ?
- Noise level of the fans and temperatures of internal components in stress conditions like hard gaming ?
- The hot air from the right side is a problem for the hand on the mouse ?
- What is your personal opinion about its performances vs 8790 Ati 9700 ?
- maybe I am asking too much but I want know everything possible about it before pay this monster.

Many many many many Thanks !!!

WWW Adam !!!!

angryshoe

03-29-2004, 05:53 PM

I can answer a few, after all i have been looking long enough.

-go5700 looks to be driver setings not differant cards.
-The HD, RAM and CPU are fully upgradeable, and use desktop hardware.

Terry East

04-01-2004, 08:16 PM

I've been lurking and decided I need an answer to this question: Why does the Acer come with 333 memory? Shouldn't it support 400?

angryshoe

04-01-2004, 11:16 PM

It supports it, it says so on there web site. I think they used the crappy ram because it was cheaper. Even with the slow ram it does pretty good on the benchmarks. + if you have a little money, you could swap out the RAM and HD, and put it in another system. Then buy some good quality RAM and a 300GB HD, and still be around $2500 :)
All in all, this is a really nice computer. I hope we see more like it.