New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Z71V and Gaming

post #1 of 35
7/24/05 at 12:33am
Thread Starter 
Z71V with its Geforce Go 6600 128MB looks like the perfect laptop for gaming with its cheap price, but how does it really perform in top gaming situations?

I would like to know if anyone on this board has tested the Z71V with various games such as:

Half Life 2
Doom 3
Guild Wars
GTA: San Andreas
Star Wars: KOTOR 1 or 2

What kind of FPS did you get on highest settings? Were they playable on the highest? How low did the settings have to be to run a smooth 60 fps and/or at a competitve level? Was the online play smooth (assuming broadband)?

Please list the CPU speed and total RAM
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 35
7/24/05 at 12:46am
Half-Life 2 at highest settings: Not playable.

For 60 FPS+ constantly, it would probably be roughly 1024x768 w/ high detail (low detail water and no AA/AF.)

Doom 3 at highest settings: Not playable.

For 60 FPS+ constantly, it would probably be roughly 1024x768 low detail.

For the others, I would say fairly high settings, but I don't know how high.

My online play was smooth in every game I tested.

Pentium M 1.86 GHz, 1 GB PC4200 DDR2 (2x512 MB)
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 35
7/24/05 at 1:06am
Thread Starter 
So Half Life 2 would be playable at medium settings?

How about CS:Source?
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 35
7/24/05 at 1:08am
CS: Source performance can be summed up by the words "See Half-Life 2," in my experience.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 35
7/24/05 at 11:01am
IF you're willing to wait, you can wait and get the Z70Va... the X700 is 25-33% faster than the 6600 Go, and if you're willing to wait, its worth it.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 35
7/24/05 at 1:43pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmumba
IF you're willing to wait, you can wait and get the Z70Va... the X700 is 25-33% faster than the 6600 Go, and if you're willing to wait, its worth it.
But that'll add about $200 more to the price tag, and i aint rich!
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 35
7/24/05 at 6:35pm
wow i dont know what u r doin wrong

But ive played Doom3 @ 40fps+ @ ultra settings, with AA,AF off, only lag was when doors open but only for an instant, had the same problem with a x800
And i played CS source max graphics with AA,AF off and got 55fps
HL2, Maxgraphics w/ AA,AF off, got around 35-46ftps. No skips
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 35
7/26/05 at 4:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The New Avenger
But that'll add about $200 more to the price tag, and i aint rich!
It also comes with a better screen, lower power usage, and a much lighter chassis.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 35
7/26/05 at 12:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by YuriSEAL
Half-Life 2 at highest settings: Not playable.

For 60 FPS+ constantly, it would probably be roughly 1024x768 w/ high detail (low detail water and no AA/AF.)

Doom 3 at highest settings: Not playable.

For 60 FPS+ constantly, it would probably be roughly 1024x768 low detail.

For the others, I would say fairly high settings, but I don't know how high.

My online play was smooth in every game I tested.

Pentium M 1.86 GHz, 1 GB PC4200 DDR2 (2x512 MB)
I'm not sure what your problem is, but you are very wrong... if you really must have your z71v beaten up pretty bad. It doesn't even perform that badly with 512 MB of RAM!

On my z71v (1.86 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, not overclocked) I can play Doom 3 on HIGH settings, shadows on, etc. at 1024x768 and I get 40-60 frames per second. With Half-life 2, counter strike etc, you can play at 1600x1050, all settings on high, world reflections with water etc and the game is still very fast. All current games are playable on the z71v. You can play Splinter Cell Chaos Theory at high settings and it runs great as well.

Star Wars: KOTOR is playable with all settings maxed out. KOTOR II I haven't tested, but the engine is not as intensive as Doom 3/HL2 so you'll be able to crank everything up very high.

If you get the z71v, you will be satisfied.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 35
7/26/05 at 1:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaydes
I'm not sure what your problem is, but you are very wrong... if you really must have your z71v beaten up pretty bad. It doesn't even perform that badly with 512 MB of RAM!

On my z71v (1.86 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, not overclocked) I can play Doom 3 on HIGH settings, shadows on, etc. at 1024x768 and I get 40-60 frames per second. With Half-life 2, counter strike etc, you can play at 1600x1050, all settings on high, world reflections with water etc and the game is still very fast. All current games are playable on the z71v. You can play Splinter Cell Chaos Theory at high settings and it runs great as well.

Star Wars: KOTOR is playable with all settings maxed out. KOTOR II I haven't tested, but the engine is not as intensive as Doom 3/HL2 so you'll be able to crank everything up very high.

If you get the z71v, you will be satisfied.
exactly my point
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 35
7/26/05 at 2:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmumba
IF you're willing to wait, you can wait and get the Z70Va... the X700 is 25-33% faster than the 6600 Go, and if you're willing to wait, its worth it.

Incorrect. That is all speculation.

Spec for Spec on paper, the X700 is about the same as 6600 go. Not much of a differences, at most 5%

However in practice that will varies from company using it.

For example, Sager 3880 using the 6600 Go is very comparable to the Acer 8100 series x700. The overclocking factor on the Sager 3880 is excellent.

Asus on the other hand downclock the 6600 termendously. They've been known in the past to underclock all of their GPU. Even back when they had the ATI 9700. That was underclocked as well on the M6N series.

I wouldn't be surprise if they end up doing that on the Z70va x700 card.

So as it stand right now, yes the Z70va does look nice and attractive with the x700 card, but what performance you will see from it is yet unknown at this point.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 35
7/26/05 at 3:07pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Var
It also comes with a better screen, lower power usage, and a much lighter chassis.
And it looks sexier. But with first year university looming in september, I gotta save what little money I can.

And besides, its more tempting to steal a sexy laptop
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 35
7/26/05 at 3:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The New Avenger
And it looks sexier. But with first year university looming in september, I gotta save what little money I can.

And besides, its more tempting to steal a sexy laptop
I think the Acer Ferrari have a higher chance of being stolen. This one resemble the IBM thinkpad with the sleek black look than anything else.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 35
7/26/05 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by smilepak
I think the Acer Ferrari have a higher chance of being stolen. This one resemble the IBM thinkpad with the sleek black look than anything else.
nahh the asus z70va is way sexier than the acer and the asus z71v...my mom is even buying it, even though she still wishes it were in pink.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 35
7/26/05 at 3:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laptop&lt View Post
nahh the asus z70va is way sexier than the acer and the asus z71v...my mom is even buying it, even though she still wishes it were in pink.
Rofl!

In any case, Yuri, I don't think you really need 60FPS+ constant. Many cards like the 6800/X800 dip below that in the more intensive games. 30+FPS is usually enough, unless you play competitively. I played UT2003/2004 competitively and only there did I sense a difference between ~40FPS and 60+FPS.

We don't know if the X700 will be clocked very high on the refresh. Seems like ASUS has a tendency to underclock the video cards in their laptops, so I could only assume the trend will continue with the Z70V refresh. Anyways, the only things the X700 would show anywhere near that improvement over the Go 6600 would be comparing 3D Mark (maybe HL2, since it is optimized for ATi cards). Look around at any review site that reviews video cards, not just the mobile ones in particular. You'll see there's really no correlation of real world GAME performance with the 3D Mark scroes the X700s are getting. Unless of course, you enjoy watching 3DMark instead of playing actual games.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 35
7/26/05 at 3:51pm
Perhaps you define playable differently than I do, but there is definite choppiness at 1680x1050 high detail (no AA/AF) on the Z71v. There's still some at 1680x1050 LOW detail (though not very much, it's ugly that way anyways.)

It's certainly not one frame per second, but that doesn't make it playable. And no, the fact that I could still get 40 FPS+ on the stress test doesn't mean anything to me, either.

Perhaps there's something fundamentally wrong with my system, but since its 3dmark scores resemble those of other Z71v owners, I doubt that.

By the way, I haven't beat the shit out of my notebook. Thanks for suggesting it, though - after all, I'm clearly a goddamned idiot who's actually compressing giant files archives in the background.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 35
7/26/05 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by YuriSEAL
Perhaps you define playable differently than I do, but there is definite choppiness at 1680x1050 high detail (no AA/AF) on the Z71v. There's still some at 1680x1050 LOW detail (though not very much, it's ugly that way anyways.)

It's certainly not one frame per second, but that doesn't make it playable. And no, the fact that I could still get 40 FPS+ on the stress test doesn't mean anything to me, either.

Perhaps there's something fundamentally wrong with my system, but since its 3dmark scores resemble those of other Z71v owners, I doubt that.

By the way, I haven't beat the shit out of my notebook. Thanks for suggesting it, though - after all, I'm clearly a goddamned idiot who's actually compressing giant files archives in the background.
playable for me is 25fps lol hey i used mac for a very long time and i got used to the crappy fame rates.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 35
7/26/05 at 5:11pm
smilepak, one thing to remember is, the X700 is available in laptops already. So comparing performance on the Ferrari and the Z71V, I think you can get a fairly clear indication on what the performance will be. You got scores between 2200 and 2300, whereas someone got 2800+ with the X700. I was taking these scores from benchmarks, not from specs, so with both cards safely overclocked, you're looking at a 25-33% increase.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 35
7/26/05 at 5:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmumba
smilepak, one thing to remember is, the X700 is available in laptops already. So comparing performance on the Ferrari and the Z71V, I think you can get a fairly clear indication on what the performance will be. You got scores between 2200 and 2300, whereas someone got 2800+ with the X700. I was taking these scores from benchmarks, not from specs, so with both cards safely overclocked, you're looking at a 25-33% increase.
No.

You're comparing a low end Go 6600 to a high end X700. How is that fair.

Go take a look at the Sager 3880 scores with a better Go 6600. Then you'll see there really is no difference in 3DMark and in games, well, the Go 6600 comes out on top.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 35
7/26/05 at 5:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redmumba
smilepak, one thing to remember is, the X700 is available in laptops already. So comparing performance on the Ferrari and the Z71V, I think you can get a fairly clear indication on what the performance will be. You got scores between 2200 and 2300, whereas someone got 2800+ with the X700. I was taking these scores from benchmarks, not from specs, so with both cards safely overclocked, you're looking at a 25-33% increase.

Take a look at the Sager that uses the 6600. Someone gotten score close to 3k.

Like i said, paper spec yes they are very similar, but in actual usage it is hard to tell. And Asus might end up underclocking the x700, just like they've done with 6600, 9700 ATI, and other video card they've implemented. They've been known to do that over and over again.

Yes the Ferrari got nice benchmark and over 2800, the Acer 8100 series got 2300 with the exact same card. This is to show that taking the best of breed comparing against the lowest of breed is basically not a fair comparison.

If you compare the Acer 8100 vs Asus Z71v, they are around 2200ish - 2300ish vs 1800ish - 1900ish stocked. Not overclocking.

But if you compare the Acer 8100 vs Sager 3880, they are comparable in terms of speed on the x700 vs 6600 go.

http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=92780

That is the benchmark from stocked Sager 3880 using Nvidia 6600 GO.

Just as an example above..

It is hard to tell exactly how x700 will perform on the Z70va. No one knows the stock speed on it yet and how much will it clock out to be.

Bench mark will varies on type of memory used and the clock on the GPU and memory.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Asus Notebooks