@gufberg @MUN200455996 According to notebook check it is closer to 30-40% http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

The architecture is similar but different fabrication node, The GT770 is the new architecture and it is about as far above the GT765 as the 750 is below it. Good call though as I thought the 750 and 765 were much closer than they are.

@Daian @ShimmerMan No fans at all, simply get an steel bottomed fish tank and fill it with acetic acid alcohol or some other non electrolytic solution, put a peltier unit under the steel bottom of the tank and submerge your entire rig in the tank. It's pretty cheap except the one time cost of the solution (get a used tank off craigs list or kijiji if you're canadian.

Lenovo y410p, identical specs except you get a 240GB SSD and a 1TB HDD. The GPU in the Lenovo is "only" a GT750 so 10-12% less performance in the worst case scenario and the Lenovo costs 899.00 on their website right now sooooo half what the Razer costs then?

Not sure if any of the site admins actually bother to read any of these posts or not, but in the off chance that they do I just wanted to make the note that the load times you have experienced in your testing are most definitely due to Sony brand memory sticks or not having increased the the systems available cache size by using space on the Memory stick pro duo. Myself and a number of members of my universities "Geek society" and members of the physics society have done our own testing a number of times and come up with significantly shorter load times than your tests have revealed. Just for the record they are still dog slow at around a minute from selecting the play game icon on the PSP's home menu to arriving at the games start menu but still nowhere near the up to 3 minutes you have listed in some cases. I will assume you either have a defective or scratched laser, a defective memory stick or the internal cache in your unit(s) are flawed. We at my universities Geek Society have tested using my launch day unit as well as significantly newer units with only an average of 2-5% difference in load times and a general initiation to start screen load time of from 1:10 to 1:34 depending on game.

Finally a game where the hard working people at AMD/ATI can reclaim lost face by showing that their hardware really is aimed at titles that aren't out yet. Personally I tend to stick with the Nvidia camp since they are more consistent as of late but it is nice to see AMD succeed in the GPU market, thereby allowing them some more space to manuveur in the hardware market. Oh and to the indidividual who stated that this piece of software is a system hog they need to go try running oblivion ( Personally one of my favorite titles but truly a hardware glutton), or just crawl out from under a rock and try any of the titles released in the last say 2 years or so, hell this game is only about as hard on systems as say FEAR or Quake 4, which are both almost 2 years old. In general considering the new technology of the graphics engine in this game (Unreal engine 3) it is almost surprising how well it does run on older hardware. In the end Oblivion stills drops my 8800GTX and my FX-60 lower than this game while having both set at max and at 1280x1024 resolution.

Just for the record for those who are doubting the accuracy of the screen shots or commenting that their old possibly 480i TV (yes some mitsubishi models of tv had S-video in the early to mid 90's) looked clearer, just remember that coaxial cable for tv is usually at 320x240 and 480i is only 640x480, if you blow either of those up to those sizes on a monitor they will look hideous. So no your tv didn't look clearer it just seems that way because A) no one sits as close to their tv as they do to their monitor and B) the only accurate way to compare the shots is with an outside HD camera on a tripod taking shots for comparison or by screen capture via a vivo graphics card. Remember kids at the end of the day your 480i (possibly) tv still has less than 1/4 the pixels as a 1280x1024 monitor (640x480=307200 vs. 1280x1024=1310720 ). >Oh yeah and most of those shots are only partial screens, or a piece of what would been shown on screen, so as to highlight a specific area of the shot for comparison (such as the flag in the last shot).

no offense or fanboy ideas intended, just drawing a very obvious conclusion about "tat2dchad's" post. Yes all of those systems were horribly overpriced when they came out, and they ALL tanked within 24 months. Graphics r great but they should not reflect an unrealistic increase in the price of consumer (key word here consumer not specialty electronics) electronics, because hey in my 20+ years as a gamer i've seen them all come and go, it just seems like the waller busters move on faster. P.S. I wonder has any console game manufacturer even considered the idea of a removable for upgrade video card, cause hey with the online networks they are all touting as being the true sign of next-gen dominance it makes the whole driver/support thing of the PC extremely user friendly, plus hey if u don't have an HDTV right now but u want to upgrade to a PS3 just for the games, then get the nonexistent model thats sporting the 7600GT video card solution (would certainly push the polygons and shader effects of the next gen games at say 320x240 or 480i resolutions) for like 399.99 and then just upgrade to the sony packaged rebranded and factory quality sealed Nvidia 7800GTX256MB video solution in a year or so when the LCD HDTV u were eyeing hits the financial sweet spot (below the divorce/breakup barrier). And hey for the true graphics fanatics this means that when the PC guys start getting those sweet DX10 games sony would be right there offering a Nvidia 8XXX GTX 1GB card to take the shader and particle effects to the truly next level. Just for the record people this is not exactly science fiction I'm discussing here they have upgradeable hard drives, in my PC the harddrive has two connectors (one for power and one for data) and well i'll be darned so does my PCI-Express video card (one for power and one for data, 7900GTX 512MB by BFG 710/910 stable). They could do it but they won't, why don't know it certainly makes financial sense for the consumer, but hey who ever cared about the consumer. NOTE: This post applies to all Console manufacturers, not just the PS3, no favoritism just didn't have my degree last year when the Xbox came out so stayed away from the tech commentary at the time.