gaming laptops

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I just bought this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834152551

It's got ...

• the 870m (pretty nice graphics for a laptop, and going higher to the 880m barely improves things so it's not really worth it)
• an SSD for the OS, and a 750GB with 7200rpm (ie. fastest for non-SSD) drive for media
• processor is the i7 4800MQ, which is pretty good for the money (a lot of other laptops at the same price point only have the 4400)
• 24GB of RAM (most similar laptops only have 16GB)
• a Blue-Ray writer (most have just a DVD writer or a DVD writer/Blue-Ray reader)

... all for only $1,699.99 (- $100 rebate, but I'm usually too lazy to send those in so I don't count it).

Very nice. I'm going to get one some day =D

[lawll]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Never liked the i5 is fine for gaming argument. Get an i7 if possible. If you're like me, it will help when you have like 40 youtube tabs, fraps, instant messenger and other shit running in the background of your game.

I hate Acer, but you really can't beat this.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...FSgLMgodlzIAGw

90% of the software to this day still doesn't support hyper threading. Unless you are editing 4k videos or running virtual machines it's 100% useless. Now if you are looking to overclock the CPU then the i7 is a solid CPU to start with.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is no need to have "support" for hyperthreading. Create a process, launch 8 threads, you now support it if its available (arguable, it's up to the OS how it wants to pool them). On the i5, at best you will now have to context switch between 4 threads (and still have the same if not more cache misses, which is the biggest criticism of hyperthreading). Im just browsing the internet, checked task manager and system wide I have 1006 threads (though most are probably sleeping).

Any type of multitasking at all on your computer will benefit from the i7.

Say I have $1500 - $2000 budget, could you link me something that you think would work well naez :3

[lawll]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is no need to have "support" for hyperthreading. Create a process, launch 8 threads, you now support it if its available (arguable, it's up to the OS how it wants to pool them). On the i5, at best you will now have to context switch between 4 threads (and still have the same if not more cache misses, which is the biggest criticism of hyperthreading). Im just browsing the internet, checked task manager and system wide I have 1006 threads (though most are probably sleeping).

Any type of multitasking at all on your computer will benefit from the i7.

Games can barely leverage more than 2-3 threads/core for the most part. Unless video editing, 3D rendering and other tasks that tend to be more heavily threaded account for a significant chunk of your workload then no, i7 is not worth the expense.

Multi-threaded or multi-cored CPUs have been around for nearly 10 years and games have barely started leveraging that. It is likely going to take many years longer for game programmers to effectively leverage quad-core. So yes windows itself can use all the cores but whatever app you are running most likely will not use all available cores. And who the hell runs a game, web browser, itunes and a few other programs at the same time on a few monitors to even use all the cores? On a personal computer clock speed is still king since most apps will only use 2-3 cores.

L2 compute