Choose a good gaming laptop

[Luscious]

Looking to find some help with my next gaming laptop purchase. I've narrowed it down to three models below. Tell me which one is better for gaming.

1. Toshiba X205-SLI6
-----------------------
C2D T9300 2.5GHz
3GB DDR2
512MB (256MB x 2) Dual 8600M GT
400 GB (200GB x 2) 7200 RPM HDD
17" 1680x1050
Vista Ultimate 32bit
Webcam, BT, fingerprint reader, ATSC tuner
full specs @ newegg
Price $1699.99

2. HP dv7 customized online
-----------------------
C2D T9600 2.8GHz
4GB DDR2
512MB 9600M GT
320GB (160GB x 2) 7200 RPM HDD
17" 1680x1050
Vista Ultimate 64bit
Webcam, BT, fingerprint reader, ATSC tuner, eSATA
full specs at hp.com
Price $2219.99

3. Gateway P-7811FX
-----------------------
C2D P8400 2.26GHz
4GB DDR3
512MB 9800M GTS
200GB 7200 RPM HDD
17" 1920x1200
Vista Home Premium 64bit
Webcam, eSATA
full specs at gateway.com
Price $1249.99

I play mostly older games (Far Cry, Doom 3, NFS, GTR2, BF2, F.E.A.R., HL2, Civ4, X-Plane 8.60, TW PGA Tour 06) but would like something that can work with newer titles like Crysis, Test Drive and FSX.

I would LOVE to get something with a 9800M GTX inside, but my budget is only $2200.

Some of the machines priced above include things like webcam, fingerprint reader, bluetooth and TV tuners. eSATA is something I would definitely like.

I'm planning to keep it for at least 4 years. Battery life is irrelevant. Gotta be 17". HDD size doesn't matter to me, but 7200 RPM does.

My focus is only on gaming right now, work is secondary. Other than gaming, it would be great if it could do web browsing, office, iTunes, email, DVD ripping, WMV encoding, WAV file editing, F@H, and some light graphics (Corel).

I know this is a lot here and I may be asking for just too much, but in a nutshell I would like a laptop that will go past it's warranty, won't choke under next year's games, and is usable for work if I need it.

Help and comments appreciated!!!

 

[frozenlead]

I think through several posts we've all agreed that the gateway FX series is perfect for any gamer under $1500. It's got the best bang for the buck.

 

[lostandwandering]

The Gateway easily earns my vote.

The 8600m GT wasnt that good of a gaming solution and having two of them wont really change much. The 9800m GTS is a much better solution.

Gateway made up for the original FX's short comings by giving it a beefier CPU and a higher screen res. Good choice IMO.

 

[Luscious]

Thanks for the response guys!

I was first leaning very much towards the HP to use as a work laptop because of the fast 2.8GHz CPU and game on it on the side. It's really a shame Gateway doesn't allow you to customize their machine, because the price difference between the P8400 and T9600 would be at most $300 - still within a $1500 sale price. That being said, I wish HP would finally consider GAMERS when they release a new $2200 17" laptop and include OPTIONS for a top end GPU like the 9800 GTS or GTX and offer WUXGA screen.

But I will be honest, I'm now taking a serious look at the Gateway. The lack of BT, fingerprint reader or TV tuner won't worry me, and with such a low price I'm going to have to take one for a test drive. I'm wondering if the BIOS has support for the T9600, since it is drop-in compatible.

One question I do have: Is there a noticeable difference between a 2.26 and a 2.8 C2D??? The mobile CPU chart doesn't list these two models but I'm guessing it might be between 15-30fps depending on the game - that's a wide enough margin for making a game playable or unplayable.

 

[lostandwandering]

That being said, I wish HP would finally consider GAMERS when they release a new $2200 17" laptop and include OPTIONS for a top end GPU like the 9800 GTS or GTX and offer WUXGA screen.

I agree. I have liked the looks of HP's Pavilion line, but the fact that they have no decent gaming solution is a bit of a put off.

One question I do have: Is there a noticeable difference between a 2.26 and a 2.8 C2D??? The mobile CPU chart doesn't list these two models but I'm guessing it might be between 15-30fps depending on the game - that's a wide enough margin for making a game playable or unplayable.

Depends on what you are doing app wise. Obviously in a CPU intensive program, the 2.8 one will be noticeably faster. In gaming it would depend on the resolution that you play at. It seems that at anything over 1440x900 you start to heavily rely on the GPU and CPU speed doesn't make as much of a difference. I would imagine though that you would be able to upgrade to the T9600.