2 - Intel i7-2670QM 2.2GHz (have checked with Acer and it is definitely 2670QM even though it says 2630QM on website), 6GB RAM, 750GB HDD, DVDRW, Nvidia GT 540M Optimus 1GB GDDR3, Windows 7 Home Premium x64, £579:
I will be using them mainly for flash games, Counter Strike Source, COD:MW, BBC iPlayer, Office applications, HD movie watching, general use and internet browsing. Does anyone have any recommendations between the two?
What do you think between these three? I cant seem to find anything at this price point with better specs, and from what I have read, the Nvidia 540M and 630M cards are pretty much exactly the same in terms of real world performance. So therefore it comes to the processors, does that make the i7 CPU the best CPU of the lot?
I would assume this one kicks numbers 1 to 3 all over the park?
How do you figure that?
It's two CPU cores @ 1.6Ghz vs i5-2450M two CPU cores @ 2.53GHz vs i5-3210 two CPU cores @ 2.5GHz (effectively 2.75Ghz for IVB vs SB)
And then you have i7-2670QM four CPU cores @ 2.2GHz.
I figure that makes Aspire TimeLine M3 a distant fourth in overall performance for everything on you list but COD:MW. CS:S (max graphics & above 100fps for both cards) and flash games don't really gain anything with the slower CPU and better GPU.
That's not to say the TimeLine M3 isn't a pretty good notebook. It's just not in the same performance league as any of the other 3 on you've listed.
Okay I think I am going to go with either number 1 or number 2. I am thinking logically and in my mind have summarised as follows:
- Number 1 has a sliiightly better GPU. +1 for (1)
- Number 2 has a better (I think) quad core CPU. +1 for (2)
- From what I have read, the integrated graphics on IVB are much better than Sandy Bridge. +1 for (1)
- The IVB CPU of 2.5GHz, because it is IVB, effectively compares to a 2.75GHz Sandy Bridge in performance? As the Sandy Bridge is 2.2GHz, this makes a difference I would imagine. +1 for (1)
- Sandy Bridge has quad core, and double the cache +1 for (2)
- Ivy Bridge has better memory bandwidth +0.5 for (1)
Laptop 1 has score of 3.5. Laptop 2 has score of 2.
Basically it seems like a question of which CPU is better for what I will need them for? I *think* 4 cores wont really be used for what I am doing, as Counter Strike and MS Office dont use them? Therefore, logically I should go for the IVB laptop, ie number 1. It is faster, better memory bandwidth, better integrated graphics, better GPU. Is that a good summary, or can anyone see any error in my logic? Or does anyone know of any better £600 laptops?
That's about the way I'd break it down too.
The only extra factor in favor of a quad core CPU is the possibility of heavy multi-tasking workloads with MS Office type products and other programs in use at the same time. You don't really lose much in way of single or dual core performance because of TurboBoost can ramp up speeds on a single or dual core to be competitive.
Am just waiting on a review someone is doing on the Notebookreview website, see what he says, but I cant believe the price on this laptop for the specs! I think the VRAM is GDDR3 instead of GDDR5 but even so, I will buy this asap if the guy on the forum gives it a favourable review. What do you think??
Not a lot really, I have a feeling my sister bought one of their PC's a long time ago from Toys R Us, and it was alright - quick, good specs for the price, good value. Thats all I remember about it now. Will see if anyone else reviews it anywhere first. But those are very good specs for the price though!