Alienware m15x: True Gaming Portability?

[Joevans]

these two laptops are not even close to comparable. Compare the m17x alienware and figure out which tops which.

the m17x has dual GTX cards in it.

 

[Crashman]

these two laptops are not even close to comparable. Compare the m17x alienware and figure out which tops which.

the m17x has dual GTX cards in it.

If they're not "comparable", contrast them. These are the notebooks they sent.

 

[Guest]

Gaming machines will never be portable, like building sized computers will never become PC's. Any attempt to dictate the future of computing is doomed to end in failure. Unless you're lucky and have a good idea what you're talking about. Then you have an atom sized chance in a thimble of getting something right.

 

[mr roboto]

Tom's really sucks the last 6 months. It's simply become a web site of advertisements disguised as "Reviews". No one in their right mind would pay $4000 for a shitty Dell laptop, especially with Dell's record as a terrible company with god awful support. Overpriced crap.

Tom's used to be a tech site, now they have stupid picture book style "The History Of Nvidia" and "10 Pictures to show you how a Motherboard is made in a Gigabyte factory using Chinese slave labor".

I remember a few years back when Tom's wrote a detailed explanation on how to crack WEP. What the different wireless security features were and how they differ (and eventually were going to show us how to crack them). Now it's just garbage. Biased Mac articles that are nothing more than lies. Dumbed down articles that don't even try to explain the tech side of new innovations.

Worst of Media has ruined Tom's hardware.

I still stop in every week or so here but I'm thinking that will eventually stop.

Am I the only one here who feels this way???

 

[Guest]

I thought this "review" sounded pretty biased. The Alienware performed significantly lower yet always had a good word put in for it saying "oh but it's still playable".

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]anon12[/nom]I thought this "review" sounded pretty biased. The Alienware performed significantly lower yet always had a good word put in for it saying "oh but it's still playable".[/citation]

Uh, d00d doesn't seem to have a clue...the idea is "Here's a middleweight gaming notebook, can it still game?" And it turns out to make most games playable.

You also see a big notebook that sets the high mark, just to show how much performance you must give up in order to get the notebook this much lighter. You can see it's a bigger notebook, with SLI and all that, it's super heavy and not very portable.

So, if these are the notebooks they sent, what usefull information can they provide? They answer the question "If I'm looking to game on a notebook, do I REALLY need the SLI rig, or can I get by with a smaller, more portable unit that has the same resolution". It turns out that for the most part, you can get by with the lighter unit.

 

[maliusmaximus]

A lot of people here are criticizing the very concept of a gaming notebook and the relevance of this article. Personally, as a gamer, who is always moving and living in different countries, my only choice is a 15.4" gaming notebook. I can't buy a desktop, and 17" is just too big for hopping countries. I'd rather have slightly lower visual settings and a 15.4" chassis than a twin SLI 17" nuclear reactor. So there definitely IS a market for this, and I applaud Alienware for pushing the envelope a bit. It's fantastic that now you can play the latest games at decent quality whilst on the go and I'm happy to sacrifice the boost in performance of a twin SLI system for something that can go around the globe. That said, the m15x is overpriced, and the Sager NP8660 with a 9800 GT kills or equals it for a lower price thus making the m15x an illogical purchase. This article should have been written months ago when the m15x was king of the 15.4" hill. As it is now, the m15x could only appeal to those who want to show off how much money they have and have a thing for bling.

 

[docnasty]

Some of you idiots just don't get. You think because its not for you then no one should bother with gaming laptops. A buddy of mine works for a government contractor and is sent all over the world to install security systems in military bases. Are you going to lug around you desktop + LCD monitor and goodies onto a 36 hour layover + plane ride to Japan? And then do that again when you got 8 different bases in the span of 3 months? No. Just shut the fuck up. There are people out there who just cannot carry a desktop around with them - gaming laptop is the best solution for them.

 

[jamesl]

this is an inexpensive gaming laptop
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8780198&type=product&id=1204332501169

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_D2lWKZRAU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NycEZ7wfCBc&feature=related

 

[Guest]

OMG, this test is a joke. Everybody can show that 2-3 year old games can run equally on two very differently powerful system. These games in the test are old. Where is Crysis, Assassin's Creed etc?

 

[Guest]

they cannot test Crysis/Assasin's Creed because the machine cannot handle it

@ docnasty,
did you ever read my last post? iPhone, mobile consoles is the future. gaming laptop is just a stop gap that neither performs or portable.

besides, if you feel midi tower is too big, there's always a shuttle case that (with a bit of modding) can fit gtx280 no problem.
and that system will only cost $2000 for the best performance PC can offer, half of what those machine offers.
what those machine offers is not even faster than my 2 year old 8800GTX

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]wyx[/nom]they cannot test Crysis/Assasin's Creed because the machine cannot handle it @ docnasty, did you ever read my last post? iPhone, mobile consoles is the future. gaming laptop is just a stop gap that neither performs or portable. besides, if you feel midi tower is too big, there's always a shuttle case that (with a bit of modding) can fit gtx280 no problem. and that system will only cost $2000 for the best performance PC can offer, half of what those machine offers. what those machine offers is not even faster than my 2 year old 8800GTX[/citation]

You can blame nVidia for that. The 8800GTX was the most powerful core they had for around two years.

 

[Farrwalker]

On the issue of weight:

The Alienware and its charger and power cord weighs just over nine and a half pounds (9 1/2); the Dell and its charger and power cord weighs fourteen and one half pounds (14 1/2). The difference is about five pounds (in whole numbers).

While five pounds is a great percentage more than the nine and a half pounds of the Alienware, those two items are not all that you carry when you go out with your laptop.

In my own case I end up carrying a briefcase with my 17" HP laptop in it and some cords, media, thumb drives, pens, and misc stuff that adds up to about 22 pounds. So if I cut 4 or 5 pounds from that I'd only be carrying 17 or 18 pounds. That little bit of weight is less of a factor in choice than the minimum performance that I am willing to accept in the computer that I buy.

After all when you are actually useing the laptop you are sitting down with it on a table or something, you are not walking around carrying it.

 

[bobwya]

Yeh and it also saves on going to the gym!!

Bob

 

[t-bone steak]

This laptop makes much more sense with the lower resolution panel where the performance is closer to the SLI rig. Such a high resolution on a 15.4" screen would make for some very small fonts which I personally find to be impractical/unnecessary. The Alienware with the 1440x900 screen (which is still better than most 15.4" screens) and the slightly slower CPU (2.4 vs 2.8) is only 2500 (they charge 350 for 4 GB DDR2, we all know better than to order that direct =). That makes much more sense than what was shown in the review price wise. If they had reviewed the lower resolution model, even with the x9000 CPU, with both models on there respective native resolution settings, the results would have favored the Alienware even more. The FPS would have been closer and the Alienware would have offered a very similar gaming experience. Just my .02.

 

[Fadamor]

Interesting that they loaded it out with 4GB of RAM. The graphics chip takes the top 512 MB of that if they're using the 32-bit OS versions of Windows. That's a nice waste of 1/8th of your RAM.

Regarding Mr. Roboto's rant on Dell service, we've been using Dells in the 10 years I've been at my current job (3000+ desktops and laptops)and their service has been exemplary when we've needed it. So I guess they just don't like you.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]Fadamor[/nom]Interesting that they loaded it out with 4GB of RAM. The graphics chip takes the top 512 MB of that if they're using the 32-bit OS versions of Windows. That's a nice waste of 1/8th of your RAM.[/citation]

It's an excellent waste of RAM. Three gigabytes offers more performance than two gigabytes (especially under Vista) and the easiest way to get 3GB is to use two 2GB modules and "waste" the excess.