Curse

mcsumo · Dec 13, 2007, 12:39 PM // 12:39

Hi

http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/pl/27-1...Compare-Prices

This is the laptop I am getting to replace my busted one. I am lucky to live in Guernsey with no VAT so only costing me £560. I love the spec on this machine for a good price. Even though I am sacrificing some screen size, I looked at 14s next to 15s and you barely notice the difference. I say I love the spec but tbh I don't really get all this duo core and quad core stuff. I miss the days when you could just look at a number after a P to see what you had.

Anyway my question for all the computer experts out there is what sort of games will I be able to run on this. It should cope with GW all set on high right? And will I finally be able to play Oblivion from last Christmas? Any other goodies I should look out for in the January sales?

Malice Black · Dec 13, 2007, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Will run GW at max no problem. Oblivion I've no clue, never played it.

Quad Core hasn't hit the notebook range yet. Q1-Q2 next year probably.

Etta · Dec 13, 2007, 02:52 PM // 14:52

Well without getting into techno-mumbojumbo, dual-core has two..um...core in 1 unit. Basically this enable the cpu to do more stuff at the same time without any slowdown and such, two heads in one body. Quad core have 4, the new Intel Xeon have 8.

As for your lappy, it comes with ATI X2400 chipset. You will be able to run GW with no problem. Keep in mind that the x2400 is not the best but should run most new game just fine, Oblivion should run as well. As long as you don't set the resolution to high and you can always scale down the detail settings if the fps is to low.

Jumping Is Uselss · Dec 13, 2007, 05:23 PM // 17:23

That computer is fine for todays games like Oblivion and CoD 4.

lordpwn · Dec 13, 2007, 09:00 PM // 21:00

CoD 4 and Oblivion on a Radeon 2400? I hope you're just trolling, that thing has a 64 bit internal memory bus and barely more raw pixel fillrate than the Nintendo Wii. Yes, it'll run Guild Wars but that's about it, anything significantly heavier and you're stuck with 800x600 and low details.

Quaker · Dec 13, 2007, 09:05 PM // 21:05

The one thing I see confusing the most people is that "Core 2" does not mean "dual core". Think of it as "Core version 2". So, a Core 2 "Duo" has two v2 cores, a Core 2 "Quad" has four. Theoretically, you could have a Core 2 Uno, with only one core, but Core 2 was designed to be multi-core and if Intel does package single cores, they're probably called some sort of Celeron.

moriz · Dec 14, 2007, 02:39 AM // 02:39

i'd like to point out that the nvidia equivalent of that chip, the geforce 8400M GS, CANNOT run GW with everything turned on at 1280x800. it can almost do it, but AAx4 drops its framerates to about 20 in battle, which is not good enough.

since the 8400M is similar to the radeon 2400, i'd say this chip cannot run GW at max either.

tijo · Dec 14, 2007, 03:08 AM // 03:08

If you have the time to, look around some more and try to find a computer with a radeon X2600 or higher (nVidia equivalent works fine too although the 8600Go isn't that good) you'll be able to get much better video performance while running games like oblivon and you'll be sure that it will run GW at max with a good fps.

Lord Sojar · Dec 14, 2007, 04:28 PM // 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etta

...the new Intel Xeon have 8...

Which is.... POINTLESS! Yeh for hyped up marketing with no real world results! <3 (not a hit on you Etta btw, more Intel for coming out with this technology while blocking AMD's request to the RAM council for advanced multi threaded compiler technology....bastards)

Quaker · Dec 14, 2007, 08:13 PM // 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

i'd like to point out that the nvidia equivalent of that chip, the geforce 8400M GS, CANNOT run GW with everything turned on at 1280x800. it can almost do it, but AAx4 drops its framerates to about 20 in battle, which is not good enough.

At that resolution, AAx4 is sort of overkill anyway. AAx2 should be enough.

iridescentfyre · Dec 15, 2007, 03:15 AM // 03:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaker

At that resolution, AAx4 is sort of overkill anyway. AAx2 should be enough.

I run at 1280x1024, and I can still tell the difference between 2x and 4x. By 2007 I would definitely consider a GPU chip that can't handle a mere 4xAA @ 1280x800 to be woefully insufficient.

Fried Tech · Dec 17, 2007, 01:37 PM // 13:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

Which is.... POINTLESS! Yeh for hyped up marketing with no real world results! <3 (not a hit on you Etta btw, more Intel for coming out with this technology while blocking AMD's request to the RAM council for advanced multi threaded compiler technology....bastards)

Most software makers dont even know what to do with 2 cores yet. And they are already making up to 8 cores!? They might want to slow it down a little

Yanman.be · Dec 17, 2007, 01:47 PM // 13:47

Fried Tech, hardware should always be more up to date than software....I mean, if they make software for 16 cores, but they haven't made one yet...you're screwed!

Etta · Dec 17, 2007, 02:45 PM // 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

Which is.... POINTLESS!

Well kind of yeas and no, depending on what you're using them for. The 2 mac pros we have at work are use mainly for Premiere Pro CS3 editing, which I have to say it cut down rendering time by a lot and give our designer an easier time. The rest of our machine are mac pro as well but with quad core set up, I have this one at home too.

Obivously they weren't design specifically for games, so yes they're pointless on that front. But for the stuff that we do, it's crucial........

(lol that's a complete bull btw! We just want to spend our parent company's budget!)

The Way Out · Dec 17, 2007, 03:01 PM // 15:01

Wasn't his question can this computer run this with everything on high... and isn't the answer no?

This laptop will run guildwars almost max. I said "almost". I would buy this, though, because you are getting an awesome deal on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcsumo

Hi

http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/pl/27-1...Compare-Prices

This is the laptop I am getting to replace my busted one. I am lucky to live in Guernsey with no VAT so only costing me £560. I love the spec on this machine for a good price. Even though I am sacrificing some screen size, I looked at 14s next to 15s and you barely notice the difference. I say I love the spec but tbh I don't really get all this duo core and quad core stuff. I miss the days when you could just look at a number after a P to see what you had.

Anyway my question for all the computer experts out there is what sort of games will I be able to run on this. It should cope with GW all set on high right? And will I finally be able to play Oblivion from last Christmas? Any other goodies I should look out for in the January sales?

Quaker · Dec 17, 2007, 03:25 PM // 15:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by iridescentfyre

I run at 1280x1024, and I can still tell the difference between 2x and 4x. By 2007 I would definitely consider a GPU chip that can't handle a mere 4xAA @ 1280x800 to be woefully insufficient.

I'm sure you can tell the difference, but I doubt you'd actually notice it during gameplay.
About 3 weeks ago, I had turned AA off while trying to track down the cause of lock ups. It wasn't until about a week ago, while taking screen shots for auction items, that I even noticed I'd forgotten to turn it back on. (But I am running at 1680x1050)

I would certainly give up 4xAA in favor of 2xAA for faster frame rates. There is nothing "mere" about 4xAA.

combatchuck · Dec 17, 2007, 09:30 PM // 21:30

A dual core chip is basically just 2 processors mashed into one chip. To say that it produces no real-world results is just silly. Multitasking is butter-smooth, which is reason enough to get it. It's nice to be able to do CPU-intensive stuff and still run Guild Wars at full speed.

Mr Emu · Dec 17, 2007, 10:23 PM // 22:23

he is talking about the 8-core being pointless...