Paying More for Less GT60-0NE Vs. GT60-0NG

Whats the deal with this? Why would you pay more for less machine. The nVidia 680M is supposed to be the fastest GPU right now, and the 0NG comes with the nVidia Quadro K2000M. Windows 8 on the 0NE (not a fan) vs. Windows 7 on the 0NG. I really am interested in any feedback because it seems to me to be a step backwards from the 0NE version.

 

The Quadro line of video cards is verified to work with particular programs. Yes, it is less powerful than a 680M, but the 680M and it's drivers don't go through rigorous testing with various professional programs (such as Autocad, Solidworks, etc....). This costs quite a bit, as you can imagine....and that's the reason for that cost.

 

Thanks for the reply to an obvious newbie question. It is because of everyone's years of experience that I have learned so much from these forums.

 

darkhawk13 is spot on. The quadros are intended for engineering type work, and so I think marketing also attributes to the price to specs ratio. I've read that you can actually take a GeForce card and - with different firmware and changing of the resistor jumpers - can get it to perform similarly to a Quadro.

Of course, theory and practical application are two very different things, and I have yet to see someone try this.

 

Yup. I'm sure you could PROBABLY do it....but I'm not sure why you would? For the most part, even those engineering programs will still work just as well and good with the same Geforce cards. Occasionally there might be a hiccup, but that's the price you pay for paying less. I mean, I'm using Solidworks, Autocad, and other various electronics programs and they work great with the GTX680M. Even my simulation (Comsol, and HFSS) programs work just fine with it.

 

The only "advantage" really is the support for OpenGL 4.3 and the lower power consumption. It's good to know said applications work well with your 680m, darkhawk. Looking at the specs between the two ( GTX 680m and Quadro series), the 680m beats the best Quadro nearly punch for punch.

 

Yes the extra cost is in the quadro and the 95% gamut screen and new motherboard.

 

In the corporate world, solution validation and certification have an estimable value. Given that nVidia is a large, established company who does their market research, I'm willing to guess the price difference between the Quadro and GeForce lines is really close to that estimated market value.

 

I think the "workstation" model have more video output? But I can't really find a reason to get a k2000m in a MSI machine(unless the look impress you)

 

It's a very targeted machine at professionals who need the quadro certification or extra monitor outputs