MSI GX60 Gaming Notebook Announced Discussion

MSI has unveiled its upcoming MSI GX60 notebook, targeting gamers who are interested in portability without sacrificing on gaming performance ... using the latest AMD technology.

Read the full content of this Article: MSI GX60 Gaming Notebook Announced

Related Articles:

• AMD A10-4600M Review: A Closer Look At AMD's "Trinity"
• AMD Radeon HD 7970M Now Available
• MSI GT783 Review: Gaming Dominance

 

I heard that the CPU AMD uses on this thing is on par with 2nd gen i5's like the 2450M, wouldn't this seriously bottleneck everything?

 

it will probably be a bottleneck

 

We've been theorizing that the CPU would perform at about the level of an i3 2310m.

Going with that assumption, Meaker did some testing a while back. (Emphasis mine)

(I think the below test was done with an 2820qm)

 

The desktop version A10-5800K ain't seems bottle-necking a Radeon 7870, so I guess the scenario will be similar with A10-4600M and Radeon 7870M.



The fact is CPU power won't do sensible difference for gaming.

 

From Meaker's test, it looks like it's noticeably bottlenecked. Changing the CPU netted a 25% average FPS increase.

Yes, the i3-2310m is just a surrogate for the A10-4600m, but they should be close enough that we can draw the conclusion that, yes, the 4600m will bottleneck the GPU compared to an i7.

Right now, it's going to come down to how attractively priced it is.

 

indeed, its been awhile since amd made a decent cpu, thus it would bottleneck, just wasnt sure on how much it would be
just look at total war games that are cpu intensive, amd cpus bottleneck the performance heavily. hell even a i7 2600k still bottlenecks

 

The only logical solution is to get the end-year P570WM with an i7 3930K

I guess if you overclock the A-10 on this thing you can get a slightly higher performance than the i5 2450M?

 

I haven't been keeping up with the ins and outs of Trinity. Has anyone managed to overclock it yet?

 

It all looked great until I seen what CPU they used, A10...really! Great idea take one of the top GPU's and bottle neck it with a CPU that can't match or even come close to entry level i5.
@ Forge unfortunately no OC that I know of, which was a surprise becuase the older llano did very well.
I hope it has dual channel memory.

 

Yeah, I remember someone pointing to an HP thread where people tried and failed to overclock the the APUs.

Which is sad. Reliable overclocking could have helped with the shortcomings as a CPU, but now...


Also, it's been a while, Kratos-face Guy

 

This is just silly, I can't imagine a company putting out a Geforce 680M\Core i3 combo and this is just as stupid. Never pair a GPU with a CPU that costs 1/5 the price.

 

Shouldn't Turbo Core 3.0 kick in when the on chip GPU isn't in use?, kicking it up to 2.8-3.2GHz, I'm not saying that's enough, but I imagine it would make the bottleneck considerably less. Another thing, are we sure that a Dual core I3 can actually be compared to a Quad core CPU? Even if you don't consider the modules actual two cores, it is more efficient than Hyperthreading once you get beyond two threads, measuring CPU performance can be tricky at times, from personal experience I can tell that even the fastest Dual core CPU won't feel as smooth at a certain number of tasks as a Quad core of any CPU really, unless we're at Atom level of single threaded performance where any task is a struggle.

I don't think it's a bad idea, we have a billion Core I5 and I7 based gaming laptops, this adds a little variety, and should give us some value as well, what I'd like to see most is Enduro kick in, as the 4600m is a nice low power APU, so considering that you're going to have quite a range, going from a gaming laptop to a pretty mobile Laptop as well, if everything works right ofc.

Honestly I am considering getting this, I like supporting AMD since imo they bring some of the best innovations to the market, and it's hard to find an AMD laptop that hasn't been compromised for no other reason than to make it even cheaper. I hope we get to see a full review of it so we can actually see if it's bottlenecked or not.

 

I forgot the full technical explanation, but the 4600m is, essentially, a dual-core with hyperthreading. It's just marketed as a quad.


EDIT:

 

I'm sorry, but that's patently false! CMT is vastly different from SMT(Hyperthreading) It's no comparison, it's nearly as efficient as two cores, where Hyperthreading doesn't even come close, the difference is SMT doesn't require as many transistors to work as CMT, but that shouldn't surprise anyone.

Calling a Dual Bulldozer/Piledriver Module CPU a Quad core isn't incorrect as it has most of the wiring of an actual Dual core, calling a Core I3 core a Quad core based on Hyperthreading would be incorrect as it nearly has none of the wiring of a dual Quad core.

 

Very good approach Medallish, I double your thoughts. And those who say 2Core+HT for 4 integer cores ain't understand anything.

 

Im just going to leave these here,

AnandTech - AMD A10-5800K & A8-5600K Review: Trinity on the Desktop, Part 2

AnandTech - Bench - CPU

And no I dont expect that the performance on the mobile should be equal

 

This is correct, but I just thought I'd add that it IS true that each module shares a FPU. A quad core bulldozer/piledriver only has two FPUs. Whenever the program in question makes even moderate use of the FPU, the bulldozer/piledriver quad core will act much closer to a dual-core.

 

Right, a video no one understands is quite scary.. I actually found the review the guy did, and yeah look at the synthetic tests it can look a little scary, the difference is huge! However, if we look at the actual game tests, well it gets quite different

The guys page is here, Google Translate calls it indonesian, but he does write the pros and cons in english and a lot of the charts are in english as well.
MSI GX60 Review | Feat: AMD Trinity Technology « Pemmz' Online Workshop | Review and Optimize Gaming Laptop for Gamers

Borderlands 2 @ Full details and no Physx avg fps:
GX60 Avg: 50
Notebook check 7970 on an I7, avg: 62,2

Crysis 2 @ FHD, DX11, and max settings avg fps:
GX60 49
NBC: 54,5

I took these examples as they are heavy games, and yet they run pretty close, yes there are examples of a much bigger gap, this isn't against the guy, but this review isn't very well made, it's missing details like what driver version he used, my guess is once more reviews come out, we'll see a trend of the difference being minimal once you turn on the details, like we saw with the A10-5800K and 7870 review vs an I5.

An example of results being slightly inconsistent is actually on NotebookCheck with Max Payne 3 both on I7 based systems @ Ultra settings, one getting 38fps like the GX60 review(39 avg), and another I7 based system getting 61fps avg, Driver or game issue? Will it fix it both places? And how many games is affected if it's Driver based.

But yes if you buy your laptop to only run 3Dmark there's about an infinite number of I7 based Gaming laptops you can choose from. If you just want gaming, GX60 should be great.

 

Right, much closer to a Dual core you say? Is that why it scales 60-80% of a core? the CMT that is, that's the usual results of Singlethread to Multithread scaling of Bulldozer.

 

In mostly Integer-based multi-threaded software, the bulldozer/piledriver cores do indeed do quite decently... but the fact of the matter remains that each module is essentially two mini-integer cores and one fpu core.

A quad-core Phenom II embarrasses a quad-core bulldozer/piledriver in FPU performance clock-for-clock. Sadly, even with much higher clock rates, the bulldozer core couldn't actually catch even the Phenom II.

Worse, most games don't really play to the bulldozer/piledriver's strengths.

Let's face it, bulldozer has been repeatedly outperformed by even the older Phenom II x4 processors in games. It takes a reasonable overclock to put a quad-core bulldozer even on PAR with a Sandy bridge i3 for gaming.

The A10 WILL bottleneck the 7970m.
The question is... how much.

On certain games, having less CPU and more GPU is actually a good choice. (example FPS) On other games, having less CPU is going to hurt.

If MSI can drop the price to the right place and AMD can fix enduro bugs, this laptop might be an interesting choice.

 

you dont speak indonesian? quite poor of you thanks for the link

its an enduro issue, you should be aware to not compare the performance of the 7970m on the clevos with the ones in the alienwares, it can be quite daunting the gpu underutilization. Thus Im going to put preferably aw systems, when they are clevo it will be marked as such, lets hope that they have a lot of benches on notebookcheck, because Im not going to go after gaming figures on the aw forums here

Max Payne, ultra avg fps
msi - 39
aw - 61.2

Crisys 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 49
aw - 54.5

Mafia 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 52
aw - 88.8

Sleeping Dogs, medium avg fps
msi - 30
clevo - 55.4

Borderlands 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 50
clevo 62.9

when you are only looking at aw vs msi its a landslide on how those a10 perform badly, I knew that they were going to be a bottleneck, everybody knew. I just didnt realize it could be that much of a bottleneck. The strange markings here is the crisys 2 game, it only gives a 10% advantage to the aw system, while on other games this is close 40%

We dont know what drivers they were using and for a good test we need to have both on the same drivers and a lot more games to make sure how much a loss of performance this can be.

depends on the value, it has to be priced quite competitively.

 

Well let's be fair... all of those are plenty playable. The Alienware is also MUCH more expensive. Furthurmore, if you look at the charts, the gx60 has some very odd FPS drops which likely should be addressed with proper driver fixes. We both know Enduro is hurting the GX60 and you are very careful to compare it to a laptop that can bypass the problem.

Most certainly the A10 is indeed a bottleneck... but you are comparing to a laptop that is likely 60-70% more expensive. A 40% performance difference seems not so much of a big deal when you compare prices.

Anyone have some 660m + i7 3610m benchmarks for those? Since that is the price range we are likely looking at for the GX60, that would be a better comparison.

 

I am being fair. I suppose that AMD wont have any enduro problems in a notebook that is entirely theirs.

Thing is my proposition was to learn how much of a bottleneck that cpu is, we can only do that with more games and same drivers, as I specifically pointed out.

Another thing I also said that depending on the price, this is a good machine to buy despite the obvious cpu disadvantage. It has to land at that price point that you mentioned 3610qm + 660m, otherwise its going to be a though proposition.

here is the same comparison with the 660m and the 670m

Max Payne, ultra avg fps
msi - 39
aw - 61.2
660m - 19
670m - 23

Crisys 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 49
aw - 54.5
660m - 22
670m - 28.7

Mafia 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 52
aw - 88.8
660m - 42
670m - 55

Sleeping Dogs, medium avg fps
msi - 30
clevo - 55.4
660m - 86
670m - 79.7

Borderlands 2, ultra avg fps
msi - 50
clevo 62.9
660m - 41.3
670m - 46


it needs to fill the niche off the 660m, 670m, thats the price point, and not asus price point, in other words the performance of the 7970m + A10 as it is in that review is that it resembles a lot of the 580m

 

Thank you, that was actually quite enlightening.

The GX60 seems to be quite a bit more potent than the similarly priced 660m/intel combos in those games with the notable exception of sleeping dogs. (I think we can chalk that up to drivers as the two nvidia+intel laptops even beat the alienware 7970m + intel. I don't think we could find someone who thinks the 660m shoudl even be in the ballpark of a 7970m.)

It all rests with price I guess.

I do disagree with AMD being able to bypass enduro problems in a laptop entirely made by them. I actually hope you are right, but have this gut feeling it isn't true. I keep looking at those fps dips in that reviewer's charts and get this sinking feeling enduro is a universal problem.

 

Given that I didnt see any spikes (its only possible to see those in a graph that shows the fps per frame or time), Im going to assume that it works. It reminds me of last year of the bacon laptops, they didnt suffer any driver issues that the intel + amd ones suffered.

 

55mm thick? Good lord, that's around 2.16 inches, bulkier than massive desktop replacement laptops!

I thought this model was supposed to be "targeting gamers who are interested in portability"

 

@moviemarketing

How is that a surprise? Or any different than the common gaming laptop? Or even the bulky workstations? Intel or AMD-based? I would expect the cooling solution in this GX60 is easily capable of keeping the APU/GPU from overheating.

 

It was surprising because my interest piqued when the article said "targeting gamers who are interested in portability," so I was expecting something at least slightly less bulky than a desktop replacement.

I'm looking for something with 1080p display, graphics card along the lines of the Nvidia 650m, 660m or AMD 7750m, quad core Ivy Bridge CPU and ideally somewhere a bit closer to 1 inch thick. The 2nd gen Razer looks interesting (0.88" thick with Nvidia 660m), but I'd prefer a faster CPU and SSD with no mechanical drive.

 

In the next 4-6 weeks i plan on buying a gaming laptop. I use to have an asus G73 and i love the build quality, fit/finish, and price. I was planning on a G75 Ivy bridge / 660M setup, but im holding out to see what the price of this MSI GX60 will be.

Some preorders are showing it around $1199 which to me is to much... ill wait until its in stock at some bigger retailers though.

I think some games the a10-4600m will have performance issues, and some games will play great. I just wish we could overclock trinity...

 

Pre-order here $1,200.00:

MSI GX60-1AC-021US AMD7970M 2GB GDDR5 Windows 8

MSI GX60 1AC-021US 15.6" SteelSeries Gaming Notebook. MSI 9S7-16FK11-021

 

The info has probably made the rounds already, but an MSI 3610qm/660M machine (GE60) is priced at about the $1200 range. The GX60 also comes with some goodies too, like a BR drive.

 

it has to, a np9150 with a 675m is around that price. and given the numbers that we have, the performance due to the cpu bottleneck is pretty close.

 

i pre ordered a gx60 a few days ago it was a bit over $1500 all configured with the screen, color calibraion, and yes it had the option to overclock it with the trinity a10 so when i get it i hope they find a way to overclock it with the $50 extra but ill tell everyone how it is when i get it. Your going to have to wait untill i get it in a week or when they are done building it, also if its a bottleneck or not and how much. but im thinking it will be a bottleneck because of the i5 comparable processor and the high end video card. the reason i got it was because of the better 7970m video card. ill also let everyone know how it does with normal tasks such as non-gaming

 

I was about to order this one, then I read the numbers in this blog: MSI GX60 Review | Feat: AMD Trinity Technology « Pemmz' Online Workshop | Review and Optimize Gaming Laptop for Gamers

The 7970m is supposed to manage 23000'ish in 3dmark06, but only gets 12000 with the AMD CPU. That's an insane bottleneck.

But it looks like that's the worst case scenario though, as that old benchmark probably is CPU bottlenecked anyway.

 

There will be a bottleneck but in reality it might not even be noticeable in most games or real world use.