Hypersonic Aviator EX7: NVIDIA GeForce Go 7800 GTX First Look
by Josh Venning on October 10, 2005 9:30 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Performance Tests
Because we weren't able to physically take the Go 7800 GTX and put it into our desktop system, we can't really compare the laptop and desktop version of the 7800 GTX directly. Instead, we performed tests with the Hypersonic system and compared these numbers with tests from a desktop setup fitted with a normal 7800 GTX.
Since the two systems have differences other than the graphics card (i.e. system RAM, processor speed, processor type, etc.), there will be some variation here, but we can still get a general idea of how well the Go 7800 GTX performs compared to the desktop version. Especially at higher resolutions, we will become more GPU limited than CPU/system limited. With our desktop system using an AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 rather than an Intel part, we can definitely expect that the numbers will favor the desktop system.
When looking at the comparison of the stock 7800 GTX and the Go 7800 GTX, keep in mind that the drop in core clock speed is almost 10% and the drop in memory clock is also almost 10%.
While there is variation between the two systems, the differences that you see in framerates are in large part due to the difference in the clock speeds of the 7800 GTXs. You can see from the graphs that for the most part, the difference in framerates between systems are consistent, with the exception of Half life 2, which isn't too surprising given the fact that it's a little more CPU limited than the other 2 games.
In Battlefield 2, we see about a 20%-23% decrease in performance with the Go 7800 in each of the settings. Half life 2 sees about a 22% decrease in performance at 1600x1200 with and without AA, but only a 15% decrease at 1920x1200 without AA, and about 10% at the same resolution with AA. Doom 3 decreases in performance with AA enabled at both resolutions by around 12% on the Go 7800 GTX, and around 18% without AA.
Overall, Battlefield 2 did the worst of these three games on the Hypersonic system, but even at 1920x1200 with 4x AA enabled, it still achieved 38.2 fps, which is playable. Most gamers wouldn't be too upset about either turning off AA at that resolution or going down in resolution (especially if in a notebook with a smaller panel). Doom 3 is only slightly better with 4xAA, while Half-Life 2 has no trouble at all with AA enabled at 1920x1200 resolution.
The bottom line is you do sacrifice some performance going with the mobile 7800 GTX instead of the standard one, but not an incredible amount. Again, we're talking about a notebook here and this one surpasses most great gaming desktops, truly earning the label of a "desktop replacement".
Because we weren't able to physically take the Go 7800 GTX and put it into our desktop system, we can't really compare the laptop and desktop version of the 7800 GTX directly. Instead, we performed tests with the Hypersonic system and compared these numbers with tests from a desktop setup fitted with a normal 7800 GTX.
Since the two systems have differences other than the graphics card (i.e. system RAM, processor speed, processor type, etc.), there will be some variation here, but we can still get a general idea of how well the Go 7800 GTX performs compared to the desktop version. Especially at higher resolutions, we will become more GPU limited than CPU/system limited. With our desktop system using an AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 rather than an Intel part, we can definitely expect that the numbers will favor the desktop system.
When looking at the comparison of the stock 7800 GTX and the Go 7800 GTX, keep in mind that the drop in core clock speed is almost 10% and the drop in memory clock is also almost 10%.
While there is variation between the two systems, the differences that you see in framerates are in large part due to the difference in the clock speeds of the 7800 GTXs. You can see from the graphs that for the most part, the difference in framerates between systems are consistent, with the exception of Half life 2, which isn't too surprising given the fact that it's a little more CPU limited than the other 2 games.
In Battlefield 2, we see about a 20%-23% decrease in performance with the Go 7800 in each of the settings. Half life 2 sees about a 22% decrease in performance at 1600x1200 with and without AA, but only a 15% decrease at 1920x1200 without AA, and about 10% at the same resolution with AA. Doom 3 decreases in performance with AA enabled at both resolutions by around 12% on the Go 7800 GTX, and around 18% without AA.
Overall, Battlefield 2 did the worst of these three games on the Hypersonic system, but even at 1920x1200 with 4x AA enabled, it still achieved 38.2 fps, which is playable. Most gamers wouldn't be too upset about either turning off AA at that resolution or going down in resolution (especially if in a notebook with a smaller panel). Doom 3 is only slightly better with 4xAA, while Half-Life 2 has no trouble at all with AA enabled at 1920x1200 resolution.
The bottom line is you do sacrifice some performance going with the mobile 7800 GTX instead of the standard one, but not an incredible amount. Again, we're talking about a notebook here and this one surpasses most great gaming desktops, truly earning the label of a "desktop replacement".
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
52 Comments
View All Comments
yacoub - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Hey, here's one thing that would be really useful... a nice chart of all the crazy Intel mobile processors organized by speed and features. It gets a bit confusing looking at a laptop site that lists Pentium IVs and Pentium-Ms and whatnot with all their 3-digit numbers like 760+, 780. What is ideal for gaming?timmiser - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link
I agree. And maybe a simple benchmark number that gives you a general idea of how much faster/slower is a 2.2 GHz P-M vs. a 3.8 GHz P4, etc.Kung Lau - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Why is there such a bitch and whine crowd for reviews? It's like Siskel and Ebert, if you don't like their reviews, go find one you like. Wait, do you pay for this service? I can see pointing out technically inacurracies to a point, but the majority of this complaining seems counter-productive.Is there a world wide recognized standard for reviews for geek gear or something? I'm not talking comparative analysis for the metric nazis here. Apparently, what a kid did out of fun and interest of the hobby years ago and gained worldwide notoriety for it has become, for better or for worse, a watering hole for all the "what if..." wannabes.
Make your own website and speak of things in the manner you want if you didn't like how it was said here.
To be semi-on topic, I can see why they reviewed it the way they did. And if I didn't, why whine about it?
If there is a bad review or information here, I should read/hear about it from Tom's or some other site, not a comments thread from hell. C'mon.
Honestly, the forums have mods, maybe the comments section should too.
/rant off
Johnmcl7 - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Following your point of view, why should Anantech allow a comments system if people are not allowed to comment?I hold Anandtech to a higher standard than most because over the years I've enjoyed their articles and trust the site more than others, and I'm sure many people are the same, so when AT post an article which does not appear up to scratch it receives criticism.
As pointed out already, most people are aware that an FX desktop will beat a P4 notebook which is all this article shows - by comparing like for like we would have useful figures which showed the performance loss going with the mobile graphics card.
John
timmiser - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
We are simply providing feedback. In this case it is mostly negative but that is not necessarily a bad thing.I remember AT a few months ago did a review of a computer case that looked like a transformer robot! There was a lot of feedback of people complaining about AT doing reviews of these boxes that seemed like they were designed by kids for kids.
After the complaints, Anand himself posted in the forum and agreed with the viewpoint and promised that he would not allow any future reviews of these "toy" cases and focus more on "adult" cases.
Here is the link that I'm referring to that proves constructive criticism is good for everyone.
http://www.anandtech.com/casecooling/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/casecooling/showdoc.aspx?...
Now some people in this thread must get insulted at criticism somehow and resort to name calling which really detracts from the quality of the discussion. :(
Leper Messiah - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
IMHO, why is Tom's Hardware more important than our opinions? We are the ones who validate the acurracies or lack thereof of their reviews. Maybe our tone is a little harsh, constructive critsism goes much further than flames, but we have to hold the reviewers to a certain standard, otherwise, how do we know what products to buy? We instill a certain level of trust to the reviewers, and we expect that trust to be returned with fair reviews.Nothing Personal Jared and Crew. You guys are still the best on the web IMHO, but everyone makes mistakes.
gmyx - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Now that you have reviewed a laptop, how about looking at others. Such as Eurocom laptops (http://www.eurocom.com">http://www.eurocom.com) and click on "Model Listings" for all of their models. They do have a laptop with the Go 7800 GTX and you choise of Proc. Intel or AMD (including the FX chips) (F-Bomb series for AMD chips and Phantom for Intel.) For the almost the same price has the revied model. Also interesting is their all-in-one Notebook PCs which uses 3.5 inch drives instead of 2.5inch. Also, all laptops are upgradable including proc, memory and hard drives. I was also told that they are working on SLI and may have it available soon. Despite the name, they are a Canadian builder (not reseller). It's worth a look. I've used their laptops before.Johnmcl7 - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Eurocom are a Clevo reseller (as is Hypersonic) and many others - the Eurocom site actually copied text directly from one of the UK Clevo sellers (Rockdirect), they forget to change the laptop name though!John
gmyx - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
Thanks, I just learned something! They are still very good laptops. And I still think they (Eurocom or Clevo or other) should be looked at.jediknight - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
why not keep all of the other components the same?The relative performance of the desktop to the mobile part would be much clearer if you used a P4 3.8 (etc.) for the desktop benchies. As it is, we know that a high end desktop will perform better than a high end laptop.. no @$#() it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.