First Impressions of Sager NP8662

Clevo M860ETU / Sager NP8662 First Impressions
By Jason S. Ganz

After over 2 years of daily usage with a Dell XPS m1710 laptop, taking it through task with academia, gaming, day-to-day work, etc., I had come to the conclusion that I wanted a performance rig, without the sheer size of the 17” profile. When a friend of mine referred me to Sager, I was hesitant using a small reseller / OEM to purchase my laptop. However, I wound up purchasing a Sager NP8662 on June 9, 2009 from PowerNotebooks and 18 days later, June 27, 2009... the UPS truck appeared at my door with... an NP8662. To give a reference point of the order, it comes across as a mid-range NP8662; sufficient performance for gaming and day-to-day operation (academics, research) without breaking the bank. Here are the full specs

1 Sager NP8662 - Gaming Laptop - $1,939.00
15.4" WSXGA+ (1680 x 1050) Glossy LCD
nVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M w/1GB GDDR3
Intel® Core™2 Duo P9700 2.8GHz Processor w/6MB L2 Cache (25W) - 1066MHz FSB
Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound
4GB (2 SODIMMS) DDR3/1066 Dual Channel Memory (64bit Vista needed to use >3GB)
500GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200RPM Hard Drive (16MB Cache Buffer)
Combo Dual Layer DVD +/-R/RW CD-R/RW Drive w/Softwares
7-in-1 Memory Card Reader (All versions of MS + SD/MMC)
Built-in Intel® PRO/Wireless 5300 802.11a/g/n
Built-in Bluetooth Wireless
8-cell Smart Li-ion Battery
Spare 8-cell Smart Li-ion Battery
Windows Vista Business - (64-Bit installed - 64 and 32-bit CD included) w/Windows 7 Upgrade Coupon
Full Range Auto Switching AC Adapter
Standard Carrying Case
NO Dead Pixel Guarantee
NO Intel® Turbo Memory 2.0 (Robson)
NO eSATA /USB SATA II 7200RPM EXTERNAL HDD
NO "Medialess" Microsoft Office Software
NO Spare AC Adapter
NO 12V Auto Adapter

1 Sager 3 Year Warranty - NP5793/97-8660/62 - Lifetime 24/7 DOMESTIC Tol - $249.00

Total before Shipping: $2,208

The good on this machine far outweigh the bad. For starters, this machine has enough power out of the box to beat even Vista into somewhat of a submission. Further refining of updates and the augmentation of Service Pack 2 to the supplied x64 Vista Business somewhat enhanced the snappiness, although Vista is still going to be Vista at the end of the day: A bloated OS with far too many pretty “features” for its own good. Features such as SuperFetch are positive contributors to the improvement of Vista by putting most commonly opened apps onto RAM (which is faster than an HDD), but Windows Aero, while aesthetically pleasing, is an un-necessary resource hog that from what I can gather was designed to woo people to the point they forget just how “power-hungry” it truly is. Thankfully, great resources such as BlackViper and Les's “TweakGuide” explain in layman's terms how to trim down Vista while maintaining its stability, reducing the amount of resources used, and freeing up CPU cycles for applications that most people will use computers for. (Gaming, work, academics, etc.) However, Vista's greatest malady is the amount of security features that it came with. While XP took a fairly libertarian stance on what is installed / isn't installed, Vista's UAC is incredibly intruding. Anything “not Microsoft” is scrutinized with a fine-tooth comb; a process that while fully capable of protecting the novice user, those who know what they want installed in their machine will be effectively reduced to a standstill. (This isn't a knock on the computer, which is completely capable of flooring it through most applications, just something one should be aware of and not put culpability on the laptop). It makes me very happy to know that Windows 7 is on its way out, and hopefully it will fix the problems prevalent in Vista.


On a more positive note, the np8662 is a 15.4” machine. It's “not quite Desktop Replacement” size doesn't prevent it from being a straight-away performance machine. From an empirical standpoint, they keyboard is solid, with no noticeable flex both in normal typing and impassioned gaming, there is very little screen wobble, in fact I noticed mine requires 2 hands and a good body-to-table push down while opening the screen to make the screen open, and 2 hands and effort to make any wobble happen. Put it this way, the screen is solidly connected. While on the topic of the screen, it is the standard 15.4” WSXGA (1680x1050) resolution screen, which had one stuck pixel (a small rub fixed that), and provides an impressive 33 degrees “south of vertical” closure view (closed = 90 degrees south of vertical) and approximately 170 degrees of side to side view. The screen is consistently bright, there aren't “hotspots” or “coldspots” to speak of, and the WSXGA in a 15” profile feels like a proportional downsize from the 17” WUXGA in my old m1710. That is, nothing feels too miniscule to see, and it feels comfortable switching between the 2 without feeling eye stress or a perceivable change in pixels / inch. One place where the np8662 though, is lacking is that it has no subwoofer (unlike the m1710), which means low-end and mids are limited / lacking. (This is the one area where the m1710 wins). While we're strictly empirical, the ports and vents configuration is typical Clevo / Sager. “Austere yet efficient”. Let's take the stance of sitting in front of the laptop using it day to day. The connections and internal peripherals are as follows:

• Left Side:
• DVD+RW or BD Drive, depending on option chosen
• Directly in front of us:
• Headphone / Speaker port
• External Microphone port
• S/PDIF port
• IEEE 1394 port (object using IEEE 1394 must have its own power)
• Right Side
• 7-in-1 media reader (good for P&S digital cameras, basic D-SLRs, etc.)
• ExpressCard Slot (good for card SSDs, a Creative X-fi internal sound card, etc.)
• 2 USB 2.0 ports
• Ethernet cable connection jack
• Phone Line connection jack
• Rear-End
• Kensington Cable Lock port
• AC Adapter port (120w adapter goes here)
• 2 USB connections with 1 of them a powered e-sata connection
• HDMI connection
• DVI connection
• Big vent with copper heatsink peeking through
• Bottom
• Vents for CPU / GPU / RAM
• Battery port
• HDD / SSD goes here

And all of this works within an “all grey/black with a few wraparound stripes of silver” body that unlike many other gaming machines, doesn't exude to the outside world that your machine is just as capable of surfing Firefox or operating in OpenOffice, as it is playing “NFS:PS”, all while at your local library or coffee shop. It is truly a “it's not what's on the outside that counts” machine... and thankfully, otherwise we'd be stuck with a G105 M and a pentium dual-core.

This brings us to the important part. My first impression of this machine floored me. It had enough power to make vista start up at a “realistic human rate!” Combining an Intel P9700 Core 2 Duo with an nVidia GTX 260m, in early benchmarking, floored me. I knew the np8662 was a beast, but I hadn't thought that with following a simple tweak guide, no OC'ing anywhere (and please do not ask me to OC anything on this machine, I want it to be reliable for at least 3 years!), and no further upgrading, a 10,507 was attainable. I was floored. With better drivers and further optimization (ie: later drivers with further refinements, Dox's drivers, etc.) I wouldn't entirely put 10,800 out of reach. The only quirk is that occasionally CPU-z will show a speed of “2,928 Mhz”, which I am presuming is when one core is run it overclocks itself slightly... not 100% sure, but I like the premise. GPU-z shows that the core / shader / memory clocks are 550mhz / 1375mhz / 800mhz... not sure if that is significant MXM wise, but I have seen nvidia say that some GTX 260m's are up at 950MHz. It works, it stays cool, I'm happy. The P9700 is no different. I initially wanted a T9600 for the best in performance and price, however school doesn't care if your computer dies mid-class or mid-assignment, the less watts used, the better, and being as the P9700 = T9600 performance-wise, and the P9700 uses 10w less in its TDP, I figured on spending the extra $35 and getting the P9700 instead. The less watts used results in less heat being produced, the fan doesn't run as much (even on performance mode), and it stays cooler on the palmrests. Even on the bottom during normal use it's fairly cool to the touch. Please note that this isn't permission to put this notebook on your lap, as it may render you unable to genitally proliferate, but hey, whatever floats yer boat. I keep it on a hard surface, and everything stays cool. Even where the HDD is, is cool to the touch even when writing.

I won't have many pics yet to post, as I'm still figuring out how this machine works, however I will provide the CPU-z and GPU-z and 3Dmark06 scores to give some idea just how much this laptop has to offer. I have 2 big upgrades I'd like to do down the line. 8GB DDR3 to be able to put more apps on superfetch and RAM for faster opening and operating, and reducing the paging file, and when win7 comes out, the next-gen intel SSDs. Time will tell how this machine truly works, and more details on real-world rates will be added as I figure out how these benchmarks work.

Addenda: 2 hrs 45 battery life at 70/30 "power saver / balanced" and still 10% life left!
Addenda #2: Now has 8GB DDR3 RAM from Corsair
Addenda #3: Now has Intel x25-m 160GB G2 SSD

Jason

thanks, it took a year of work, and promising myself i could pay off college at the same time to do it. I don't believe in financing or credit cards, and I wanted to make sure that the purchase didn't break the bank, otherwise I'd have gotten 8GB RAM off the bat. What I like is that it beats vista into submission, and it's a game machine in docile clothing. Feel free to ask away if you'd all like.

the P9700 only uses 25w (as opposed to the 35w of the T9xxxx series), and it also runs at 2.8Ghz much like a T9600. I kept it at about 70% powersaver / 30% balanced, and set the write caching to aggressive. The gtx 260m clocks down, and it's nice that it does that, otherwise the battery would get demolished. One thing I will say, i have never seen so much copper in a laptop in my entire life.

Jason

A lot of people asked me if for windows vista 64-bit, if it is worth it, now or at any reasonable point in time, to go beyond 4GB of RAM in a laptop. Arguments for greater than 4GB RAM include more room for superfetch to pre-load programs to memory, greater stability both overall and when running heavyweight programs, and more “available gaming memory” according to the quasi-benchmark known as the “Vista Experience Index”. At the same time, those who decry going beyond 4GB state the lack of 64-bit native programs, the cost to upgrade to 4GB SO-DIMMS to accomplish “64-bit only amounts of RAM”, and that it will effectively prevent returning to 32-bit OS's without retrofitting the old memory. Having taken my Sager NP8662 from its stock 4GB DDR3 RAM to 8GB DDR3 RAM, and having a little time to assess things, there are observations both positive and negative, that have surfaced as a result of the upgrade.

First, the most obvious positive affect of upgrading to 8GB or more of RAM is that programs are more responsive. Perhaps this can be attributed in part to SuperFetch, a component of Windows Vista that pre-loads your most used programs to memory during start up. If such logic is deemed valid, then more memory obviously makes a happier SuperFetch (and thus, Vista). From what I've gathered, I believe that Firefox, AIM, and OpenOffice.org have been SuperFetched, as over time they have started up with increasing alacrity and less waiting. At the same time, SuperFetching with 8GB really has not slowed down the startup time of the computer, which means it apparently is sufficiently seamless so that in the right (read memory-favorable) circumstances, you won't notice it working in the background quietly loading programs. A little more time pre-loading from the hard-drive to memory means that once in memory, the program opens nearly instantly. (RAM is an extremely fast storage media, it just needs to be kept constantly powered in order to prevent loss of data.) Such copious amounts of memory, combined with SuperFetch thus becomes useful when opening large applications that concentrate on artistic manipulation, scientific and/or mathematical calculations, music production, etc. Who really wants to wait for a hard drive to spin about wildly as a “minimum of 1GB or more” RAM sized program slowly awakes from the Hard Drive? It's loaded during startup based on your usage amounts, you click it, it starts up in a few seconds, you're in business. The same logic applies for laptops with 12GB or even 16GB of RAM, just with more room to pre-load programs. With Vista, what once was considered “wasted memory” in XP, gets put to use pre-loading programs.

At the same time, all this memory has to come at a premium. Finding 4GB SO-DIMMs to make 8GB kits is not cheap. The least expensive I could find a Corsair 8GB DDR3 kit was for $750 at NewEgg, and even DDR2 667MHz 8GB kits hover at around $300. Attest this partially to the difficulty of putting 4GB of storage on a small chip, and partially to the pride of companies that can actually pull off such density. (I'd like to note here that if you buy a company's memory such as corsair, and it says Hynix or Apacer or whatever on the chips themselves... Hynix and Apacer make the chips, and Corsair with its naming power puts its name on the chips and sells them to the public... people know Corsair as a premium brand, but Hynix and other semiconductor makers usually get a “?” look from the general public.) Compare this amount to the $90 to $110 that 4GB DDR3 1066MHz Ram kits goes for, and the $50 to $60 that a 4GB DDR2 kit command, and you can see why the idea of a 4GB SO-DIMM is not commonly found in laptops outside those designed for gaming and workstation use. The cost / benefit analysis just isn't there to really justify the price punch at this point in time. An extreme example could be the 16GB upgrade available in the Dell Precision m6400, and the 12GB upgrade in the Sager np9280. By maxing out the memory at their respective limits, potential buyers are looking at between a $1,300 to $2,500 upcharge simply for the bragging rights of “I have more memory in my laptop than you do!”... to which most users will simply shrug off as “why?” Some people may say “but it allows me to future-proof my system!”, but the same $750 per aftermarket 8GB DDR3 SODIMM kit, or even $300 for its DDR2 667 counterpart could arguably be better used for upgrading parts such as the CPU from a dual-core to a faster dual-core / quad-core solution, a faster and bigger hard drive, or solid state drive (depending on the cost for both), or if your laptop allows, a better video card. There really has to be a great reason to justify such an upgrade, and how many programs really can fully fill an 8GB or 16GB RAM-Laden computer? For the average user, I presume very few.

While we're on the topic of performance upgrades, Vista and Windows 7 have a component of their experience index known as “gaming graphics”. This component is a combining of what the dedicated GPU (if applicable) and the “shared system memory” are. Admittedly, the “Experience Index” is far from an end-all for determining a great computer for high-end and gaming applications, but to have a bounty of memory for a computer to dip into during 3-D intense applications is never a bad thing. Think of it as “stem cell memory”; that is memory that can be used for anything, and it happens to be available for use in a game should the GPU ever require it. It could be memory that's takeable from programs that are superfetched (for when you need a memory boost for a game), or just sitting around doing nothing in particular (as the used for current programs + superfetched programs) could be less than what's the total. Comparing 4GB to 8GB, the amount of this “gaming memory” goes up from approximately 1.5GB of system RAM used to 3.5GB system RAM being used. (In fact, on my Sager, the amount of gaming memory is 4,606MB RAM... 1,024MB is dedicated from the GTX 260m, and 3,582MB is system memory that can be switched to help the dedicated GPU.) What effect this extra RAM has depends on the game and whether it can actually use the system memory, as well as if it's even needed at all. If you have more than you need, and the aforementioned SuperFetch and the system isn't using as much as it can, you still have memory going to waste, which reduces the justification of spending the large amounts of money to attain 8GB or more of RAM. Imagine a program that can only use a single core, and you're working with a quad-core. This is not unlike having 16, or even 8GB of RAM for a program that at most can or will only use 1GB of RAM (video or otherwise). The rest of the bandwidth and available space is simply being put to waste and being used to occupy programs that are merely fetched, and not in active use. How many of us really want to face the possibility of having too much RAM that's being wasted, just like when one had 4GB RAM in windows XP as an early adopter of “maxing out 32-bit ability”.

Well fortunately, those of us who have more than 4GB RAM are smart enough to have a 64-bit operating system and a motherboard platform that can handle the 64-bit addressing abilities of 2^64 bytes. While the vast majority of programs are still 32-bit, and can only take 2GB RAM for themselves without crashing, with the advent of > 4GB RAM and 64-bit architectures entering the mainstream, programs can now more fully utilize this newly available RAM and thus more complex applications with larger instruction sets will become the norm. Realize, that a 64-bit chunk can carry twice as much information as a 32-bit chunk and is not as “memory restricted”. A side bonus is that, at least with Windows, 32-bit programs run seamlessly with 64-bit programs, regardless of whether there's 4GB of RAM or more inside. (In fact, some 64-bit native programs will use more than 2GB RAM at any given time, and thus the extra RAM becomes no longer a luxury, but a necessity.) I could only imagine how those who run scientific programs felt when 64-bit architectures and more than 4GB RAM meant that programs wouldn't max out when 2GB were used. I find that within 12 to 18 months, 4GB will be the standard of all laptops, and 8GB, if not more, will become commonplace in mid-level laptops, with triple-channel leading gaming machines and portable workstations in greater presence. Laptops are slowly becoming desktop replacements at various levels, and most companies know this.. with this advent, the difference between desktop and laptop is slowly closing (although I doubt it will ever become 1:1 level), and the number of people who own computers with more than 4GB RAM is growing. The end result will be prices will come down, giving more people a justifiable reason to fully abandon 4GB and 32-bit limitations for a 64-bit and greater than 4GB world. The performance, gaming, complex workstation applications, and the architecture is ready for it to take over, all that needs to take place is a greater embracing by the computing public, and for prices of memory to come down from the ivory tower in the same fashion SSD prices have plummeted. It's just a matter of time.

(And if you're wondering, yes I'm one of those dolts who upgraded early to 8GB DDR3, and these are some of the observations I've noticed with my computer, as well as those of my friends who have 8GB and more.)

qhn, go for it!

new benchmarks awaiting verification

BROKE 1500 in passmark 7!

new record!

broke 1,500 on passmark 7

none. All I did was when i got the 1,479 i had AIM running.

Jason