Buying an M17 - Which CPU? help!!

I'm a hardcore gamer looking to pickup a laptop to go with my home built desktop - I love the M17 but I am not sure which processor to get and whether or not it will improve my performance all that much.

I see a lot of people buying the minimum spec 2.26ghz cpu - is this to upgrade on your own? or is there just not much difference between that and the higher end?

I'll basically be getting the Dual 3870's, the 1920x1200, 2gb ram(upgrading on my own to 4gb) etc.

I could shoot the moon and get the x9100 or the T9600 - (pretty much not going to get quad core, as I know they're underutilized in gaming atm)

Any advice on processor would be wonderful!

 

CPUs aren't that big a part of gaming performance anymore, so i think a 2.4-2.5Ghz Core 2 Duo should serve you just fine.

 

Cool that will help me save some money... So running games like Farcry2/Left4Dead/Fallout, I shouldn't have any problems with the slower processor? (I won't mention wow or warhammer since they are graphically simple)

- Thanks whizzo

 

no, i don't think so. many m15x users have the 2.5Ghz CPU and everything's just fine. i guess if you want to be on the safe side, you could get the 2.8Ghz processor, but anything above that is a big waste of money.

 

Totally makes sense - I figure the CrossfireX GPUs and ram will be taking the brunt of the gaming power

 

Yeah, if you have the cash I suppose you could go quad core for future proofing but that's only if you have the cash/should you feel that way. And processors are supposed to be easy to upgrade later anyway. So, the Dual 2.53's get my vote too.

 

Thanks Ennea! Also, if I have your ears - do most people get the 1 yr warranty plan, or higher?

I am thinking the 2.53 is the right choice though, brings my system to 2149 +tax/shipping. - not too shabby!

 

I think the 1 year warranty is fine because you can upgrade it anytime before the warranty ends. I'd recommend going with that, though you can go higher if you think you'll need it. Personally, I just went with the 1 year warranty and will be updating as I see fit.

 

Awesome thanks! I am pumped, haven't had an a-ware laptop in about 6 years so I am excited to see how much better this will be.

 

i think you should be very happy with the m17.

 

The specs and price are definitely pretty amazing, a bit worried about the ATI drivers, but I will have some faith that issues will get ironed out

 

Hopefully, that's your only worry for the whole lifetime of the laptop. Let us know how it goes when you receive it.

 

Thanks for the thread, I decided to get the M17 and was deliberating over which CPU to get. The T9400 seems a lot more solid than I first thought.
I have one question left though, what could I expect to upgrade through AW in the next few years on the M17, CPU? GPU? 8+ GB RAM? SSD?

 

I'm not sure if there's any sure fire way to tell but since the M17 is pretty fresh already I'd assume maybe RAM or SSD.

 

through AW, only CPU and GPU. as for HDD/SSD and RAM, do that on your own, it'll be cheaper.

 

I notice a SIGNIFICANT difference with a quadcore for both assassin's creed and far cry 2. I think both are from ubisoft montreal, and i remember reading an article from their lead developer about how they were VERY intent on coding to take advantage of multiple cores. I have a q6600 on my desktop and when doing some testing on my motherboard i also used an e6850 as well as an E8200 (that i put in a pc i built for my parents), and there was a NOTICEABLE difference in "smoothness" for both assasin's creed, frontlines, and FC2 (not tested with the e8200), using the same hardware. Not saying its gospel, just what i noticed. Didn't really matter for say source games such as css and tf2 or EA's bf2...

 

Can you post screen shots or record FPS? It's not that I don't believe, it's that "smoothness" is subjective.

 

ahh. alas. i wish i could. i was just doing impromptu testing when i had some ram go bad and i was seeing which CRAPPY asus board i wanted to keep. The 6850 i installed into my boss's desktop this past week to replace some LOW-END CPU that we buy to save $$$ for my company. I sold it to em for cheap as i figured i could keep the low-end one around myself for troubleshooting, so i'd rather not upend his pc and take it back out.

And yeah, i know smoothness is subjective. i think the overall fps if i remember rightly for the q6600 vs the 6850 (all stock clocks by the way) was around 10fps for *** creed and maybe 5 - 10 for fc2, BUT, i noticed that the "swings" in fps were narrower vs the dual core. i guess that's what i meant by smoothness. Plus sometimes with the dual core (especially on assassin's creed) even with frames above 30-40, i'd have weird stuttering/sort of super fast flicker... like it was trying to refresh or something. Sorry i dont have that chip. the e8200 got way nicer FPS on certain games for sure as its clocked higher but that's been in my parents pc for about 2 months now.

 

quad core is the future just get over it guys. if your on a budget dual. if not go quad or go home. quote on quote

 

First of all, it's quote unquote. And where's your proof? It will be eventually but you talk like it's coming tomorrow.

 

and when it does come, quote unquote, it will be cheaper so if we're on a budget, we can afford it then. Being cheap and actually coming to market so everyone can afford it goes hand in hand, typically.

 

If you are a hardcore gamer you don't want 1920x1200 because that will make some games harder to run and when you scale them down to 1440x900 or 1280x800 they won't look as crisp because that is not the native resolution anymore.

It is up to you but if you are just going to be using this for hardcore gaming I would go with 1440x900. However I see that you are playing WOW and having 1920x1200 resolution is nice for that game because it makes the UI smaller so you can see more of your character (however you can adjust the UI yourself in the settings).

For games like Farcry 2 and Crysis, running at a lower resolution will greatly improve game performance and you will be able to run it at a higher setting.

I have the 1920x1200 resolution because I do a lot of graphic work on my computer and not that much gaming anymore (switched to my 360). The only games I really play on my laptop anymore are CS:S and maybe a few others.

 

well crap i already ordered it, ****it lol.

I do have a 1900x1200 screen at home on my desktop and farcry/crysis both run really well on it... guess we'll see what I get!

 

Yea I was more recommending the 1440x900 to save money. Honestly for WOW and other games that use the UI a lot you will benefit from it. In addition, for everyday use once you get used to the 1920x1200 you will love it.

If you don't mind post your config. in your specs so we can all see what you ended up getting .

WOW and Warhammer will look AWESOME on 1920x1200. If you can get good settings you will love playing them even more as you have so much more room on the screen to work with because of the higher resolution. The 1440x900 was a recommendation but I don't think you will be disappointed. in the least bit with the 1920x1200.

 

Here's my final config - I may upgrade the processor before the 1yr warranty is up, but we'll see - I think it will do well. I'm glad I'll be able to have Warhammer/Wow portable again so I can play from work Oh and btw, read your laptop saga yesterday Stone, from start to finish... what a crappy experience man, sorry you had to go through all that!


Video/Graphics Card: Dual 512MB ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3870 - CrossFireX™ Enabled!
Processor: Intel® Core™2 T9400 2.53GHz (6MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB)
Chassis: 17-Inch WideUXGA 1920 x 1200 LCD (1200p) with Clearview Technology
Keyboard Options: Illuminated Keyboard – Alienware Exclusive Design - Fusion Red
Operating System (Office software not included): Windows Vista® Home Premium (64-bit Edition) with Service Pack 1
Notebook Tuners and Remotes: Without Media Center Remote Control or TV Tuner
Memory: 2GB Dual Channel DDR3 SO-DIMM at 1066MHz – 2 x 1024MB
System Drive: Single Drive Configuration - 160GB 7,200RPM (8MB Cache) w/ Free Fall Protection
Optical Drives : 8x Dual Layer Burner (DVD±RW, CD-RW)
Wireless Network Card: Internal Intel® Ultimate N 5300 a/b/g/Draft-N Mini-Card with MIMO Technology
The World's First 450 Mbps Wi-Fi Adapter!
Sound Card : Internal High-Definition Audio with Surround Sound
Warranty: 1-Year AlienCare Onsite Service and 24/7 Toll-Free Phone Support
Alienware Extras: Alienware® Mesh Cap
Alienware Extras: Alienware® Mousepad
Alienware Extras: Alienware® Mobile Binder
Alienware Extras: Owner Identification Card
Alienware Extras: M17 Protective Cloth Sleeve
Alienware Extras: M17 Keyboard Diagram Overlay


SubTotal: $2,149.00

 

Stick with the 1920x1200 screen. You're not going to be gaming 100% of the time on the machine, and in those scenarios the huge screen real estate will pay off. I find my productivity is directly related to screen resolution.

Also, in my experience 1920x1200 screens scale well as long as you keep the aspect ratio. So, using 1680x1050 or 1440x900 would be advisable and you won't notice the difference while gaming.

Congrats on the rig.

 

Thanks! I'll post a review in about 2 weeks when it arrives - now to decide which RAM to buy...

 

I think 1680x1050 would be perfect, but they dont have it.

 

QFT (Quoted for truth).

 

Why go for the 64bit OS mate? I thought that was only needed if your going for 4gig+ Ram and I see you're only purchasing 2? I guess your going to upgrade later.

I don't want to hijack your thread but how stable is 64bit, alls i've read is its doomed for drivers etc. Speccing my new lappy (Which is a m17) is starting to become a headache. Roll on my registration and no more lurking lol

Kev

 

Hmm my friend is running a 64bit OS on his desktop and everything is fine. The only problem he had was finding a wireless driver but in the end he found it fine. All programs run fine and he is currently running 6GB of ram.

Personally if I knew my computer had all the drivers on it already I would bump up to a 64 bit OS. I would see others responses though.

 

Maybe it's just me, but i cant remember the last time i updated my drivers haha. As long as my lappy performs playing the latest games the way they're intended and connects wireless to my router im happy. If 64bit does all that and performs better than 32bit then im happy

Sorry, just after information, not a 'omg you bought the wrong OS' fear post Bayle.

Besides, i can't see Alienware supplying 64bit as defualt when it has poor driver support for the supplied hardware.

Kev

 

I freaking frustrated trying to install flashpaper 2 on vista 64, and i give up now.

I was frustrated before to get it to work on vista 32, then after 1 week of research and losing ton of hair, i got it working in vista 32, but 64 is another dimension for drivers.

 

Someone want to spend £1800 for me, save me alot of hassle haha.

Ill try searching to help you find those drivers fusion but i can't promise anything

Kev

 

I have had no trouble using vista 64 on my desktop, has been the most stable windows OS I've used in years. No driver issues for me yet and I've had it running for 2 years maybe? So I'm pretty happy with it. We'll see how it works on the Lapt. I'll keep y'all posted

-B

 

You ever used the 32bit version too mate? How does the 64bit compare to it? Performance wise that is.

Kev

 

My old computer was running 32bit Vista... had more stability issues, ran most programs and games fine, but I had a lot of crashes just in windows for no good reason - But being able to have more RAM has made a huge difference in my gaming and in overall application speed.

 

Note that Vista is a lot more stable after SP1.

 

That is true, and probably a huge factor. I was using my 32bit before sp1 (and a bit after before the computer conked out)

 

Is this faster than the m17x ?

 

Does anyone know how much RAM you could cram into the the M17 (ignoring the current price of RAM on the larger sticks) and have the machine/BIOS recognize it?
I know the 64bit OS can handle more than fiscally possible at this point.

 

I think there are actually only 2 slots so 4GB might be the maximum. Feel free to correct me but I think I read this somewhere.

 

For some reason I thought there were 8 GB sticks out there. I guess I was confused after looking at the M6400 Covet.

 

there are 4gb sticks available. bloody expensive though. and it's not available for DDR3 yet, only for DDR2.

 

Yepp there are 4GB sticks but you will be paying ~$300 a stick. Depends if its worth the 8GB to you or not (if the laptop even supports that).

 

no one needs more then 4gbs if your not using your laptop as a serve and i mean no one. Ive had crysis minimized ut3 minimiized 5 browsers open and a movie playing and a picture album open and i diddnt go over 3.5gbs

 

Actually, some people just said in another thread that CAD and some other engineering programs actually use 4GB so having more than that might smoothen the process.

 

Rendering is the main issue, but that's only when we're talking multi storey city centre buildings in 3d

 

Now that I have looked around more, some laptops are limited by hardward to around 6GB of RAM. Ignoring the price and question of if you need it, will the m17 be able to recognise the full 8?

 

Photoshop and the rest of the CS3 package.