Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which laptop is Better ?

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
August 25, 2009 8:41:58 AM

:(  Ive found two laptops in my price range and was wondering if any of them will be able to play Spore and Fallout 3 on medium settings (if lower or higher please say ) and which one is better for gaming overall.The links are below:


http://www.acerdirect.co.uk/Acer_Aspire_5536_Laptop_LX....

http://uk.computers.toshiba-europe.com/innovation/produ...

Please help , thank you.

More about : laptop

August 25, 2009 2:20:10 PM

You'll need discrete graphics to play Fallout 3. Unless I'm misreading, both of those have integrated graphics. I'm not sure that you'd be able to play Fallout 3 at all, let alone on medium settings.
August 25, 2009 4:47:07 PM

he's right, that's not gonna cut it for you man
Related resources
August 25, 2009 6:46:43 PM

If im write the graphics card is hypershare , which means its got dedicated and shared , so if i was to increase the RAM to 6GB (one or both are able to have 8GB if im not mistaken) that way i have the dedicated then shared and still enough RAM left to run smoothly.I dont know alot about computers so correct me if im wrong(this is how i figure it) Cheers
August 27, 2009 6:48:25 PM

well the thing is, the gpu just wont be strong enough to stay smooth the whole time you're playing
August 27, 2009 7:55:43 PM

What about this laptop ?

Processor AMD Turion 64 X2 mobile technology TL-62 / 2.1 GHz
Multi-Core Technology Dual-Core
64-bit Computing Yes
Chipset Type NVIDIA nForce 630M
Type L2 Cache
Installed Size 1 MB

RAM
Installed Size 3 GB / 4 GB (max)
Technology DDR2 SDRAM
Form Factor SO DIMM 200-pin

Graphics Processor / Vendor NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GS TurboCache supporting 1280MB
Video Memory 512 MB
Max Allocated RAM Size 768 MB
??

Will this manage on medium ?Oh and is acer reliable?
August 28, 2009 9:50:44 AM

I would not want a laptop with a graphics card based on a G84 or G86 (8600M is based on a G84M). They are known to overheat and fail at any unacceptably high rate. See http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2008/07/nvidia-den... (also check the article linked in making the allegation).


Here's the truth about trying to play the latest and greatest games at anything more than the lowest settings (if at all): you can't do it unless you pay through the nose (>$2000) and buy a mammoth computer. Even then, performance will be limited by the difficulty in keeping the machine cool. And within 18-36 months (at the outside), your hardware will no longer be adequate and there will be limited means of upgrading.

The idea of an affordable laptop that is both portable and capable of high graphics just doesn't exist. And any compromise you make will only last 18-24 months. The very expensive desktop-replacement laptop that I got to play Doom 3 in mid-2004 at medium setting was unable to play Fallout 3 even on the lowest setting in late 2008 because of the GPU and there was no way to upgrade. Had I owned a desktop, I could have easily extended the life of the PC as a useful gaming machine by a few years by upgrading.

Computers are so incredibly cheap right now. By an inexpensive laptop to use for school/work/whatever and buy a relatively inexpensive desktop for gaming. You can easily afford something both for under $600-800, rather than spending $1200-1500 on a laptop that will be mediocre gaming PC now and next-to-useless within 2 years.
August 28, 2009 9:51:57 AM

Forgot to say: Acer is fine for general purpose laptops at a decent price, but probably not for gaming laptops. But that Nvidia chip is a loser.
!