NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Sager & Clevo Notebook Forums › Sager & Clevo Notebooks › Clevo D900K (Athlon Dual Core Laptop) Sager XXXX Specs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Clevo D900K (Athlon Dual Core Laptop) Sager XXXX Specs - Page 4  

post #61 of 140
6/24/05 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambitwogunz
btw..yaaaaaaaaaaaaawn
For those unaware, the few posts above this one (mainly the additional information provided by terrell) were previously part of a separate thread, and have been combined with this thread for continuity.
post #62 of 140
6/24/05 at 3:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergism
lol. Its actually right side up. Those little rubber strips you see keep the lap top from sliding off. Once you put your laptop on top, you pretty much can't see that round base underneath. Check it out here

"Invisible Laptop Stand" for iMacs

Griffin Technology

You can get it here at Provantage for 34.95 shipped. If you search more you might be able to find a better deal: I just used Froogle.
Those interested in a similar product may want to look to the Lapvantage, pictured and linked below:
I preferred the height adjustable and swivel nature over the "one size fits all" approach offered by the iCurve.
post #63 of 140
6/24/05 at 4:15pm
But the iCurve is open on the bottom allowing better ventilation, that's why I got it for my i9200, the XPS2 I had for about a week, and the soon to be 900k
post #64 of 140
6/24/05 at 5:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caffeine
But the iCurve is open on the bottom allowing better ventilation, that's why I got it for my i9200, the XPS2 I had for about a week, and the soon to be 900k
Open? Yes, indeed. Better ventilation? Depends greatly on a number of factors - not least of which being which model notebook is being used.

The design of the iCurve necessitates a balanced placement of the machine for stability; unfortunately, this allows for only a finite number of positions of placement. This presents an issue with a number of higher end DTRs for obvious reasons - the "legs" of the iCurve can in fact block the fan vents on the machine bottom, and thereby limit ventilation in general.

For this reason, I actually employ a combination of both the Lapvantage and the Targus Coolpad (which I also carry and use when commuting to client locations), which offers not only greater flexibility and usability but also (more importantly) greater ventiliation than using the Lapvantage (or similar product) alone.

With careful placement of the machine (and a bit of luck as far as if/where fan vents exist on one's machine bottom), the iCurve can prove an equally effective solution, however.
post #65 of 140
6/24/05 at 5:28pm
wouldn't the unsupported front portion of that icurve promote excess flexing of the laptop?
post #66 of 140
6/24/05 at 6:37pm
i don't see the point of having a 64bit processor that is dual core and still having an 800 FSB. that's pretty cheap. i'll wait after this one still
post #67 of 140
6/24/05 at 7:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPotatoes
i don't see the point of having a 64bit processor that is dual core and still having an 800 FSB. that's pretty cheap. i'll wait after this one still
you and i are probably the only ones that noticed that, I dont believe that those are the final specs though. If they are...I am quite dissapointed. Mainly due to a 4000+ cpu cap off.
post #68 of 140
6/24/05 at 8:08pm
All AMD mobos are 800 FSB, that is all AMD supports. Since the mem controller in on the processor itself, it manages the memory better and it doesn't have to travel all around the mobo (like intel) to get the info to the processor. And isn't the fastest single core AMD 64 chip (aside from the FX-55) the 4000+? It supports dualcores, that starts at 4200+ and it supports FX-55 as well which is the fastest single core solution AMD offers currently. The draw to this laptop is that you can order a cheap AMD processor (or the fastest they offer currently) and later on down the road drop a dualcore or faster FX?? in it. Unlike the 9880, where if you get the 3.8 P4, that is it, no more processor upgrades from Intel, want a faster processor get a new laptop. That, included with the inevitable next video card upgrade and possible faster SATA drives, is about as futureproof as you can get with any laptop I think.
post #69 of 140
6/24/05 at 9:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotorhead
Maybe someone will come up with 2 gig chips
Actually someone already did:

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=90571
post #70 of 140
6/24/05 at 9:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotorhead
Maybe someone will come up with 2 gig chips
Actually someone already did:

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=90571
As mentioned in the article and subsequently in the thread, that would be a 2GB DDR2 SO-DIMM.
post #71 of 140
6/24/05 at 10:11pm
http://www.megapc.com.au/product_det...part_indx=3031
http://www.xpcgear.com/asusk8smx.html
http://www.xpcgear.com/k8n4edeluxe.html
http://www.xpcgear.com/gak8nspro.html

those are 1600 FSB. they are desktop mobos but hell, our laptops use desktop components
post #72 of 140
6/24/05 at 10:56pm
Don't get so testy now, I can admit being wrong I guess that I misunderstand the whole DDR thing, doesn't it stand for Double Data Rate, so you get 2 chunks of information per mhz in effect doubling the throughput? That would mean since these mobo's only support up to DDR 400 they would max out at 800, the same way intel gets 1066 FSB from 533 mhz ram. Or is my thinking all wrong about that?

The AMD AthlonTM 64 processor improves the memory performance by integrating a DDR memory controller into the processor. By running at the processor's core frequency, an integrated memory controller greatly increases bandwidth directly available to the processor at significantly reduced latencies.
post #73 of 140
6/25/05 at 12:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotorhead
Don't get so testy now, I can admit being wrong I guess that I misunderstand the whole DDR thing, doesn't it stand for Double Data Rate, so you get 2 chunks of information per mhz in effect doubling the throughput? That would mean since these mobo's only support up to DDR 400 they would max out at 800, the same way intel gets 1066 FSB from 533 mhz ram. Or is my thinking all wrong about that?

The AMD AthlonTM 64 processor improves the memory performance by integrating a DDR memory controller into the processor. By running at the processor's core frequency, an integrated memory controller greatly increases bandwidth directly available to the processor at significantly reduced latencies.
You're thinking all wrong about that. The A64 processors no longer have a connection between the RAM speeds and the CPU speeds, which used to be a FSB. However there is no more FSB at all, instead it is a direct serial point-to-point connection called Hypertransport, which runs either at 800Mhz or 1000Mhz. Thee is almost NO difference in the two performance wise, you only happen to see the 1000Mhz HT speeds on motherboards that have higher rated socket 939 CPU's and RAM that is in dual-channel, which would increase the performance.

But for the performance differences between the 800Mhz HT and the 1000Mhz HT; none at all. As a matter of fact, when professional overclockers increase the RAM speeds and the CPU speeds, they never increase the HT speeds, as it never brings any performance benefits at all, whether SuperPi, SiSoft Sandra, any 3DMark scores, anything.

Now-a-days AMD has the A64 CPU, RAM, and the motherboard all running asyncronus of each other.
post #74 of 140
6/25/05 at 12:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPotatoes
Those are NOT 1600Mhz FSB. That is marketing/advertising. What they are referring to is the 800Mhz Hypertransport in both directions (ergo, 1600Mhz). But it is not really 1600Mhz at all. It's not even a FSB, but a Hypertransport connection between the CPU and the RAM. A64 CPU's have no official FSB.

Intel has a FSB still, but not AMD.
post #75 of 140
6/25/05 at 1:46am
well if that's the case explain to me why this isn't just the same laptop with a different CPU then. i'd like to know what makes it faster and easier to do things with.

like comparibly spec'd machines (intel - AMD of course) then what is the difference? is the AMD gonna be faster or something?
post #76 of 140
6/25/05 at 2:07am
Many thanks to Karma for covering nearly all the points necessary above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPotatoes
well if that's the case explain to me why this isn't just the same laptop with a different CPU then. i'd like to know what makes it faster and easier to do things with.

like comparibly spec'd machines (intel - AMD of course) then what is the difference? is the AMD gonna be faster or something?
The processor architecture itself (and the subsequent implementation surrounding it) should lend a performance increase in a number of areas compared with single core Intel based machines.
post #77 of 140
6/25/05 at 11:14am
I see, thanks for clearing that up.
post #78 of 140
6/25/05 at 11:17am
is the d900t upgradable for the p4 dual core??
the lga 775 mobo, the chipset is new enough it is the 955x right?
post #79 of 140
6/25/05 at 11:23am
No (from what I have read at tomshardware and anandtech), intel has stated that while it will use the same number of pins, it will require a mobo change unfortunately (bad move on their part IMO) Looks like AMD may pick up some market share on this one for thinking ahead.
post #80 of 140
6/25/05 at 11:35am
Direct quote copy and pasted from Anandtech:

"AMD's dual core Athlon 64 processors will work in all current Socket-939 motherboards with merely a BIOS update. The same level of compatibility obviously isn't true for Intel's dual core solutions. You'll need a new motherboard to support the Pentium D and Pentium Extreme Edition chips, and thus, Intel shipped us a board based on their soon-to-be released 955X platform."

Another interesting quote from the same article for the previous discussion:

"Contrary to what we've reported earlier, the only difference between the Pentium D and the Pentium Extreme Edition is the presence of Hyper Threading; mainly, the Pentium D doesn't have it, while the Extreme Edition does. Both chips will only use a 800MHz FSB, they both have the same cache sizes, and they only differ in the presence of HT. "
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks
This thread is locked  
NotebookForums.com › Forums › Notebook Manufacturers › Sager & Clevo Notebook Forums › Sager & Clevo Notebooks › Clevo D900K (Athlon Dual Core Laptop) Sager XXXX Specs