Anyone know if Asus has any plans of putting the 8600 in a notebook that is smaller than a 15.4"? I know the new A8 and W7 have the 8400, but everyone seems to be saying that it's underpowered.

I just want something in a smaller form factor because I travel everyday, and with enough power to run games such as Oblivion and the newer stuff coming out.

The F8S and V2S both have 8600 video cards

Thanks Djembe those are both what I've been looking for...but man the price for the F8S looks like it's going to be kinda steep at around $2700.

Is there really a difference between a "business" notebook like the V2S and one that's supposedly more for gaming even if the specs are just about the same?

$2700? Maybe in Australian dollars but certainly not in the US. I'd put it between $1500 and $1700 myself.

And the differences are in build quality and added features. The V2 has a spill-proof keyboard, fingerprint reader, is designed to be compatible with a docking station, comes with an extra battery, and has carbon fiber impregnated in its chassis. The F8 has none of those features. From a business perspective, the V2 is more durable, more expandable, and more secure- it's an obvious choice and worth the (presumably) extra money to buy it due to its advantages. However, for those who don't need their notebook to be extra durable, who don't want or need a docking station, and whose biggest performance concerns revolve around how well they can play Crysis, there is the less expensive and less well built F8 that has the better GT version of the 8600M along with other capable specs that can be used to dominate their gaming rivals.

Looking it up on Google I read 2000 euros on one or two of the sites...can't seem to find them again...but $1500-1700 is a lot more doable. I fly everyday (because I'm and airline pilot) and need a sturdy notebook. I like the smaller form and high performance, and after two years in the industry my Mayhem G3 is starting to fall apart a little.

Maybe I don't want a sturdier notebook though...just gives me another reason to upgrade again in a couple of years.

computers are a lot less expensive in the US compared with most any other place in the world, which accounts for some of the difference.

Hi flyby17,

Djembe's pretty much answered most of your questions, but I'll throw in a little more information in case it is useful to you.

The V2S has had a deal going on at MilestonePC and GentechPC. The deals were basically for a free external hard drive and maybe free shipping.

As for the 2000/- Euro, I don't know where that was. But the F8s will definitely be cheaper than the V2s, which is going for ~$1750 right now.

It might also be a good idea to bump up the Asus global warranty for 2 years, which will allow you to use repair shops pretty much anywhere in the world. Of course, buying with most AmEx cards will do the same thing also.

One note about graphics: As you said, the 8400 is underpowered. However, the V2s has the 8600GS which is widely considered underpowered compared to the 8600GT (despite the intense flames from both camps). There seems to be some conflicting information whether the F8s will carry the GS or the GT version. This may be a factor, depending on how hardcore your gaming needs are. Overall though, I definitely agree that any 8600 will outshine the 8400.

Regards,

zakaluka2.

Thanks zakluka. I did check out the V2 on Milestone and it looks nice, but I think I'm going to wait to see what the actual price of the F8s will be. Like I said I want to play Oblivion and maybe some others...I don't have time to be a hardcore gamer but I still want the power.

As for the 2000 euros I saw that on Engadget. It was the same release every other web site has about the F8s but it had that proposed price on it.

I've seen the differences between the 8600GS and GT...all I know is they're both better than the 8400. Those comparisons were done on either the G1 or G2, can't remember which, but wouldn't there be a difference when talking about less res and smaller screen size?

gaming comparisons are usually done via benchmarks at a standard resolution, so they can be more easily applied across models with different resolutions, as you mentioned. I don't think the screen size is relevant to graphics card performance, since its job is to determine what appears on however many pixels there are on the screen. The screen itself is responsible for taking the instructions sent by the graphics card and displaying them properly, so while there may be differences in appearance due to differing response times and contrast ratios of each screen, these are not caused by the graphics card.

Just FYI, ExcaliberPC is pre-selling the F8s for $1,549[1]. According to their specs, it does have the 8600GT, but a delivery date is TBD.

If you look at the benchmarks, the only thing you should have to worry about is what resolution, AA, AF, and other detail settings are being used during the tests. The screen won't matter, except from a purely aesthetic angle.

[1] http://www.excaliberpc.com/ASUS_F8SV...id-580899.html

Regards,

Z.

Thanks Z. I saw it on ExcaliberPC and I think it looks nice with what I think are really good specs.

Doesn't the 8600GT use an extra 256mb from the computer's ram source when the laptop has at least 2gigs of ram? And wouldn't all 8600GT have DDR3?

I'm not sure if the 8600M GT has Turbocache (using extra memory from the main RAM), but I wouldn't think it would need it with 512 MB dedicated VRAM on most versions. Also, most versions of the 8600M GT use (G?)DDR2 for their VRAM. Only the ones that come with 256 MB dedicated VRAM use GDDR3, and they're only found in the Asus G series and the Macbook Pro, to the best of my recollection.

The specs given on ExcaliberPC the VRAM is only 256mb for the 8600GT. That's why I was wondering if it had Turbocache.

I don't think it has Turbocache. And as for the DDR3, it is a shame that the F8s won't have it. By the benchmarks I've seen, the 8600GT DDR3 is ~28% faster than the DDR2 version[1].

Regards,

Z.

[1] http://forums.notebookreview.com/sho...d.php?t=147708

So no DDR3 AND no Turbochache? That sucks. Oh well, it's still a hell of a lot better than the MR9700 I'm running right now.