First time poster looking for some advice! The time has come for me to replace my desktop, and I would like to see many opinions as to what I should do.

First, my intentions with this notebook:

Gaming (WoW, Conan, CoD4, etc.)
Possibly running a small business using it
Multimedia (I want something amazing to watch DVDs on while I'm out)
Schoolwork

The most important things to me are gaming and multimedia. What attracted me to this particular model is the screen...though I can't seem to find a laptop backpack large enough to carry it (any idea on that?). Now, the build I'm looking at is going to cost me around $4k. I'm hoping that some small downgrades can happen so that I can spend a bit less, but it's not the end of the world if I cannot.

Another question that I have is whether or not WoW/Ventrilo will even run on Vista 64-bit. The HP guy I spoke with on the phone said that it wouldn't....but I would like to hear everyone's input and experience with regard to that.

Here is the build, please let me know if there's anything I can downgrade to without suffering greatly in performance:

Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Extreme Processor X9000 (2.80GHz)

20.1" diagonal WUXGA High-Definition HP Ultra Brightview Widescreen (1920x1200)-"True HD" 1080p res

512MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800M GTS Video Card

240GB 7200RPM SATA Dual Hard Drive (120GB x 2)

Microsoft(R) Office Home and Student 2007 (Figuring I can upgrade to business when/if things go that route)

--------------------------------------

Is the X9000 Extreme processor worth the extra $350? They offer the Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo Processor T9500 (2.60GHz) for $350 less.

They also offer 320GB 5400RPM SATA Dual Hard Drive for $100 less than the one I selected. Would I notice a huge difference between the 5400 and 7200? Would I be able to purchase a 7200 in the future if I feel that I need that caliber of a drive?

Thanks for taking the time to read this! I'd appreciate any positive input that can be given!

After speaking with some friends, they've started convincing me that a 20.1" laptop is a bit excessive even if I am replacing my desktop. I've read lots of positive comments about Sager, so....I'm looking for pretty much any and all input from people. I would ideally like to spend less than $3,600 with all warranties included.

You can get the 17'' Sager NP5793. Well configured for under 3K. I own it's predecessor and love it.

17'' WUXGA screen
Core2 T9300 @ 2.5ghz
GeForce 8800m GTX
4gb DDR2-667
200gb 7200rpm HDD
8x DVD Burner
2 Year Warranty

Total: $2653 w/o Tax or Shipping

Agreed^^ SAGER NP5793 is smaller but has a 1920x1200 resolution and has teh 8800MGTX which is better than 8800MGTS

If u want to pay $3600 then i strongly recommend u to look @

1_DELL XPS M1730
2_SAGER NP9262

these 2 laptops have SLI 8800GTX and the differences between these 2 is that the SAGER model has DESKTOP CORE 2 DUO/QUAD CPUs whereas the M1730 has Mobile CPUs

If you can, WAIT!

ATI is pushing out the 4XXX series mobile stuff soon. Should run a bit cooler and have the same performance of the Nvidia parts if all goes well.

Also, notebook specs will be changing with Montevina (sp?) incoming soon.

If you wait, and nothing changes except the price went down, you win. If you buy now, and nothign changes, its doesnt matter. If you wait and everything changes, you still win because youll have better hardware.

I 3rd the Sager vote. Great laptop, at good prices. 5793 is you want something a little more mobile. A 9262 if you want a long term desktop replacement.

HD 3870 for notebooks is even released and u are talking about HD 4xxx?
Notebooks GPUs changes take more time than Desktop GPUs

As far as I know ATI has 3k stuff out for notebooks, and the 4k stuff is incoming. I will see if I can dig up the webpage I found that on.

Main advantage I see with the 4k stuff is better performance in a smaller cooler package.

The benchmarks aren't out yet, so the things we know aren't 100% accurate

Either way, I'd still take a long, hard look at the NP5793 series. I own one myself, a nice $2500 config.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] 793-review

Theres the review I wrote on the machine.

And I, too, would not place money on a card (4xxx) without benchmarks for it first.
Wait, or jump, your choice.

Can u post some pics there, so it may become sticky ?

There are pics on it, they just aren't actually embedded so i don't blow my bandwidth

Cant remember where I found the 4XXX info, but ATI does list the 3XXX cards as mobile parts on their website. ATI/AMD actually has quite a leg up on Intel and Nvidia as far as mobile chipsets go. They can do the entire chipset/processor/video in house. AMDs processors aren't anything special, but the 4XXX video cards are very nice. Tests have show that a better performing video card is greater than a high dollar processor.

Nvidia has a stranglehold on the mobile performance market right now, charging outrageous amounts of money for a decent mobile gaming video card. ATI could certainly bring them back down to earth if they could break into the mobile gaming field with a decent low dollar product.

Not entirely true.
AMD does not have a wireless chipset, and would require a substituent chip of the chipset to use one - sometimes causing issues. (though most notebooks use addon cards anyway, intel's are more streamlined, coming from the same company.)
Intel actually has the whole package...except their gpu's are nothing special, whereas their processors are.

Meh, wireless chipset. Not that big of a deal really. Im sure AMD could scare up a wireless chip they could weld onto a mobo.

Intel does have the whole package, if all you want to do is anything but play a decent 3d game.

Intels processors do kick butt. However, in a mobile setting those kicking desktop processors are a bit much. AMD has slower processors, true, but they do fall into the good enough area for a mainstream setup like a laptop. In other words, your not going to see much overclocking on a laptop regardless. Thats where Intel gets their big advantage. Clock speed vs clock speed, without overclocking entering the equation, AMD processors are very comparable to Intels stuff.