Is this futureproof?

i7-2670QM
GTX 580M
8 GB ram at 1600mhz
240gb SSD (no hdd)

I ask because some people say it's safer to go with the i7-2760 for future proofing, and also with the GPU, next gen coming out soon. I'll probably wait for next gen for both, but its what I listed futureproof? just need a quick opinion thanks

 

best futureproof is to buy something with best price/performance ratio and save money for upgrade. Then also sell used parts that you are replacing on ebay.
imo.

Whether something that you spend extra 100-200usd for will last few months longer -- i am not sure.

 

This.

Your best bet is to get the 6990m as of right now (as the 6990m and 580m are virtually the same, unless they are the same price, or you just like nvidia). Then make sure the MXM is upgradeable and upgrade in a few years. The only way to be truly "futureproof" is to buy 2 of the highest end gpu's and a higher end processor which is going to cost a lot of money.

 

For gaming, i7-2760qm won't perform any better than 2670qm. It may increase resale value a little bit, but not much. IMHO, like s2odin states, if you can get 6990m GPU instead of 580m you can probably save yourself a couple hundred bucks. Also investigate pricing on SSD's and buy the SSD yourself. You can likely save a decent amount of money over what OEM's charge to install one in the machine for you.

 

What notebook are we talking about? If it's a Clevo, dump the 580M and go with the 6990M; if it's the M17x, the GPUs cost an identical amount, so go with preference.

You made the right CPU choice, as the 2760QM is only 10% faster than the 2670QM. Anyone telling you the 27xx is more future proof is delusional.

 

if it is cheaper go with 2630qm as CPU, any i7 won't be your bottleneck for gaming, NOT computing. If you are running codes, that is a different story.. go with 2920xm in that case

 

A basic i7-26XX and a 6990m is the best bang for buck. The 580 is only a 5%< difference in performance for several hundred dollars more, which I would personally avoid.

 

thanks guys, u all answered my quesiton awesomely.

 

In the US, 580M is only slightly more than 6990M. You also get better drivers than ATI. But nothing is "futureproof", it is a delusion that something is futureproof unless you want to buy an MXM laptop buy keep upgrading the cards.

 

As others have said, "futureproof" is a myth. But yes, that's a beast of a machine.

 

The 2670QM according to Intel can take 16GB RAM, while the 2760QM can take up to 32GB.
The 2760QM would only be a worth-while upgrade in that particular regard, but I don't think it's really necessary since 16GB should be enough for even very demanding software (CAD based) for some time to come.

On that note... even the 2670QM was apparently sold with 32GB RAM (here:
Notebook Asus G74SX - Intel Core i7-2670QM - 32GB RAM: Amazon.de: Computer & Zubehör) so information on that front is flaky.
Intel says that the maximum RAM 2670QM supports is 16GB, while some laptops were apparently sold with 32GB RAM featuring that cpu.

Bottom line is: I don't think it's necessary for you to spend more money on the 2760QM because performance/price ratio is abysmal.
The only silver lining is the guaranteed 32GB RAM, but you have to ask yourself if you will even need that much RAM down the line, and whether the 2670QM can support it as well.

I'd go with the 2670QM.
As for future-proofing... the notion is a bit outdated... but realistically speaking, the system in question should last you about 4 years.

 

That depends on what kind of code. I do Java coding (JEE) and serve some services... some virtualizacion too, and with the Dell from my signature it runs flawless. I can even do video encoding while coding.

BUT, if I could redo it all again, I'll go with a machine with a better cooling system, at least for gaming.

 

4 years? There's no system that can realistically game for four years without an upgrade in hardware or running at lower resolution and quality after a couple years if you intend on playing new release games.

Four years ago, the 8800m GT/GTX was the prevalent top end GPU and now it's more or less integrated graphics performance.

 

It depends on which games a person plays... what details they use, etc.
A 'top end' mobile gaming gpu can certainly last that long.
My 9600m GT certainly lasted me thus far for most of the things I use it (and my laptop is 3 years and 3 months old).

 

it running flawlessly doesn't mean it is as fast as possible I mainly use MATLAB and open workstations (CUDA is not that fast in MATLAB yet ), therefore the turbo clocks are highly relevant

 

You are kinda tripping. The 8800M GTX is like 15% slower than today's 6770M.

 

Where do you get that from? SLI maybe, but not a single 8800m GTS or GTX. Let's see the 8800m play any gpu heavy game released in the last two years at 1080p at > 30FPS, like Crysis 2, Battlefield 3, Metro 2033, Deus Ex, Skyrim. It can't, it's a stutter-fest. How do I know? A friend of mine has an 8800m GTS and can't play any of those games without issue, has to resort to 1280x800. He's about ready to order a new laptop he's so fed up with it...

Just a quick example. Youtube 8800m GTX http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeygynBA52A

Crysis 1400x900 19 fps mix of med/high
Crysis 1920x1080 45 fps all medium 6750m @ 780/880

 

8800m GTX scores 9k on 3dmark6
6770m scores 10k on 3dmark6

it looks like about 10% difference

 

3dmark06 means nothing and AMD DirectX 9 drivers suck for the 6xxx series of GPU's. DirectX 10 and 11 are where it's at. My 6750m only scores a 3DMark06 of 8800 but it sure as heck is a lot more powerful than a 540m with a comparable score. Anyone who believes an 8800m is nearly equivalent to a 6770m is kidding themselves.

If you want to use FutureMark, use 3DMark Vantage:
8800m GTS = 2500
8800m GTX = 3400
6750m = 5100 and over 6200 overclocked
6620G (AMD IGP) = 3400

That is 50-100% performance improvement with 6750m, and equivalent to AMD's IGP.

Not to mention technology advancements. 8800m or 9800m series are only DirectX 10.0 not even 10.1 let alone 11 capable.

 

The 8800M GTX, or 9800M GT, is simply a GTX 260M with 16 fewer shaders. Plus it's 256-bit bus gives it a huge advantage over today's mid-range cards. It's certainly much faster than the GT 540M.

The last stock 9800M GT Vantage GPU score I have saved in my Futuremark profile is 3845, and that's with an old 17x.xx driver. It would be comfortably above 4k with today's Forceware (my GTX 260M gained 400-something points with a single driver update), and over volted and clocked it's beyond 5k.

None of today's 128-bit DDR3 mid-range cards can hope to touch the 8800M GTX. It's still in the rock bottom of the tier above them.

I will grant that I should've said 6750M.

 

Say what you will but performance results tell the story. I had a GTX 260m in my NP8662 (I believe you had the same laptop), and it struggled with Crysis and Bad Company 2 where my 6750m runs spectacular at 1080p medium detail. 256-bit should shine at higher resolutions, but it just doesn't with the 8800m/9800m with newer games. And still 4000 vs 6000 is still a 50% improvement.

I do believe GTX 260m scored in 5000's though with Vantage, but it's still a much faster and refined product than the 8800m which is four years old, hence the comparison. In beginning of 2008 if you bought a laptop with a high end GPU, you got the 8800m GTX. If your laptop had an 8800m GTX it was an 8800m GTX, not a 260m. Its performance is what it is, despite the rehash/refinement of the product over the years.

DirectX 9 it may perform almost similar, but again, that's primarily due to crappy DX9 driver support for the 6xxx series Radeon GPU's. Take DirectX 10 and 11 into consideration and it will leave 8800m in the dust.