Comments on: First quad-core laptop hits U.S.

Xtreme 917V Accelerator is the first quad-core laptop in the U.S.

[make_or_break]

So even with the hurkin' battery...

...how long does a charge last with all that gear? 90 minutes? An hour? Less?

[BeatleMegaFan]

Wouldn't that be heavy? ... Who could use it?

I know that the new HP HDX laptop is more like a mobile dekstop than a
laptop. That weighed twenty pounds. What about this?

A desktop processor, three hard drives, a Blu-Ray Tray, etc. Some laptops
have 2 hard drive bays, but I haven't seen three. A quad-core... nobody could
need that kind of power! That's crazy.

Even with that kind of power, who'd buy it? If you needed so much, you
might as well as buy a Mac Pro with the quad core 3.0 Ghz instead. At least
that's upgradable and more powerful for the buck. Dang... again, that's just
insane.

[fozzyfozborne]

Powered by a GeForce Go 87000M GT?

I think there's a typo in the fact that Nvidia only make an 8700M GT.

Anyway, besides that, a faster dual-core CPU will way outperform a slower quad-core in single-threaded cases. Why would you need 4 cores unless you're running 4 demanding programs at once?

[coolbee8]

...I'll pass....

...A desktop replacement...

Eurocom offers a similar system, probable 12 cell battery, battery last only 40 minutes with light usage.

As its a laptop, bios will probably not allow overclocking, it doesn't offer the newer QX6850 with 1333 FSB, and enen if it does in future, Q6850's performance will probably be easily bypassed by the the next gen quad Penryn processor or the dual core CPU one generation on. Intel santa rosa's dynamic acceleration (IFA) is better if working with single threaded apps as it shuts a core and increase the frequency of the other, I would think that for 2007, getting a santa rosa X7800 is a better choice, quad core is over kill and does not seem to offer very signifiant performance gain in common apps relative to its cost or power usage. Conroe microarchitecture is probably only suppose to be used dual core, quad core introduces performance bottleneck... and Penryn will not offer the kind of performance increase that we saw when core 2 replaced P4...

8700m GT is just a significantly overclock 8600m, its 128 bit mem creates bitter sense of irony as it says on nVidia's roadmap to be for enuthastics; nVidia's 8 series's high benchmark in 3Dmark 05 and 06 simply does not realistically reflect its performance, its performance is overated if you only take 3Dmark into perspective, at XVGA res, it may perform near a 7950 GTX go, as the res goes up to 1920x1200, 8700m perform more like a underclocked 7800 GTX go goving it in SLi won't do better; despite it supports DirectX 10, it is not meant to replace 7950 GTX, in acturality, its more like a 7700 Go, and DirecX 10 will probably be short-lived as 10.1 standard is going to be supported by R700...

As sweet as this laptop is, i'd probably like to see it to be eqiuipped with AMD's new gen desktop processor and option for the forthcoming ATi flagship mobile cards therefore, i pass on this offer...

[oxtail01]

Yeah - push the technology - needed or not.

The more CNET pushes new technology, the more money they make. Doesn't matter that software development is ages behind and haven't even fully exploited the processors at least two generations behind.

[Wild Eep]

A Little fact about multi-cores...

Currently, most programs don't use TWO cores to their full extent, so why would
we want four??? (A better question would be: if the computer is for gamers, why
would they even bother offering vista)