We're not exactly sure what kind of impression they'd make during a presentation or business meeting, but luckily for sales of Dell's upcoming
World of Warcraft edition XPS
M1730 laptop, most folks who would purchase such a product have long ago fled corporate America for the privacy and creepy ambiance of their basements. Seriously, though, the pair of special edition Horde and Alliance notebooks are a hardcore fan's dream come true, featuring WOW artwork all over the place along with all the current games and patches preloaded. What's more, the bonus swag here is off the hook, including a special box full of items related to the game and an envelope containing such goodies as beta tester privileges and a free in-game pet, whatever that means. Dell also claims that the minimum configuration specs have been bumped as compared to the plain Jane M1730, but like pricing for this package which goes on sale next week, specifics remain a mystery.
Update: As commenter Ryan points out, specs and pricing are now
up on Dell's retail site. The good news is that even a barebones rig gives you a 2.2GHz T7500 Core 2 Duo, 2GB of DDR2, and 160GB of storage; the bad news is that such a configuration starts at $4,500 and only goes north.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
imacmatt09 @ Dec 4th 2007 8:48AM
I hear it's harder to quit WoW than smoking...
geekmorgan @ Dec 4th 2007 9:12AM
Why would you buy a laptop that only plays WoW?
Michael @ Dec 4th 2007 9:29AM
Wouldn't know...can't quit WoW....
Thomas Prescott @ Dec 4th 2007 10:17AM
I've tried to quit. I lasted 3 months.
greatslack @ Dec 4th 2007 11:20AM
Hit level 70 and start raiding every night. You'll be surprised how easy it is to quit.
Reader @ Dec 4th 2007 12:25PM
Your mom goes to college.
o29 @ Dec 4th 2007 4:53PM
I quit after about 3 months. Then again, I also stopped smoking.
Ryan @ Dec 4th 2007 8:49AM
Here's the link for cost and components included:
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/m1730_wow?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&dgc=EM&cid=26383&lid=601037
Seems it costs more to join the Alliance ($4644) than the Horde ($4519). At least as a starting point. Alliance starts with a faster processor (2.4Ghz) that you can upgrade. 2GB ram, 160GB 7200rpm drive, no bluetooth.
The link just got pulled down as I wrote this...
Ryan @ Dec 4th 2007 8:50AM
My bad, the link still works
Esat @ Dec 4th 2007 8:50AM
I don't play WoW, but if I did I'd probably want one of these....
superfresh @ Dec 4th 2007 9:04AM
When are they going to come out with a Minesweeper deluxe edition laptop?
Panathas17 @ Dec 5th 2007 12:24AM
Or the Pacman?
shaliron @ Dec 4th 2007 9:07AM
...but does it play DOOM?
Sorry guys; have to do it at least once don't ya?
Justin @ Dec 4th 2007 10:04AM
No.
Oracle @ Dec 4th 2007 2:50PM
I don't know why. As soon as I saw the title of this article, I was already thinking how many idiots will post the "will it play doom" or "will it blend" comments. You better grow up people.
ugg.tryptophan @ Dec 4th 2007 5:50PM
A barebones rig gives you a 2.2GHz T7500 Core 2 Duo, 8700M GT, 2GB of DDR2, and 160GB of storage, this will SO play Doom.
Mobius_1 @ Dec 4th 2007 9:11AM
I don't play WoW and I want one of these anyway :) But the price is a bit too much :(
joemamma @ Dec 4th 2007 9:26AM
The Figureprints thing looks pretty cool. Custom made figure using 3D Printing - looks like they used this technology - www.zcorp.com. The Figureprints site isn't up yet, but that looks like what they are talking about.
Anyone else catch the bit about the figure?
Malina Kirn @ Dec 4th 2007 12:02PM
I assumed Figureprints was some sort of WoW term. You mean you get your character made from plastic? How cool is that? Here's the FigurePrints link (opens Dec. 11): http://figureprints.com/
Brian @ Dec 4th 2007 9:28AM
WoW isn't exactly demanding. My 2-year-old generic ChemBook plays it just fine (GeForce Go 6400, 1.25GB DDR, 1.73GHZ Pentium M, Vista).
Now, my new Lenovo T61, which arrives today (from Hong Kong!) should be even better. Even the "low-end" Quadro NVS 140M (GeForce 8400GS) is 3x as fast as my Go 6400, which is just fine for WoW. Add the fact that my new laptop has 2GB of DDR2, a 7200 RPM 100GB Hitachi disk, and a 2GHz 4MB L2 Core 2 Duo T7300, and you've got a decent gaming rig. Well, at least as long as you don't want to play Crysis.
The best part? The whole thing was $1009, which is a hell of a lot less than this Dell.
Thanks Dell, but people who actually use their PCs for a living understand that there's no such thing as a "gaming" PC. It all comes down to components and build quality, and Dell's not known for either.
I laugh at people paying $6k for an Alienware ALX box. Go buy yourself an HP xw8600 - it's significantly cheaper (often by several thousand dollars), takes up to 64GB of memory, can handle two quad-core Xeons (up to 3.2GHz with the new 45nm chips), and has dual-graphics to boot. It's also very quiet, easy to work with, and rack mountable.
Fruition @ Dec 4th 2007 10:03AM
Wait, what do you mean there is no such thing as a gaming pc? I mean, I don't really understand what you're defining as a "gaming pc" because you say "It all comes down to components and build quality" and that's exactly what a gaming pc is. Unless you mean to suggest that just because a company calls something a gaming pc that doesn't make it so, but that's pretty obvious, I should think.
I mean you don't need an NVIDIA 8 series gpu to run msword, so obviously if your rig has that it was intended for gaming. There could be bottlenecks elsewhere in the system but I'm sure it's more of a gaming pc than something running on Intel Extreme Graphics.
Brian @ Dec 4th 2007 10:37AM
@Fruition - That's exactly what I mean. Dell XPS ceased to mean anything when they started shipping Intel integrated graphics on some of their line. Alienware, Falcon, and Voodoo have done the same.
There's no such thing as a 'gaming' PC. There are lots of normal (and self-built) PCs that are great at gaming. There are lots of 'gaming' PCs that are underpowered.
This $4500 Dell travesty doesn't have the new Go 8800GT.
Other than the better GPU, it's not any faster than my Lenovo. My notebook has the same CPU (OK, 200MHz less, but same core and cache size), same memory, same speed HDD (or better - the 7k200 is the fastest drive on the market; I'm not sure what the Dell has), and same FSB. Yeah, the Go 8700 is going to beat my Quadro NVS 140M hands down. No, it doesn't matter for WoW.
So what does the $4500 even buy you? What does this thing have that you can't get in a 'normal' laptop for 1/2 or even 1/3rd the price? Oh, right, it has a PhysX card. We all know how useful that is.
Finding the right notebook is about balance. I've owned many of them, from a Toshiba M200 tablet to my Clevo (Sager) horse (which was amazing for the day, by the way - 1600x1200 LCD, Mobility Radeon 9600, P4 with HyperThreading and 800FSB). I've owned a Compal CL-56 (Radeon 9600, Pentium M), an nc6000 (similar; business notebook), and I'm typing this on a Compal FL30 that I've had for the past two and a half years. My Compaq 6910p (IGP, Core 2, business notebook) showed up last Friday to replace my nc6000, and it's an outstanding business notebook. But I want something that can play games, yet is still light enough to take wherever. That's why my T61 shows up today.
If you never game, get something with an IGP. You'll get better battery life and save some dough. If you play mostly WoW or older games, or don't mind turning down the settings a bit, get something with a decent (e.g. GeForce Go 8400/8600/Quadro NVS 140, Radeon 2600) GPU and enjoy yourself. If you game a LOT, get something with a good GPU, but be ready to sacrifice portability and battery life.
Look at the specs, look at the reliability. That's what's stupid about this Dell notebook. Don't spend $4500 on a notebook because it has WoW graphics on it. Don't spend more to buy a notebook 'designed for gaming'.
Almost all notebooks are made by Quanta, Lenovo, Compal, or AsusTek. Dell, HP, Apple - it doesn't matter. Design features vary, as do prices and specs. The brand is not the notebook.
bjrcboy @ Dec 4th 2007 10:57AM
See your Quadro NVS 140M may be able to play WoW but there are people who like to play the game at max settings on a 25 man raid to the Black Temple. I doubt your card will handle the game then with max settings or even handle the orgimmar bank on a busy server night. All that said people who are buying this have a little bit deeper pockets then most and are only buying it for the "status" and extra stuff that comes with it! I'd buy it if i werent in college and broke off my ass hahah.
Johnny B. Goode @ Dec 4th 2007 11:25AM
While I agree that any major manufacturer's gaming PCs are over priced, there is such a thing as a gaming PC. Gaming PCs are the high end systems typically designed to provide maximum performance from current technology, because games will likely be the most demanding applications a home user will run. However, I believe that anybody who buys a gaming PC is missing out on the experience of building your own, and paying way too much.
I don't even know this HP system you're recommending, but if it's running dual Xeon processors, it's probably either a workstation or a server. There's a good probability it's using registered memory, ECC memory, or registered/ECC memory. It's probably also running Quadro's instead of GeForce cards. While those cards can be used for gaming that's not what they're designed for, and they won't give the same performance as other high end cards. Those dual Xeon chips are going to be great for running multiple application instances or doing some serious number crunching, but they're not going to be that great when you want to run Crysis, or Bioshock, or even WoW.
Let's not even mention that to run 64Gb of ram you'd have to have a 64bit OS, which really isn't a big deal nowadays, but it will run you the cost of two licenses for your OS of choice(they're licensed per processor[socket] ya know). You can call me jaded, but I have a feeling that if you buy that thing with dual 3.2Ghz Xeons, 64Gb of RAM, and Dual Quadro's it's not going to be any cheaper than any "Gaming" system.
Brian @ Dec 4th 2007 12:00PM
Gaming PCs are the high end systems typically designed to provide maximum performance from current technology
No, 'Gaming' PCs are designed to make more money for their manufacturers. PC manufacturers, by and large, do not 'design' the performance of their systems. That is determined by the CPU, GPU, chipset, memory, disks, and other factors - very little of which is actually within the manufacturer's control. What manufacturers (at least the major ones) do design is serviceability, cost, manageability, reliability, and thermals.
Anyone can throw together a SLI or CrossFire rig. The parts are easy to get and they're not even very expensive. A couple of 8800GTs run around $500, and they're within 20% of the fastest thing you can buy (dual 8800 Ultras). A Core 2 Quad Q6600 is under $300, and you can overclock it to 3GHz without even changing the voltage.
There is no 'secret sauce' that makes an Alienware or a VoodooPC faster than something from ABS or something that you put together yourself.
There's a good probability it's using registered memory, ECC memory, or registered/ECC memory.
FB-DIMMs, actually.
It's probably also running Quadro's instead of GeForce cards. While those cards can be used for gaming that's not what they're designed for, and they won't give the same performance as other high end cards.
Fair enough, although the dirty little secret of the graphics business is that Quadros and GeForces (and FireGLs and Radeons) are the same thing. The difference comes down to bits tweaked in the video BIOS.
Let's not even mention that to run 64Gb of ram you'd have to have a 64bit OS, which really isn't a big deal nowadays, but it will run you the cost of two licenses for your OS of choice(they're licensed per processor[socket] ya know).
Of course you need a 64-bit OS to use more than 4GiB of memory (at least in a single process - there's always PAE). But you want to be running a 64-bit OS if you're using more than 2GiB anyway, because XP and Vista reserve the top half of the address space for the kernel anyway, leaving you only 2GiB on XP-32 or Vista-32 for your applications. Of course, you can also use the /3GB flag, but that creates its own problems and you still only get around 3GiB for your apps.
Business versions (Vista Business/Enterprise/Ultimate, XP Pro, Windows 2000 Pro) of Microsoft desktop operating systems are licensed by core.
Those dual Xeon chips are going to be great for running multiple application instances or doing some serious number crunching, but they're not going to be that great when you want to run Crysis, or Bioshock, or even WoW.
I won't dispute that dual-quad Xeons are totally overkill for WoW or even most games. But the Xeons are every bit as capable as the Core 2 CPUs, because, once again, they are Core 2s. Xeons use different sockets, usually support more than once socket, and sometimes have different cache/FSB/power configurations. Other than that, they're the same damn thing.
Let's have a rundown - I'll have a Xeon X5450 (45nm Penryn-based) and you can choose any x86 CPU you want, at stock clocks. Singlethreaded or multithreaded, it doesn't matter. There isn't anything faster.
This is the ENTIRE POINT of my original post. Server, workstation, desktop, or gaming system, it doesn't really matter. It's all the same basic hardware, with a few things tweaked here or there. Servers have more management features and redundancy, but aren't usually going to ship with dual PCIe x16. Workstations use registered (or FB-DIMM) memory so that you can cram them full of RAM. Gaming boxes have multiple GPUs and low-latency memory.
I'm not recommending that you spend $5k on an HP workstation. But if you're going to spend $6k, don't buy an Alienware that's essentially the same box you could build yourself for $2500. You might as well get things like large memory capability, fast SAS drives, or 8 cores of Xeon goodness.
You can call me jaded, but I have a feeling that if you buy that thing with dual 3.2Ghz Xeons, 64Gb of RAM, and Dual Quadro's it's not going to be any cheaper than any "Gaming" system.
Quite true, but if you compare equally configured systems you'll find that the workstation is significantly less expensive than an Alienware or other 'gaming' system.
And I can absolutely guarantee that Alienware/Dell don't put the same kind of work into thermal/acoustic engineering or quality control that goes into an HP workstation. How do I know that? I know the people who do the engineering and testing.
Brian @ Dec 4th 2007 12:03PM
FYI, scratch my comments about ABS. I was just looking at their website and they've gone the 'gaming' route too, which is a shame because they used to sell well-configured yet reasonably-priced rigs.
L.M.L.Y.P @ Dec 4th 2007 2:36PM
@bjrcboy
wow is not demanding at all... its one of those games that if you can play doom, you can max wow
when i played wow 2 years ago, i was able to max it out with full mc/bwl ogrimmar using a pentium 4 @2.55, radeon 9600se, and 1 gig of ram..... my $600 laptop that i just bought can max that shit out, and it has shared gpu
Fruition @ Dec 4th 2007 7:43PM
@L.M.L.Y.P
Are you sure you're playing WoW?
What framerate is your machine running at that for $600 you can "max that shit out"? Because my 6-month-old laptop with a Geforce Go 7400 runs at 1280x800 with most of the settings and effects on med/high and I only pull ~40 frames in Outland, which is quite poor. Because yes, you can max out the settings for any game, but it isn't worth it if you're getting 2 frames per second.
Any hardcore PC gamer will tell you:
Frame rate > all
Vince @ Jan 8th 2008 10:12PM
Any "gaming" PC is usually configured similarly to a CAD machine; the GPUs used for games and other 3D apps are usually the same things.
Brian's right, they want your money, and they know that WoW guys (used to be one; I quit) are willing to shell out, especially if they have cash in the first place.
The machines do look awesome though.
dataminer49er @ Dec 4th 2007 9:39AM
I'm still waiting on the Leroy Jenkins edition laptop.
Ty @ Dec 4th 2007 10:19AM
There'd be a bucket of KFC printed on the top.
h8rain @ Dec 4th 2007 9:50AM
I like the design, but I would rather put a sticker on my MacBook Pro and save $4500, or buy a brand new MacBook Pro and put stickers on it, and only save $2000. Nice idea Dell, but the "Alienware" tax will hopefully not fool too many people. Wait, I probably spoke too soon, and thousands have been ordered.
You can seriously play WoW on almost anything. My wife plays on her 3+ year old iMac. My MBP plays with almost all the effects on at like 30-60 fps. In Shat, drops to like 20-25 fps.
snitch @ Dec 4th 2007 12:11PM
well i think you just hit the nail right in the head with the sticker idea, but dam is this what dell is doing now?? its there a board of directors there? maybe they should just give there shareholders back there money and keep drinking Kool Aid there
Fruition @ Dec 4th 2007 9:51AM
Ugh I love WoW dearly but I don't think I could ever love anything enough to get it plastered all over my laptop.
Victor @ Dec 4th 2007 9:52AM
Yeah, but the thing still weighs a friggin ton...
And I may just be blind, but I didn't see any mention anywhere about what graphics options are available... can we just assume that they will be the same as the regular M1730?
Ryan @ Dec 4th 2007 10:12AM
The link to Dell, if you look down the right side (since it doesn't give you an option for graphics card) says it's dual 512MB 8700M GTs.
AlexL @ Dec 4th 2007 9:57AM
Yes you can play WoW on anything. Not because WoW is not a demanding game, but because WoW is a game with flexible graphics settings.
WoW can be very demanding, if you want to play at WUXGA resolutions with all the details and aliasing turned up. But is this really something new? This is the same thing that applies to virtually all games except for the latest DX10 games. I'm really surprised at all those posters who said WoW isn't demanding. It's as if you people have never touched a computer game before.
Ty @ Dec 4th 2007 10:19AM
Even turned all the way up WoW isn't very demanding when compared to pretty much any other PC game out. Word in Conflict, FEAR, Team Fortress 2, Crysis, etc. I run WoW at 1920x1200 with everything cranked and I rarely drop below 60fps on an 8800GTX.
jc8 @ Dec 4th 2007 10:07AM
No 8800m GTX or quad penryn = no deal
bjrcboy @ Dec 4th 2007 11:00AM
To you maybe not everyone else that doesnt know better!
Matthew Hilario @ Dec 4th 2007 1:19PM
were playing wow here, not doom on max resolution.
i agree 4.5k without those is a waste...
but atleast you'll be exalted with the virgin faction.
Deus Innomen @ Dec 4th 2007 11:33AM
Honestly? Absolutely we would buy it. My fiance is a big fan of WoW in her free time, I think the case styling looks great, and the pack-ins are a very nice touch. The specs are pretty solid and it would be a great replacement for her aging XPS laptop that she uses for gaming still.
Of course it's the price that prevents us from jumping into the queue for this one, we have a wedding and a house to pay for. ;)
Malina Kirn @ Dec 4th 2007 11:57AM
Now all Dell needs to do is make a Guild Wars edition and they'll have locked the market.
Angus Hedger @ Dec 5th 2007 1:15PM
Weee! Guildwars, love that game o_O
I wish.. i really do.. i would love a guildwars branded laptop.. =/
*insert standard Gw >>> WoW stuff here*
aoeu00 @ Dec 4th 2007 12:09PM
I killed a gnome today :P
vanye111 @ Dec 4th 2007 5:44PM
By dropping the laptop on it?
Jay N @ Dec 4th 2007 1:19PM
Have read to many told by to many friends that WOW is way to addicting, only reason I never bought it.
sotec_productions @ Dec 4th 2007 1:54PM
All technical hardware specs, top of the line rig comparison, and flame-war aside, anyone that would post on this site has probably been to the major OEM computer web sites and built themselves a 'dream machine', numerous times. I know I have. I know that I have several major RSS feeds that spit techno-lust and I willfully and happily read and drool, or gasp, or dismiss as fodder. THAT aside, anyone that knows anything about basic retail marketing ploys knows that any little shiny spot that can be added to existing products, including the upgraded and typically eye-catching product name, is a seller. "Oh, Napster is getting big again, so lets us at Verizon add a widget-app to our phones and see if that sells". Guess what? It does. This is the same and tired practiced concept as with celebrity endorsed products, specifically perfumes. This manner capitalizes on Company A's huge following, adds their likeness to Company B's product, and WHABAM!, the price tag soars, and the quality declines to comment.
Another example would be the present generation iPods. Now they have a touch screen, and a larger price tag. Whoopty-doodoo. Buy a 30GB Zune, which I have found online for $100+sh, buy whatever color case you want from Ebay, less than $10 with shipping, upgrade the firmware so that it functions like the newest Zune, and get what I think may be Microsoft's best idea since XP. I have read COUNTLESS exceptional reviews from both newbies and ipod fanboys on the Zune.
So I back up the idea that it's the hardware that really counts, not the brand name of the OEM trolls pushing their retail crack.
The only real plus I can see in this machine, is that it IS from Dell, which means that they can load up Ubuntu Linux (which does play WoW) and save you money, slave ties to Microsoft, and the ability to use more of the high priced computing power that is putting you into level 70 debt. The internet is a wonderous and plentiful thing. Use it.
wow indeed.
-ThoughtCriminal
mb @ Dec 4th 2007 2:18PM
Huge douche edition....
FM @ Dec 4th 2007 3:00PM
Horde > Alliance