NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Forums › Acer Notebooks › How well does the acer 3200 game??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How well does the acer 3200 game??

post #1 of 28
6/21/04 at 9:59pm
Thread Starter 
Hey all,


I'm new to these forums and was in the market for a NEW laptop, and saw the acer ferrari 3200 and thats a real nice little notebook plus it's a amd64 being I'm a AMD kind of guy,But also I like the cl56 cause it's thin and don't I mind intel either.

Both of them have good gpu's and good proc's which is my main concern! but I really want to know which one is better for gaming, since I can't buy an ALIENWARE 51 or should I say don't want to spend that kind of money for a notebook lol......anywayz could any of you that have either of these notebooks give their 2cents on how well they perform!

thanks guyz
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 28
6/21/04 at 10:00pm
you can get much better gaming performance that what you get from the ferrari 3200, MUCH better
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 28
6/21/04 at 10:50pm
Thread Starter 
"bump"
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 28
6/21/04 at 11:24pm
Well you can customize the CL56, so that might be a pro if you want a 7200rpm hard drive for example.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 28
6/21/04 at 11:36pm
doesn't the cl56 with 2.0 dothan have better gaming than ferrari?
dont know really this is a question
prob with acer is that the price would be perfect if you could get someone to buy the puny 2x 256 rams and the 4200rpm hdd., after you upgrade for at least 300 dollars, curcial 512's and 7k60 would run up $450 ish, but the second memory is buried and i dont trust myself to open the keyboard even with a service manual.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 28
6/21/04 at 11:37pm
sounds like a personal issue to me
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 28
6/22/04 at 8:44pm
Thread Starter 
bump
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 28
6/22/04 at 8:46pm
you can get much better gaming performance that what you get from the ferrari 3200, MUCH better

can you? the bottleneck is the gpu, not the cpu

but just to see how much better the a64 was compared to a pentium-m notebook we did a few tests earlier...

http://notebookforums.com/showthread...783#post292783
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 28
6/22/04 at 9:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rincewind
you can get much better gaming performance that what you get from the ferrari 3200, MUCH better

can you? the bottleneck is the gpu, not the cpu

but just to see how much better the a64 was compared to a pentium-m notebook we did a few tests earlier...

http://notebookforums.com/showthread...783#post292783


So for gaming they are both pretty well balanced!!??
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 28
6/22/04 at 9:09pm
Interms of gaming, yes. The bottleneck is the graphics card, not the CPU. If you took 2 notebooks (A64 and P-M) equipped with ATI 9700 that are both clocked the same core/mem wise, you'd be hard pressed to realistically see the difference in gaming performance between the two. (Unless you were looking at synthetic benchmarks, but even then the two are pretty comparable)

The only difference really is most P-M notebooks get 4-5 hour battery life, while AMD64 notebooks get 2-3 hour of battery life.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 28
6/22/04 at 9:13pm
I posted this ealrier in another forum, but here it is again for those too lazy to click the link I supplied above
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

460/210, just like the Ferrari3200





vs.

From soyboy's review:
http://notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=27166

"These are all at stock speeds (I will run some overclocked results when I get my 7k60).
3DMark2001: 10,706
3DMark2003: 3,033
Aquamark 3: 26,149 (GFX: 3,177 CPU: 7,370)"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I set my GPU to 460/210 mem in Powerstrip.

460/210 is what the Ferrari3200 comes default.



Now heres my score in Aquamark03



vs.

From soyboy's review:
http://notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=27166

"These are all at stock speeds (I will run some overclocked results when I get my 7k60).
3DMark2001: 10,706
3DMark2003: 3,033
Aquamark 3: 26,149 (GFX: 3,177 CPU: 7,370)"
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 28
6/22/04 at 9:34pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks Rincewind

For your unbiased review of both puters, seeing in your sig that you have the cl56 personally I like both putters but their are some gripes with the acer fact being that you dont have the option to upgrade ram or HD other then that it's a nice notebook I have a nice quicksilver sticker that would look good on it LMAO as for the cl56 it's very upgradable...but it cost too DAMN much to paint lol.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 28
6/22/04 at 9:39pm
well I didnt review the ferrari3200...

soyboy did

I just took the information he got from testing his machine

both machines will be great for gaming, thats the bottom line
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 28
6/23/04 at 12:35pm
The other difference is political - continue to support a monopoly company that strongarms motherboard makers and does all sorts of behind the scenes unethical issues, or vote for competition and give money to a much smaller company who can make processors at least as good as if not better than the large, lazy, flatulent beast.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 28
6/23/04 at 12:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich
The other difference is political - continue to support a monopoly company that strongarms motherboard makers and does all sorts of behind the scenes unethical issues, or vote for competition and give money to a much smaller company who can make processors at least as good as if not better than the large, lazy, flatulent beast.
Like that's a good reason to base your decision on
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 28
6/23/04 at 1:27pm
gpu definitly isnt the only bottleneck in gaming. its the definitly primary bottleneck yes, but there are many brief instances where your gpu will be waiting for hd/processor, espicially with newer games coming out that load more from hd and use more complicated physics and AIs. many tests like 3dmark03, purely test the gpu, so comparing the results might not be truthful to gaming. from what iv heard 3dmark01 is still a better test, but i myself would rather hear real fps from games.

if you truly want gaming power now, hands down pentium4 is the way to go. in current notebooks, amd64 doesnt seem to be worth it, pentium-ms are performing just as well for gaming. pentium4s seem to be able to clock 9700s much higher than other processors, i really dont know why.

if you dont need the extra fps in games youd get from a p4, id say go for the cl56 or something similar. if i had to pick one id go for the cx5 at hypersonic.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 28
6/23/04 at 2:26pm
Newer games also tend to use more complex graphics that employ pixel shaders, which swings the bottleneck right back to the gpu, unless you are playing in 640x480.

Of course, cpu speed still has an effect on a game's speed because it is used to run the card's driver, as well as the DirectX components. Also, system memory bandwidth may have an effect, because a lot of data is transferred to the card via the agp bus.

However, for most games, the gpu is the most important component. An exception would be a purely cpu limited game like Dungeon Siege, which has relatively simple graphics coupled with a large and complex world.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 28
6/23/04 at 5:26pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad Mr.Woo
gpu definitly isnt the only bottleneck in gaming. its the definitly primary bottleneck yes, but there are many brief instances where your gpu will be waiting for hd/processor, espicially with newer games coming out that load more from hd and use more complicated physics and AIs. many tests like 3dmark03, purely test the gpu, so comparing the results might not be truthful to gaming. from what iv heard 3dmark01 is still a better test, but i myself would rather hear real fps from games.

if you truly want gaming power now, hands down pentium4 is the way to go. in current notebooks, amd64 doesnt seem to be worth it, pentium-ms are performing just as well for gaming. pentium4s seem to be able to clock 9700s much higher than other processors, i really dont know why.

if you dont need the extra fps in games youd get from a p4, id say go for the cl56 or something similar. if i had to pick one id go for the cx5 at hypersonic.

Yes I totaly agree with you on the bottle neck situation..but if I get the acer all I would need is more ram and a faster HD which I would probaly do anyway and that right there would put the acer up there.

As for the pentiums I see that they have better battery life thats a huge plus ...but when your gaming your most likely have it pluged in anyway! so I guess it comes down to preferance,cause as for oc'ing I'm sure you can do it to all good notebooks intel, AMD, doesent matter so long you know what your doing.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 28
6/23/04 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlizzard
Like that's a good reason to base your decision on
Like it's not
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 28
6/23/04 at 9:23pm
i dont see why youd want to go for a amd64 right now thou, it doesnt game better than the pentium-m, but has much worse battery life. plus if your going for a pentium-m/9700 you have alot more places to buy from. right now the only reason to buy an amd is for the name.

in the days of the 9600 i would have said amd64 made the best notebook, gaming on par with pentium 4, much better battery life.

nowadays, its just beaten by the pentium-m.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Acer Notebooks
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Acer Forums › Acer Notebooks › How well does the acer 3200 game??