Laptop Time

[Tigranes]

So after chugging along for 4 years, my self-built $700US PC is breaking down. Even with a new PSU it keeps shutting itself down, the 160GB HD is full and sagging, and I can't play NWN2, Witcher or uh, mid-settings Oblivion at more than 5fps.

 

The thing is, depending on where I do my Masters, and where I work in the meantime, it's very likely that I'll be city-hopping at least, and probably hopping half the Earth away. That means, laptop. I may be doing my masters over in the US/Canada come next september, and I'll want to be carrying it around on campus, I think.

 

So it's a challenge. Can you get a laptop that can play current games (Witcher as benchmark) at top settings, and ~2.5-3 years down the line, play the newest games then at low-to-medium settings... for $2000US max, $1500US preferred?

 

Only a few years ago doing that on laptops was a pipe dream, but I'm hearing that things are perhaps marginally better now. Still, I remain very much confused about all those different graphics card models, etc, so I want advice.

 

Let's get a sample out there. There is an HP Pavilion for ~$1500US with the following specs:

 

# 2.26 GHz Intel

[LostStraw]

Details on the video card from: http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForc...-GT.9449.0.html

The gaming benchmarks below were conducted with a 9600M GT containing 512 MB GDDR3 graphics memory and a fast Core 2 Duo CPU. Using a slower CPU and / or slower memory, a slower performance has to be expected (e.g., 20% slower with GDDR3).

 

Crysis: 1024x768, med: 25 fps -> playable (only in low fully playable)

Unreal Tournament 3: 1280x800, Stufe 3/5 -> fully playable

Call of Duty 4: 1024x768, high Details: 50 fps -> fully playable

Supreme Commander (Gameplay, Multiplayer 2vs2): 1024x768, med -> playable

Race Driver Grid: 1024x768, med -> fully playable

Colin Mc Rae Dirt: 1024x768, med Details: 30 fps -> playable

Gothic 3: 1024x768, high Details: 35 fps -> fully playable

Lost Planet: 1024x768, med Details, DX10: 30 fps -> playable

 

Current games (08-2008) are all fully playable (but not at the hightest settings) with the 9600M GT. Older or less demanding games can be played with full settings enabled.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/ is a fairly comprehensive resource for information on notebooks/mobile video cards and how they stack up against one another. Hopefully it can help you out

[Tigranes]

Thanks LS, although I already knew about the site. I suppose I should have clarified. I know where to get that kind of information, and for example I can understand the bits you quoted of course - but I can't really extrapolate. i.e. It says the 9600m GT can handle current games at mid-high details, but where is that likely to leave me 2.5-3 years on? Unable to play the newest games without cutting down all the settings to try and get the FPS over 20?

 

If it can handle Gothic 3 high at 35fps then it's probably good enough for all the games I want to play now, with possibly the exception of MTW2, but what I want to do here is sink as much money as I can into it, just to make sure I am happy with the laptop for the projected lifespan (instead of running on Computer Savings Time after the first year).

[samm]

It says the 9600m GT can handle current games at mid-high details, but where is that likely to leave me 2.5-3 years on? Unable to play the newest games without cutting down all the settings to try and get the FPS over 20?

My guess: Yes. 3 years is a hell of a lot of time for graphics cards, especially lower mid-range card such as 9600m GT (which isn't derived from the desktop 9600 gt, but rather a shrunk version of the 8600m afaik.) Edited September 19, 2008 by samm

[Tigranes]

Thought so. I should be looking at mid-high range, really. But that's the thing. You can look at HP laptops that are a thousand bucks more expensive, and they still use the same damn card. It's as if that's as good as laptops get, which would be depressing indeed.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Look at the Vostro series from Dell, they're cheap and you can get better components.

[samm]

Here you can only buy Vostros with worse components than said HPs, don't know about the US though. For ok gaming performance there's Alienware and stuff like this MSI, or the Fujitsu Siemens X Series some of which should (in the future?) come with support for external graphics cards, some newer ASUS models, but you pay all of that with limited portability and shorter battery duration, and at least the Alienware models are likely to be out of your price range.

 

Also might want to check out this Anandtech article about gaming laptops posted in some other thread here

Edited September 19, 2008 by samm

[Tigranes]

Note: I live in New Zealand. I just converted all prices to US 'cause nobody will know the NZ currency.

 

Okay, I had a look in you guys' links and all over the place elsewhere. I can find, in terms of graphics cards:

-> 8700M GT, which is similar and for a similar price.

-> FX 770M; I hear its a 'slightly faster 8600GT'. So probably not, right? I keep getting confused because sometimes cards with lower numbers are actually better.

-> Alienware provides top of the line 8800M GTX even in NZ, but prices start from $2500US and its very unlikely I can afford that.

 

-> What I'd really like is something inbetween the Alienware insanity and the original post's 9600MGT seems a happier solution: such as, Dell Precision M6300 with Quadro FX 1600M 512MB. Although that bit about 'discrete' worries me, is that anything like integrated graphics cards (ugh)? It seems to go at around $1700US elsewhere, but apparently in NZ, I have to call for prices. Will do that monday I guess, if you guys think it's worth it.

-> The MSI laptop you linked me samm, with the Mobility Radeon HD 3850... also looks like a good middle-ground... if I can just find it in New Zealand (gah)!

 

Finally, I used to think, way back, that laptops were pretty much impossible (or too much bother) to upgrade. Is this still the case?

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Some are easier than others, but generally Dells are fairly easy to upgrade. In fact I'll most likely be putting a new CPU in mine sometime soon, although I'll have to get my new desktop before I do that.

[samm]

Dell Precision M6300 with Quadro FX 1600M 512MB. Although that bit about 'discrete' worries me, is that anything like integrated graphics cards (ugh)?

This quadro is the equivalent to the 8700m gt, but you get better drivers (if you don't have to use the ones that Dell offers you) because it's the "workstation"-variant of this graphics card. Good for you if you're doing CAD "Discrete" is a good thing, as it's the opposite of integrated. It means the graphics card is probably in an MXM slot or similar, and more importantly it uses its own RAM instead of sucking RAM away from Windows and using the comparatively slow FSB.

 

[edit1]

Clicked the link and saw that only 256 are onboard, the other 256 are "turbo cache", the nVidia-Marketing word for sucking up the slow and much needed system memory, as in the provided link, it would leave you with only 768MB for Vista, which makes this notebook a bad choice in my opinion.

 

[edit2]

I hate it to be un-helpful, sorry :/

Edited September 20, 2008 by samm

[Tigranes]

Ah, I missed the turbo cache then. Dedicated memory is a basic requirement, IMO. Nothing's worse than getting a butchered graphics card.

 

At least it seems like I know what range I want and can get now, I just have to find something thats actually sold in NZ.

[Magister Lajciak]

Look at the Vostro series from Dell, they're cheap and you can get better components.

 

Vostros are not bad, but depending on the build you desire, they can actually end up more expensive than other Dell systems with the same specs. At least that was my experience when trying a few builds experimentally, as I will also soon need a new laptop and it also must be a universal machine for work, gaming and multimedia, since I also cannot lug around a desktop when I move between countries, which is a fairly regular occurrence.