Build quality Asus G1s vs Compal IFL90 vs Sager 2090

So, I am browsing around reviews/previews of these system, and they basically seem similar spec-wise, with Asus edging out on looks, but Compal having better graphics card, battery life and speakers. What about build quality? Reading that translated review in one of the threads, makes me worry about flex on screen and the keyboard.

So, how do you think Asus compares to Compal in build quality?

 

I can't comment on the G1S but the sager and the compal are the same computer.

 

From what I read both Asus and Compal are known for good build quality, I wouldn't worry about either. I like the looks of the Compal better and it is the same machine as the Sager, they just come with different warranties.

 

The Asus has a better graphics card. However, it also has a gaudy look.

 

Both have the 8600M GT. The ASUS has 256mb and can take another 256 from main memory. The Compal 512mb. The ASUS is GDD3, the Compal GDDR2 with no need to take from main memory.

I don't see where you can say out of hand that the ASUS has a better video card.

 

The 8600M GT in the Asus laptops have almost double the memory clocks compared to the Sager/Compal's 512MB version (1400 vs 800, if I'm correct). I'd much rather have twice the bandwidth than twice the memory.

 

Let's just wait and see how much speed they've got to deliver.

 

I'm too lazy to do the search for you but it's been discussed elsewhere in this forum that Asus reports the clock speed for the memory in a way that makes it appear to be about double that of the Compal.

 

So, DDR2 would run hotter and draw more power as well, would that be correct? What about screen and build quality itself? There are all kinds of reports of grainy screens on the Asus.

 

Actually, it is correctly displayed. The memory bandwidth of Asus's 8600m GT matches what it should be (22.4GB/s).

Here's how you find it out: memory frequency (if ddr, then it's twice) x bus width in bytes.

So, for the Asus's GT: 1400 x 16 = 22400

But, for the Sager, it's 800 x 16 = 12800

That will cause a serious bottleneck very quickly.

 

Where do you get those numbers? Asus says they have an 800MHz GDDR3 bus, which I'm dubious of... they've in the past said that they had an 800MHz bus, when it was really a DDR 400MHz bus, and Compal says it has always stated the actual frequency, rather than the DDR frequency. It's a standard that's very closely related to DDR2, so I can't see a doubling in clock frequency just from moving to the new standard. Maybe an increase of a hundred MHz or so in a mobile factor, but from 400 to 700, almost doubling? There's no way.

 

does anyone know what kind of plastic is the chasis of the IFL90 and the Asus G1 made of?

Are there different quality gradients for ABS platic?

 

so which card is actually faster/better? Asus G1s or Compal IFL90?

 

No one has any hard numbers yet from what I can tell, but I'd wager that the IFL90 has a bit better performance in memory speed, and definitely has more memory available without "stealing" it from slower system RAM, so that gives it a plus as newer games come out.

 

Well in the nvidia spec sheets it says the 8600GT has memory speeds of 700.
Meaning 1400 * 16 = 22.4gb/s which is listed as the bandwidth.

So basically pitabread I think Osser is right in this case. GDDR3 does allow for some very high memory clocks. But then you have to take into consideration most laptop manufacturers won't have the clocks that high, and also the 512mb dedicated partially makes up for the lack of memory speed thats why the 8600GT 256mb GDDR3 vs 8600GT 512mb GDDR2 are infact quite similar in performance.

 

Yes, I am correct. But, I'm sorry, more memory quantity doesn't make up for lower speed memory. It's pointless to have huge storage if you don't have the power to push it around.

Look out for any reviews that show gaming performance and the crippled 512MB version will show its flaws a lot quicker.

The funny thing is, though, that the 512MB's bandwidth is almost as slow as the bandwidth of the main RAM (in dual channel). So while the 256MB GT may have to dip into the computer's main RAM every once and a while to flip out some textures, it's going to perform a lot better with its own dedicated RAM.