Out of curiousity (Oblivion related question)

What's the MINIMUM specs needed to play Oblivion on a laptop seamlessly with all settings on at least High or cranked to the max?

Just curious because when I do buy a laptop I'll know what the minimum I should be looking for is.

Keep in mind i'm NOT asking minimum requirements that are on the box, but that are needed to run the game smoothly on a laptop with most settings on High.

 

Probably a 7900GS or so. I run it completely maxed at native, with V-Sync at 50-60FPS.

 

how would my notebook be able to run it? I have a t7100(1.8ghz) and 8600m GS (GDDR2).

 

Medium/high settings, depending on the resolution.

 

so processor, graphics card?

I'm guessing mid 2's in ghz and at least the 7900? Since the 8XXX's are still out there, that looks like any laptop I buy today that has decent specs should be able to run it.

I'm currently looking for a configuration that comes to around $1,500ish, preferably less that will run this game on High. Battery life and everything else isn't that important as long as the screen looks good and the build quality isn't crappy.

edit: i'd also like at least 1680x1050 resolution or 1920x1200

 

The Gateway P-6860FX my friend. Like I've said before, I was an avid hater of Gateway, but this computer just can't be over-looked. Best Buy doesn't carry them anymore, but you can order it online for like $1,349 or so. Has no problem maxing anything out at native. (Aside from Crysis, which you can run on high, but at 1280x800)

You can also catch a T9300 on eBay for a good price, toss it in, and have a beast for around $1,500! (I really need to order one, but I don't buy things online...)

 

yeah, I've been thinking of going the Gateway route, but i've also been looking at Sagernotebooks.com . . .

 

Well, Sager also makes great budget gaming notebooks. I personally bought the Gateway for $1,099 at Best Buy on sale, and didn't even open it for a while. I was expecting it to be horrible, and have to take it back and eat the 15% restocking fee. (Wife encouraged me to "just get it") I stayed up all night just looking the notebook over, and scratching my head wondering how it's at such an amazing price.

But either Clevo/Sager or Gateway, you will be happy.

 

God, i can't wait to play crysis on a notebook, but I CANNOT buy one for at least a month and a half-2 months, which is fine with me for one reason

prices will go down and what costs such today will cost less tommorrow, and the further along we go, the more apt the hardware is to run this game.

I just love it, that's all

 

what's worth it today may not be worth as much tomorrow. u only have one life to experience it all but i guess 2 month is not too bad

 

A 8700m GT is the minimum i'd recommend for maxing out oblivion at 1280 res.
An 8800m GTS for wsxga+ or wuxga.

A HD3650 or 3850 should be the next best things for 1280 and 1920 respectively from the ATI side

 

Oblivion is a pretty damanding game since its so large...i mean my 8600M GT DDR3 even had a hard time running it on medium/high settings.

 

Mine ran Oblivion maxed at 1440x900 (my native resolution) with no AA at 40+ FPS running around the imperial castle.

So an 8700m GT + T7100 seems quite effective.

 

anything equal to or higher than a 8600m should be fine. something higher would be better obv, for a little over $1000 you can max almost evvery game on the market, and im sure gateway will jump on the refresh bandwagon and stick the equivalent 9000m series GPU in near the end of the summer or soon after.

 

My 8600M GT (DDR2) plays Oblivion all maxed out exept AA effect.
Resolution is 1280x800.

 

I'm still trying to decide what kind of laptop I will get, I'm kind of leaning towards spending only just under $1,500

I want it to at least play Oblivion.

I'm not concerned about HD space or anything

what i'm after is

512MB at least GPU
2.4 ghz processor (dual core or better)
2-4GB of RAM (doesn't matter which cause I plan on using XP cause Vista is craptastic)
While HD space is irrelevent, I'd like it to run at 7,200 RPM, no lower.

 

Don't judge your purchase on VRam... that's how you purchase the wrong thing.

2.4GHz is over-kill for most games. You need to look at the FSB and the L2 Cache, not so much the speed.

Why would you want 7200RPM? You realize a 320Gb 5,400RPM runs at the same speed as a 200Gb 7200RPM, right? And the 320Gb is cheaper, with more available space.

 

Honestly, I don't have a laptop yet, but I plan on buying one within the next 1-2 months, I came across this forum and I've been reading some of the stuff and trying to educate myself on what to look for.

How is a laptop that runs at a lower RPM faster than one that runs at a higher RPM?

the same isn't true on a desktop.

 

Check stats and tests. Now, if a 320Gb 7200RPM was against a 320Gb 5,400RPM, the 72k would win, but they don't sell 320Gb 7200RPMS that I know of, and if they do, they would be ridiculously expensive.

*EDIT* They do make a 320Gb 7200RPM HDD, but it sure isn't worth the money.

 

i'd still feel just fine with the 200GB 7.2k rpm hard drive. I don't need more than 150 GB of space. If I did, I could always use an external.

 

Well, that's up to you, just seems like a waste. Why not pay the same amount, get an extra 120Gb of space, and the same speed? Seems like you're blowing money to me...

 

Some people are more comfortable sticking to what they know.

It just sounds counterintuitive to me to suggest a 5,400 rpm hard drive would be faster than a 7,200 rpm hard drive.

let's just say on my desktop using the same 150GB 10k rpm Raptor I've had since 2006, I haven't filled up the hard drive even with all the games I play, I still have slightly over 50 GB unused last I looked.

 

Well, like I said, if you don't mind wasting money that's fine.

As far as GPU, the 512m doesn't matter. Go with an 8600m GT or above to try and max it out. My 8400m GT ran it pretty good OC'd, but couldn't max it.

Again, you don't need to worry so much about "Ghz" on the CPU as you do L2 Cache and FSB.

A T7100 1.8Ghz will out-run the T5550 1.866 GHz CPU any day of the week.

 

ok what laptop would you suggest that can run this game that costs around $1,000-$1,250 and don't suggest that Gateway, haha.

I'm wondering what other options there are.

I can understand you not understanding why I'd give up 120GB more, but I honestly can't even max out a 150GB hard drive, so what would I do with 320GB?

 

Why are you against the Gateway? You can purchase a Dell for that price, but the Gateway will out-perform it in all cases. The HD thing, I am dropping. It looks like the new 320Gb 7200RPM will, of course, out-run the 5400RPM counterpart.

Like everyone is saying across the board, the P-FX is the best gaming option for the price, hands down. There is a Sager around $1,500 with a better CPU, but it's a little more than your budget.

 

the problem with the Gateway is if I want to upgrade the processor, I gotta shell out $319 at Newegg for the 2.53 ghz one.

it has a weak processor in it, something had to give to put that graphics card in there.

 

I'm willing to look at any sources you could link me to that show a 5.4k rpm hard drive being faster than a 7.2k hard drive, preferably from a website that does reviews.

 

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...o-320gb-5400rpm-vs-hitachi-200gb-7200rpm.html

That's one for the HDD's. Google can be your friend if you need more.

And as far as the CPU, by "weak", you do understand that it is still a C2D and handles any situation just fine, correct? But, to future proof yourself, you can pick up a T9300 on eBay for around $250, if you watch. (See the $250 deals about twice a weak) I have no problem maxing Oblivion out, all native, every option, including grass shadows, with V-Sync on, keeping a solid 48-60FPS at all times.

Here's another, more reputable site for the HD's, if you need it.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/hard-disks/average-read-transfer-performance,675.html

 

Western Digital does make good hard drives, that's why I'd buy them over a Hitachi every time . . . haha.

I'm going to read more about this.

It still feels a little counterintuitive to what I know as far as desktop hard drives go, I guess I do have some things to learn about laptops.

 

Well, like I said, comparing the two at same sizes, the 7200RPM would win, but when comparing a 320Gb 5400RPM to a 200Gb 7200RPM, the 5400 would win.

Seriously check into the Gateway. I have seen no problems with my CPU. Every game runs maxed at native, aside from Crysis, which consequently is the only game I see a flaw in the CPU. When a lot of stuff starts blowing up (Physics rendered by the CPU), my framerate will drop around 25FPS. (Not bad for 1280x800, all high) I also don't play many RTS/TBS, aside from Starcraft, WiC, and CivIV, which have all played max just fine. (Uninstalled WiC, but I ran it maxed in DX9... DX10 seemed bugged to me)

 

Are you sure this is because of the physics, or the strain of instant change in lighting? I'm sure fancy explosions take a toll on the graphics card.

Do explosions lag when you run everything but physics on low?

 

Nope, turn physics down, and my framerate stays the same. The CPU usually handles physic rendering, or as far as I know. My 8800m shouldn't have a problem rendering physics, but my T5550 does in intensive games.

 

listen to the man, he is right. the data is more dense, because on the same amount of platters there is more space available, which disregards the speed, making it faster then a 7200rpm drive of smaller size. and that CPU is plenty powerful and only in RTS' will it be a real bottleneck. other then that it can max everything just fine, cept crysis obv.

 

I second the 6860-fx. I play a wide variety of games Oblivion, Call of Duty4, Css, you name it. I can max any of these games at native res with 4xaa and never get anything below 35fps. As far as rts go I can tell you that Company of Heroes and Age of Empires 3 run fine. The only rts I can think of where the processor might be a bottlenck is Supreme Commander. Just get the Gateway, you will be pleasantly surprised at how awesome it is for the price.