Comparison Gateway FX vs Asus G71

Well, I had the FX for about a year and now I have the best buy G71 so I thought I'd share some differences between them that you cant just see by looking at specs. As of now, the G71 has a much better graphics card, etc but the FX is an outlet item and in the past year this has happened a few times with an improved model directly following so we'll assume there will be a new FX with similar specs. The FX im comparing to is the p7811.


Appearance:Well, first off this obviously will be very opinionated, but there are settings on the Asus I havent seen discussed on here. The asus will always have the blue glowing badge and stripe. You cant turn it off. However, you can make the side lights either stay on, always flash rapidly, or flash rapidly./stay on with the cpu or fan. Also, there are lights on the bottom of the laptop on each side. You can make them always on in multiple color choices, or change color with the subwoofers (though I havent tested this yet). I never heard of this though before buying the notebook but it is a cool bonus if it works.

Another nice thing about the asus is that the outside of it has a finish at the bottom for your hand for carrying that does not attract fingerprints. Also, the palm rest and buttons dont either. However, in the FX, the keyboard, media buttons, and trackpad are the only places that dont. Even the mouse buttons do so you have to wipe it a lot (if you get annoyed by such things).

The asus also has covers over the side ports which looks good when closed, but when you need the ports you have to flip them out. It isnt hard if you have nails though, but some people seem a bit annoyed by it.

Screen: Well, first off the 7811 had a 1200p screen, but the most recent one had a 900 and im sure the new one will be too. But before the 7811 i had the first model which had the 900p screen. Honestly, there is no comparison. The screen is MUCH better on the FX. The asus isnt as vivid and has much worse viewing angles. I swear the FX screen quality was as good as a good tv's. The viewing angles were very wide and it was very bright. This is a huge con for the asus if you are a student and you want to watch movies with a bunch of friends on it.

Input: Each have their own pluses here. First off, the FX has media buttons (play, pause, volume control) while the Asus has none (besides the keys you press along with FN key. Also, the FX keyboard has 2 FN buttons, 1 on each side. This is a big minus for the asus because if you are cleaning in your room or doing something away from desk and want to pause the music, you have to use 2 hands (or a mouse). I find this annoying, especially if I have something in one hand. Also, the FX keyboard itself is much higher quality, and i cant imagine it getting much better. The asus, I'd rate ok. But if you are gaming a lot you might want to but a usb one so you dont wear the asus's out (the one in store seems worn and it had been out for about a week or 2). Also note that the CTRL and FN keys are switched fro the standard on the FX. Although its very annoying at first, I DID use FN much more the Ctrl so it does make sense, but if you'll be going back in forth between this and a usb or another computer, it potentially could stay annoying.

Now, the asus touchpad seems more precise, but out of box is very annoying to move across the screen (simple turning up the cursor speed easily fixes this though). The FX is good too and creates less friction when moving the cursor but I still prefer the asus one. Also, the asus mouse buttons are good quality, while the FX is not. The FX's are extremely loud with clicking, especially if you are in a class.

Although the asus doesnt have separate media controls, but it does have some extra "buttons". You put your finger on them and let off and it senses your touch (you dont actually press down). One is a touchpad on/off switch, another brings up the asus options (what LEDs to leave on, or to flash them, etc). Another one chooses image options, like a TV would (natural colors, etc). This is a cool feature but the FX will always look better anyways. Finally, and most importantly imo, there is one that chooses what power mode to be in. It toggles through standard, power savor, AND overclock. Its extremely convenient to quickly turn overclocking on to how you set it by simply tapping this.

Speakers and Sounds: Well, first off with ANY laptop you really should get some sort of speaker system for music, games, video, whatever it is you do. But, if you are out somewhere, the asus will perform much better. The FX speakers are very good, but the asus gets a little louder and sounds clearer. Both of them when maxed dont have much distortion, compared to most laptops which sound like a bat dying when turned to max volume.

As far as sound via HDMI, the asus wins again (though this probably will be upgraded in a new FX). The FX only supports 2 channel while the asus supports 5.1. However, with the FX my home theater simulated 5.1 very well anyways, but if you are watching a movie with 5.1 format this is a plus in the asus.

As far as computer noise, each wins in different situations. When being pushed, the asus is quieter (i have heard it only has 1 fan which is probably why). However, when idling or just using the web, aim, etc the FX is silent while you can hear the asus's -its not annoying though. Also, the asus cd drive is much noisier but is also faster.

Software:Well, obviously both come with a lot of bloatware, but they Gateway and Asus both provide some useful programs. The FX came with a nice, clean utility for the webcam which could dock on either side, or the top of the screen. It stays hidden until you put the mouse in front of it for a second, then pops out. You can take a picture, video, or record yourself and change the settings easily. Although Asus has a program, you have to click on the start menu and find it (unless you put a shortcut on the desktop of course). The asus though has a facial recognition program for logging on to windows that is very nice. I use a password that is 7 characters, first 2 letters and next 5 numbers, and this program is about the same speed as typing it. It comes up all on its own in the logon screen and you can take pictures in different lighting to make sure it can recognize you. If it doesnt for some reason, you could still logon by typing your password. Also, the asus can either lock the computer or turn off the display if no one has been in front of it in X amount of minutes/seconds. I find this a cool feature and it has worked well and flawlessly. The asus also comes with overclocking software that can bring the 2.5ghtz processor up to 2.9, and as i said in "input" its very easy and convenient to do.

Other: One thing that annoyed me with the FX, every time i put it in my backpack and took it out, the wireless button was turned off. It was far too easy to switch and i even mistakenly switched it off a couple times while I was using it.

Also, the asus has the hdmi on the rear, rather than the right, which I prefer (though i wish there were 1 usb there too).

Conclusion: Well, since a new FX hasnt come out yet its hard to decide but if they end up about equal in price and performance it will probably be the looks that are the main factor. However, again if you are or will be a college student, you should really consider the FX for its screen, unless you will have a monitor or a tv.

 

Well written post but let's clarify some things...
Gateway HAS released 2 "new" notebooks just recently (a few weeks ago actually).
Due to the 7805u and 7808u being wiped from the face of the earth (refurbished units don't count),
The 7807u was brought back (it came out in March, got yanked due to it coming out too early- they already had the 7805u and 7808u well in stock)
and the 7809u has been introduced (kinda disappointing though, it's actually more like a 7805u with a fast processor and higher hard drive).

Unless you were talking about the distant future of Gateway's FX line, Japan get's those ones early , surprised Gateway not dropping this in the states (or anywhere else for that matter):
http://www.google.com/search?q=Gate...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

http://www.notebookcheck.com/Newseintrag.54+M59a547aa787.0.html

http://translate.google.com/transla...refox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=w3e

 

Wow... I'll be honest, having just demo'd side by side for a few days the 7805U went back to TD and I kept the G71. I would most strongly disagree with your keyboard comments. The G71 is a slightly larger form factor (wider) and they took advantage of that space by giving you bigger keys. The Gateway is far more difficult to type with if you are a touch typist. Keys are smaller, in the wrong place (FN and CTRL swapped) etc; As you said, entirely a matter of opinion. I just greatly prefered the G71.

-MP

 

^ added the FN key part in, i forgot about that. I used the FN key more though so it did make sense, but it was very annoying for the first couple weeks or so, and this was the ONLY computer I used during, so I didnt have to switch back and forth. Good point though. But as far as build quality, the asus does seem cheaper to me. I think the gateway will show less wear and tear in a year, if you normally use the laptop keyboard.

 

I used to have an FX P-7805u and I must say that I was pretty impressed by its overall build quality. Most people down them assuming that Gateway is an inferior brand. Mine at least was on par with other comparable gaming notebooks out there.

Back when the 9800m GTX was the fastest GPU, the FX was an excellent deal for the having the second-fastest chip out there. Now, even though the 9800m GTS isn't as highly-regarded, the fact that they can be had for $700-$900 still makes them an excellent value.

The only problem is that, like the Asus G51, the CPU in the FX (the P8400) bottlenecks the GPU somewhat. I dropped a P9600 in it and easily got over 10k 3DMarks, pretty good for a computer in that price range a year ago.

Mine had the LG WUXGA+ and it was excellent. A 17.1" notebook with only WXGA+ is totally unacceptable IMHO (that includes the BB M17x).

 

Both computers are a gaming laptop, EVERYONE knows that in order to max out settings or see better frames, besides overclocking or updating the CPU, the screen resolution is going to have to be turned down anyway. WXGA+ is fine for me and other people as well, these are GAMING notebooks after all, not meant to be watching 1080p movies and such. If you REALLY want to have a higher resolution, you can EASILY plug an HDMI cable from the laptop to your TV. I don't have a clue why people cry a river over sharper resolutions, are you going to get high frames from a laptop with a 1920 X 1200 screen display (at least set at that resolution for your games), HELL NO.
You as well as other people are going to lower the resolution (and probably up the AA if you want) to pump out those high frames and put the settings of your game to the max.

It's a personal opinion if a laptop needs that sharp of a display, some people just don't see it as a necessity. Some companies give you the choice of upgrading it and some don't, you don't HAVE to buy the lower resolution version but other people will find it fine (like myself and others).

Heck, I run my games (on my desktop) right now at 1024 X 768 and pump up the AA (through the game or forced through Nvidia Control panel) and the games look great and have higher frames than upping the resolution to the max on my computer.

Here's the deal, the G71GX-RX05 are for those who want a great performance and price ratio computer (best bang for their buck) and the G71GX-RX05 supplies that by cutting a few corners to keep the price down and ALOT of people are fine with that.
There is a G71GX-A1 to suit YOUR needs on xoticpc with a WUXGA display, so this should appease the high resolution fanatics, albeit a higher price tag.

The only reason the 7811 had a higher resolution was because they tried a gamble (and on a few 7805u's) and most likely sold those laptops at a loss due to the fact that the REVERTED back to the 1400 X 900 displays in the 7805u/7808u/7807u/7809u. A 17.1" notebook with only WXGA+ is totally acceptable to some people (like myself) and Asus provided. If I want to watch movies in High Definition or Blurays, I have a PS3 and a HDTV- I'm good already.

 

If you're going to go with a screen as large as 17", you might as well use it. Gaming notebooks SHOULD have at least decent res. screens IMO, WXGA+ is good for 13.3" and 14.1" notebooks.

The GTX260m in the G71 is MORE than powerful enough to play most games at higher resolutions than the screen will allow. I just feel that it's a waste to have so much power with such a low res. screen.

Of course you can always plug in a monitor, but, let's face it, most people will not. After all, not having to buy a monitor is one of the pluses of getting a notebook over a desktop.

 

Considering a 50-65" tv has 1080p, i dont think a 17" screen really does require 1200p. Thats sooo many more pixels per square inch and the tvs already look smooth.

Honestly, the only reason why i slightly preferred the 1200 screen in the gateway was because when looking at pictures on the web they didnt take up much room in the browser.

 

Also, you do produce more heat/stress the graphics card at higher resolutions. Yes the GTX 260m is powerful but if you think you can pump out high frames at max settings for a 1920 X 1200, you are in for a rude awakening.

As stated before and by you, your opinion is that 17" displays SHOULD have a high res display no matter what the cost whether drops in frames, having to lower the settings in games, or TOO TINY of icons - the resolution matters most, nothing else. Who cares about the economy right, who care if the computer costs way out of MANY peoples budgets right - WUXGA is the way to go no matter what if you are using a 17".

I have to disagree again though and many others will as well.As Flaring Afro pointed out, I have a 47" tv and 1080p is just fine for me, having a 17" display with an outrageous 1920 X 1200p display is ridiculous and not need by ALOT of people. The WXGA+ is fine by many people and like I mentioned I game at 1024X768 anyway, so the screen resolution is more than adequate for me and others. You don't have to buy the G71GX-RX05 dude, the G71GX-A1 is perfect for you instead but I see that maybe you bark about the high resolution thus far because the W90vp has spoiled you.

I, future owners, and current owners are perfectly fine with the laptop and have no sense of feeling of , "I wish it was a high res screen" because we are having too much fun playing our games at great speeds and at max settings. The performance to price ratio on the G71GX-RX05 is oh so tempting, a fantastic deal, and totally trumps anything else in local computer stores. So we can argue for days on end that 17" laptops MUST have a high res display, it's entirely your opinion, and some people are just happy with what they get from their purchase. I haven't wavered, I still want the G71GX-RX05 and with my current budget - it's the best price I've seen from a fully loaded laptop and others agree.

How in the heck did this thread get side tracked/offtopic? This was suppose to be a comparison between the Gateway FX laptops and the Asus G71GX...
We need to drop this 17" banter and get back on topic...

 

been to 1080/1200 (don't really think they have that much difference) I can never go back down just because how ugly it looks. 1280 * 720 just won't cut it , 1680 * 1050 is ok but you still notice the difference. On the other note I don't know the G71 screen , but my W90 screen really nice and bright , using it with the spledid softwere that came with the laptop really make a big plus . My old 7811 do have a good screen , but I think i will take this 18.4" over the 7811 .....for da1writer game at 1024*768 .... I don'tt know how you do it but once i reach 1080 , I can never game @ 768 again.

 

I agree with da1writer comment, I prefer to have a Native resolution that i can play and work. Although you can lower a higher res to a more workable res it wont look as good as their native res. A higher resolution would also require better hardware (depends on the game), but the computer will have to draw more as the resolution is higher, so it might be fine now, but with new games coming out might not. More import for me, its the ability of a computer to handle well a game, much more than it is to look better.

So for me, the 1440x900 in 17' is ideal, i can do all my work, surf the web, and play games fine, and thats what the G71 delivers.

While i agree with most of your comment, there are old games like WOW, that in my desktop (i7/285gtx) at 1900x1200 while raiding i seen the fps drop to 30s (everything high except shadows). So for sure a 260m GTX with a core duo 2.5ghz will stuggle at 1900x1200 under the same circumstances, and this is where i find the 1440x900 res would be better, as it will probably give me very similar gameplay as my big desktop but at lower res.

That said, to each to its own, i think its more a user preference, while some see a 1440x900 as a weakness, for me its a strength, but i don't disagree for people looking 1900x1080 res, i just find thats not ideal for what my budget oriented by what im planing to do with (work/gaming).

 

Thanks abula, that's what I've been trying to say. Glad some are looking at it in my perspective. I want good frames and to see if I can max out the settings in my games, high resolutions (1920 X 1200) is something I don't even take into account- I usually lower my resolution anyway to get better results !

 

yeah my asus g1s has a 1680x1050 15.4 and i cant for the life of me justify going any lower than that. maybe higher so its been a battle finding a laptop to meet my needs. well until i found the new g51vx-a01