Is a i5 worth an extra $100?

[thenate]

I'm currently looking for a new mid range laptop, that I'll be using for gaming and normal computer tasks. I've pretty much decided to get a Acer Aspire V3, but I can't decide what processor I want. Here are the two laptops:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834215552
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834215417

What I'm wondering is whether or not it's worth paying $100 more for the i5, or will the i3 be good enough?

Some games I'm looking to play if it matters: Minecraft, Diablo 3, Starcraft 2, Lord of the Rings online, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Splinter Cell Conviction, Metro 2033, and Skyrim to name a few.

Thanks in advance

 

[dudewitbow]

laptop wise, the i5 only offers higher cpu speed and turbo frequency. most of the time(i would believe) i5s on laptops are still dual cores.

 

[thenate]

laptop wise, the i5 only offers higher cpu speed and turbo frequency. most of the time(i would believe) i5s on laptops are still dual cores.

So are you saying it's not worth paying more? The exact models of the i5 and i3 are: intel i3 2450m @ 2.5Ghz; intel i5 2450m @ 3.1Ghz.

 

[dudewitbow]

I cant say much, but as laptop gpus arent the best, it will rarely gets to the point where you need quad cores unless you have high end laptops. at the most, the i5 will increase fps a bit, but the 100$ if possible would be better spent on a slightly better gpu if one could find one.

 

[thenate]

laptop wise, the i5 only offers higher cpu speed and turbo frequency. most of the time(i would believe) i5s on laptops are still dual cores.

whoops its actually an intel i3 2370m @ 2.4Ghz

 

[thenate]

I cant say much, but as laptop gpus arent the best, it will rarely gets to the point where you need quad cores unless you have high end laptops. at the most, the i5 will increase fps a bit, but the 100$ if possible would be better spent on a slightly better gpu if one could find one.

all the laptops I've found in my $500-600 budget have either an intel CPU with a nVidia 630m or an AMD CPU with integrated graphics or ATI 7670M. Do you have any suggestions?

 

[dudewitbow]

the 7670 and 630 are almost the same performance wise. the intel cpu I would think would do better. so its really your choice if you think the 100$ for the i5 is worth it or not.

 

[thenate]

the 7670 and 630 are almost the same performance wise. the intel cpu I would think would do better. so its really your choice if you think the 100$ for the i5 is worth it or not.

but thats waht I'm asking. Does the i5 make a significant difference, or can I save the $100 for something else. From what I've read it's only a minor performance boost. True?

 

[jessterman21]

it's not worth it

calculate the percentages

increase in price does not equal increase in performance

 

[rdc85]

Yup, as other said. i5 in laptop perform not that much better to it's i3 sibling (not $100 better)

 

[thenate]

it's not worth it

calculate the percentages

increase in price does not equal increase in performance

Ok, thanks that what I thought, I just wanted to be sure

 

[Solandri]

As has been said, the only significant feature the i5 mobile adds is Turbo Boost. Both the i3 and i5 are dual core with hyperthreading, and 3 MB of cache. The i5-2450M also adds AES new instructions. If you don't know that is, you don't need it.

The Turbo Boost on the 2450M is 3/6. That means it normally runs at 2.5 GHz, but can overclock itself up to 2.8 GHz when both cores are in use. If only one core is in use, it can overclock itself up to 3.1 Ghz. Those are 12%-24% speedups (16%-30% compared to the i3's 2.4 GHz).

So basically, is a 16%-30% faster CPU worth $100 to you?

(The desktop i5 is an entirely different beast. It's a quad core with Turbo Boost, no hyperthreading, and 6 MB of cache. It's substantially better than the desktop i3.)

 

[rdc85]

Some what i never liked how the naming schemes on mobile parts it very different performance scale if u compare it with desktop scale......