What games could be played on a UL30A?

Now, before you chastise me for not buying a UL30VT, keep in mind that I'm not buying this computer for gaming. I'm buying it as a portable laptop to do work on, but I'd like to throw a few games on here to keep me entertained when I'm not busy. I'd rather have the lower pricetag on the UL30A with the higher-end battery and warranty than wait for the UL30VT-A1 or settle for the UL30VT-X1.

So, what games would run smoothly on the UL30A? I figure SNES/Genesis emulators and other older 2D games will work well. What would be the upper limit for gaming smoothly? I basically just don't want to buy a game and have it not work, especially with demos being relatively rare these days. Thanks.

 

My X301 has slightly better specs than the UL30A and I can play TF2 at 1440x900 with low settings and get a playable frame rate.

 

Buy a UL30Vt. Period.

Here's a good link that was recently relayed to me that shows the dismal state of gaming on the Intel GMA 4500MHD integrated graphics:
http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=3618&p=8

Also consider the 't' for Turbo33 in UL30Vt, which brings the performance of the SU7300 up to respectable for your work related tasks. This and the G210m will come in handy when streaming hi-def video (hulu, youtube, etc). With the UL30a, you're stuck.

Plus openCL, CUDA and webGL/O3D are compelling reasons to get a capable GPU, for enhanced performance in non-gaming applications.

Especially considering that you want to game (even lightly) from time to time, get a machine that can play a wide array of games well (you have choice rather than being restricted). IMO It's not worth saving $100 when you consider the rather steep performance consequences, and cost in the long run as you'll have to replace your laptop far sooner, than something that performs well now.

I think it's a mistake to get the UL30a. I know people love it, but I think it's a short sighted solution that will cost more in the long run.

}:^)~

 

Honestly, even when I had a gaming-quality desktop, 99% of what I played was older. If I want to do some serious gaming, I'll build a gaming PC again.

 

Sure, that makes sense. I'm sure a competent gaming system will cost the $99 it'll cost to get the the UL30Vt over the UL30a.

But to each his own. Enjoy gaming on your UL30a, sub-par performance of the stock SU7300 for your work, and choppy web videos.

}:^)~

 

I would still consider the VT, i mean just the one button OC to 1.67 seems nice. And the dedicated GPU is nice to have, not only for gaming but consider flash 10.1, and its said that new gen of browsers will start using dedicated gpus, so it seems like a good investment, i dont see that big of price jump, $40 difference for dedicted GPU n one button OC vs better battery.... i take the VT.

 

My UL30A still OC's to 1.67. All you have to do is go into the Bios and set it to do this. Works like a charm and so I use it at this setting all the time and still get great battery life

 

That's actually really good to know! I figured it would be easy to OC the UL30a! Thank you very much for pointing this out.

I'd still highly recommend the UL30Vt, though. In this day and age, GPUs are almost required hardware and the trend is moving increasingly in that direction (Flash 10.1, ie9, firefox, photoshop, etc, etc). Especially when the price is so slight for the upgrade it's hard not to justify.

}:^)~

 

I'm just gonna warn you:

I have an acer timeline, 5810tz, su2700 and intel x4500mhd, and performance is TERRIBLE on games such as warcraft 3, which is something really huge since it's a pretty old game. not sure if it's drivers causing this but the game stuffers even at 800x6xx resolution..

 

Yeah, I have an inspiron 1545 with intel GMA 4500MHD graphics, and I can second that. It's got a 2.1GHz processor too, so it should outperform the UL30a, and the graphic performance is terrible. Really, really bad.

I'm like the OP, I want to game occasionally in my downtime, but the performance of this machine restricts the titles that I actually want to play greatly. If even light gaming is a requirement, I can't stress the UL30Vt enough.

I'm going to replace this computer (~$800) and it's less than a year old. Thankfully it was given to me by someone that no longer wanted it and I didn't spend money buying it.

}:^)~

 

Are you sure this isn't just the 5% overclock offered in the bios, not the Turbo33 offered by the UL30VT which offers 33% overclock?

 

I like how, despite prefacing the topic with, "yes, I've considered the UL30VT and I dont want it, I just want to know what will run on the UL30A," the entire topic has been "Why didn't you get the UL30VT?" which I explained in the first post.

And a competent gaming PC will certainly cost more than the difference between the UL30A and the UL30VT, but it will also far outperform the UL30VT.

 

Yup it is. But it is a 5% OC on the FSB not the MHz so it essentially becomes 33%. See the attached screenshot for proof

 

Out of curiosity, would running it overclocked like that be damaging on the processor at all? I've never really done any overclocking, I just figured it would shorten the lifetime of the parts.

 

Well, the advice was given in good faith, so no need to get angry at people that are genuinely trying to help.

Also, I believe I submitted a link with a bunch of titles listed.

}:^(~

 

Hmm... on the following settings, I get the following core clocks in CPU-Z.

High Performance - 1236 MHz
Entertainment - 1648 MHz
Quiet Office - 1648 MHz
Battery Saver - 1648 MHz

Really weird since I have manual processing states set for each in Power4Gear, e.g. high performance is set to work at 100% all the time, and quiet office is max 60% at load, 5% minimum.

Hmm, that's strange. I tried playing Counter-Strike 1.6, and it lagged so bad even at 1024x768 for a game that came out over a decade ago. Warcraft 3 runs a lot worse than I expected too at 1024x768, but World of Warcraft on the other hand runs smoothly at max resolution, low details.

 

Ya mine has the same weird thing happen at High Performance. The CPU Clock jumps around a lot from 1236 to 1670... The voltage also jumps from .85 to 1 which is strange. Seems like there is a bug somewhere

 

I didn't mean to come off as angry, I just find it an amusing constant across most forums.

 

No worries, mate! My fault really, I shouldn't have assumed. There's not enough emotion transferred with these lifeless characters, so messages are easy to misinterpret.

{:^)~