Really Quick Question (Laptops)

2009-02-11 11:19:23

#1

Rohirm: Fear is a Leash; +85|6436|New Austin, Not

In a laptop

MSI GX620
CPU: Core 2 Duo P9500 2.5GHz 3MB L2 1066MHz
Display: 15.4 WSXGA+ (1680 x 1050)
System Memory: 4GB (2x 2GB) DDR2 667 SDRAM - 0 open slot MAX. 4GB
Video: nVidia GeForce 9600M GT w/512MB VRAM i965PM+ ICH8-M
HDD: 320GB, 5400PRM SATA

Comes some sort of feature that can overclock the processor by 15-20% apparently
Price: $1300 CAD inc. tax

Asus N81

-Intel Core2 Duo Processor T9550 2.66 GHz, 1066MHz, 6MB On-Die L2 Cache
-14.1" 16:9 1366 x768 LED backlight ColorShine (Glare-type)
-ATI HD4650 1GB GDDR3 VRAM (lol this lappy can't use 1gb, why put it in?)
-4GB DDR2 800
-320GB 7200rpm SATA

Price: $1600
^^^thats as much as I could find on the new Asus. This is apparently the high end model. There should be a few lower end ones

who wins in terms of performance (in terms of like 3dmark06) and which one is best bang for your buck or price performance ratio?

Last edited by Rohirm (2009-02-11 11:51:56)

2009-02-11 11:25:46

#2

phishman420: Banned; +821|5945

prices?

2009-02-11 11:31:39

#3

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6461|Winland

Prices and brands, please.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2009-02-11 11:43:06

#4

King_County_Downy: shitfaced; +2,791|6861|Seattle

First one.

Bigger numbers=better.

Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it

2009-02-11 11:46:30

#5

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6263|The Mitten

King_County_Downy wrote:
First one.

Bigger numbers=better.

That's what she said.

But yea, it depends on brands, price, what you want to do, etc. etc....

EE (hats

2009-02-11 11:58:25

#6

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6831|NYC / Hamburg

AFAIK the 9600GT has a slight edge over the 4650. From the specs I'd certainly get the first laptop. Bigger screen and an actually usable resolution. On the other hand I refuse to buy MSI products.

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2009-02-11 11:59:41

#7

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6461|Winland

The MSI is better at gaming, but it'll fall apart after less than a year instead.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2009-02-11 12:01:46

#8

Rohirm: Fear is a Leash; +85|6436|New Austin, Not

Thanks Max!
Yeah I have heard some nasty things about some of their products, but from the reviews I have read regarding the gx620, it seems solidly built.
The last asus I had was a fuck up. Support was shite. Quality was a bit shite as well.

2009-02-11 12:09:30

#9

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6461|Winland

Rohirm wrote:
Thanks Max!
Yeah I have heard some nasty things about some of their products, but from the reviews I have read regarding the gx620, it seems solidly built.
The last asus I had was a fuck up. Support was shite. Quality was a bit shite as well.

I doubt that MSI has been on the market for long enough to make the issues apparent.

Trust me, if you buy an MSI product, it will fail prematurely.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2009-02-11 12:15:03

#10

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6831|NYC / Hamburg

IMO gaming laptops are overrated anyhow. The performance is rather bad in comparison to a desktop, the prices high and the quality low. All those hot components packed into a small space just create problems sooner or later.

Considering your budget you're better off getting some 500$ laptop and spending the rest on a good desktop. Better performance, less hassle and you have a backup system for the time when the shit hits the fan.

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2009-02-11 13:01:13

#11

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7000|Salt Lake City

I think the Asus is the better model. It definitely has the smaller screen, but it overall has the better performance specs.

1. The CPU is faster and has twice the cache; the Core 2 can still live and die on lack of L2 cache.

2. The Asus, while having the same amount of RAM has the faster RAM.

3. The Asus, while having the same size HDD, has a 7200 RPM drive Vs. the 5400 RPM of the MSI.

4. While I couldn't find anything specific regarding a comparison of these two exact mobile chipsets, using their desktop counterparts to extrapolate would show the 4670 to be about 1 FPS faster (73 FPS) than the 9600GT (72 FPS). Chances are that the 4650 wouldn't be too far behind, so figure maybe another 3-5 FPS slower. This was using CoD 4 at 1680x1050, 0xAA, Trilinear, Max Quality settings.

All things considered, I'd take the Asus.

2009-02-11 14:56:55

#12

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6757|N. Ireland

Secret Box Number Two

Reliability, smaller resolution means gamers can be handled easier and what everyone else said positively about it rings true. But the words "gaming" and "laptop" shouldn't occur in a sentence without there being a negative in it - they just don't go hand in hand.

2009-02-11 15:03:45

#13

Yellowman03: Once Again, We Meet at Last; +108|6499|Texas

MSI will blow up, and it only has a 5400rpm hard drive

i suggest looking at the asus g50 series. it's asus's "gaming series." i plan on buying one for college this fall.

2009-02-11 15:38:05

#14

h4hagen: Whats my age again?; +91|6617|Troy, New York

This one:
http://www.gateway.com/systems/product/529668231.php
Memory 4096MB 1066MHz DDR3 Dual Channel Memory (2-2048MB modules)
Hard Drive 320GB 7200RPM SATA hard drive6
Chassis Chassis with NVIDIA® GeForce® 9800M GTS Graphics with 1GB of GDDR3 Discrete Video Memory and Intel® PM45 Chipset
Battery 9-Cell Lithium Ion 86.58 Whr (2.6AHr) (lasts for 4 hours on power save - although I have a bit older version)
Display 17" High-Definition Widescreen WXGA+ Display (1440 x 900)
Processor Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor1 P8400 (2.26GHz, 1066MHz FSB, 3MB L2 Cache)

1300$

Last edited by h4hagen (2009-02-11 15:38:20)

BF2S Forums Really Quick Question (Laptops)

King_County_Downy wrote:

Rohirm wrote:

Board footer