Hypersonic Aviator EX7: NVIDIA GeForce Go 7800 GTX First Look
by Josh Venning on October 10, 2005 9:30 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The System and The Card
We mentioned earlier that there are some differences between the Go 7800 GTX and the 7800 GTX. The most important difference is the fact that the Go 7800 GTX is clocked slightly lower than a normal 7800 GTX, with a core clock of 400MHz and memory clock of 1.1GHz. Other than that, they are essentially the same, with 8 vertex pipelines and 24 pixel pipelines. The Go 7800 GTX does employ NVIDIA's PowerMiser technology in order to manage heat more effectively than its desktop counterpart, which is a good thing, given the limitations of a notebook in that regard. The power budget given to the Go 7800 GTX is the same as it is for the earlier Go 6800 Ultra.
For testing, we used a Hypersonic Aviator EX7 notebook fitted with a GeForce Go 7800 GTX. Here are its specifications:
P4 670 (3.8GHz)
2 Gigs DDR2-533 CAS4 RAM
2 100 Gig Hard drives striped in RAID 0
1920x1200 17" display
The system is fairly large, as are most notebooks with displays like this. Not only is it very heavy (about 13 lbs), it generates lots of heat and will burn your lap up if you keep it there for very long. That said, it has all the benefits of a mobile system and was made for serious gaming. The Aviator EX7 is easier to transport than even a small form factor system and packs quite a few high powered components.
We are very impressed with Hypersonic's offering. With a 3.8GHz Pentium 4, this system should outperform those other notebooks that run Pentium M parts. The Dell notebook in which the Go 7800 GTX launched for instance supports at most the 2.26GHz Pentium M, which does perform very well, but isn't quite as the desktop 3.8GHz part.
The one complaint that we have about the Hypersonic Aviator EX7 is that it gets incredibly hot. After long hours of operation, the surface on which it sits also gets very warm and just using the keyboard was able to make our palms sweat. Or maybe that was just the incredible performance that we were getting out of the notebook. For those interested in the system, we found it to be very stable when kept well ventilated, and you definitely get what you pay for with this one. We do also like the fact that Hypersonic includes a dead pixel guarantee that ensures your thousands of dollars will not be spent on something less than pleasing to look at.
The desktop system that we used is very similar to the one on which we test most of our graphics cards:
Radeon Express 200 based motherboard
AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor
1 GB OCZ 2:2:2:6 DDR400 RAM
Seagate 7200.7 120 GB Hard Drive
OCZ 600 W PowerStream Power Supply
Now, let's take a look at performance.
We mentioned earlier that there are some differences between the Go 7800 GTX and the 7800 GTX. The most important difference is the fact that the Go 7800 GTX is clocked slightly lower than a normal 7800 GTX, with a core clock of 400MHz and memory clock of 1.1GHz. Other than that, they are essentially the same, with 8 vertex pipelines and 24 pixel pipelines. The Go 7800 GTX does employ NVIDIA's PowerMiser technology in order to manage heat more effectively than its desktop counterpart, which is a good thing, given the limitations of a notebook in that regard. The power budget given to the Go 7800 GTX is the same as it is for the earlier Go 6800 Ultra.
For testing, we used a Hypersonic Aviator EX7 notebook fitted with a GeForce Go 7800 GTX. Here are its specifications:
P4 670 (3.8GHz)
2 Gigs DDR2-533 CAS4 RAM
2 100 Gig Hard drives striped in RAID 0
1920x1200 17" display
The system is fairly large, as are most notebooks with displays like this. Not only is it very heavy (about 13 lbs), it generates lots of heat and will burn your lap up if you keep it there for very long. That said, it has all the benefits of a mobile system and was made for serious gaming. The Aviator EX7 is easier to transport than even a small form factor system and packs quite a few high powered components.
We are very impressed with Hypersonic's offering. With a 3.8GHz Pentium 4, this system should outperform those other notebooks that run Pentium M parts. The Dell notebook in which the Go 7800 GTX launched for instance supports at most the 2.26GHz Pentium M, which does perform very well, but isn't quite as the desktop 3.8GHz part.
The one complaint that we have about the Hypersonic Aviator EX7 is that it gets incredibly hot. After long hours of operation, the surface on which it sits also gets very warm and just using the keyboard was able to make our palms sweat. Or maybe that was just the incredible performance that we were getting out of the notebook. For those interested in the system, we found it to be very stable when kept well ventilated, and you definitely get what you pay for with this one. We do also like the fact that Hypersonic includes a dead pixel guarantee that ensures your thousands of dollars will not be spent on something less than pleasing to look at.
The desktop system that we used is very similar to the one on which we test most of our graphics cards:
Radeon Express 200 based motherboard
AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 Processor
1 GB OCZ 2:2:2:6 DDR400 RAM
Seagate 7200.7 120 GB Hard Drive
OCZ 600 W PowerStream Power Supply
Now, let's take a look at performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
52 Comments
View All Comments
Degrador - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
Yes, they are meant to be testing graphics. As you say, they should be minimizing the impact any of the other system components have on the results. Hence my point of why not keep the cpu and the memory the same - whether it's 1GB or 2GB, equal memory would make the results more applicable to finding the difference between the chips.Johnmcl7 - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
I fully agree - the review appears to be aimed at comparing the desktop 7800 to the mobile 7800, not the notebook as a whole against powerful desktop. If it was a Pentium-m system I can appreciate it's more difficult to match a desktop system but using an FX-55 against a P4 670 makes the performance figures almost useless, we have no idea if the performance differences are due to the faster processor or differences in the 7800.John
bob661 - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
I disagree. Although the 3.8 is slower than a FX-55, neither video cards would be CPU bound in those systems. And the difference in memory sizes doesn't have that great of an effect on performance.Johnmcl7 - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
The comments on the benchmark seem to imply AT are comparing the 7800s, not a complete system. If the latter was their intention, the review should have been written to reflect this.John
bpt8056 - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
This is a high-end notebook and it should be compared against a high-end desktop system. While it may not be a good indicator of raw graphics power, it does show what you'll get with this notebook compared to an uber-fast desktop system. Frankly, I'm impressed with the numbers that the GeForce Go 7800GTX put out in a system with obvious limitations.DerekWilson - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
This was our take on comparing the systems -- gamers will really want to know if a notebook will be able to perform as well as the highest end desktops. The tradeoff in performance is important even if mobility is helpful. That's a lot of money to drop on a notebook, and I could build our desktop box for much less.
The point is this: just because it's got a desktop processor and a Go 7800 GTX does not mean it will perform the same as the highest end desktops out there.
Note that this was also billed as a first look.
timmiser - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link
"gamers will really want to know if a notebook will be able to perform as well as the h1ighest end desktops."Well, judging by the number of complaints I would say you're out of touch with your audience! Gamers already know that a high end desktop will be faster than a high end laptop. Give us a little credit please!
ElFenix - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
i agree. i've always thought there are two ways to go about making a review fair: use as similar components as you can, other than the one being tested, and get as similar a price out of each setup as you can. obviously, these types of notebooks cost probably as much as a high end desktop, so i think this comparison is fair and give you a good idea of what you give up if you choose to spend $2500+ on a portable rather than a desktop. of course, the portable is portable, so has all those benefits.a thought for portable/notebook reviews: a subjective review on using the system to take notes in class (on a little college desk), lugging around campus (whether it fits in backpacks, lockers, etc), that sort of thing.
yacoub - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
Well there are two reviews much more useful that AT will hopefully conduct with this laptop soon:*Comparison against the previous desktop replacement gaming laptop which I believe sported some sort of high-end ATI Mobile GPU. This shows how it compares to what else is up for comparison to potential buyers. Let's see just how much this new GPU boosts performance versus the previous champions.
*Comparison with a desktop with the same CPU, RAM count, and a real 7800GTX, to get a better idea how much performance is lost if someone goes with a laptop instead of a desktop for their next upgrade. Let's see just how much performance is lost and price is increased for the same parts in a laptop, because it's a joke how much they charge for those things. (okay the last bit is just my opinion.)
Warder45 - Monday, October 10, 2005 - link
I have to agree. When I saw the desktop system I didn't understand what the point of the comparison would be. Also why not wait to throw the Dell machine in? Then compare the differences between the two, with heat, speed, and battery life.