This guy runs Crysis High 8400M GS?!

hey KGann,
i just bought the Gateway P-6860 FX from BestBuy with the July 4th sale. It will arrive on the 10th-11th. the processor is only 1.83ghz. should i be worried about that? im going to be hard core gaming on it but im only a kid and i spent all my on the laptop and dont have enough money to buy a new processor.

thanks

 

It'll still perform nicely, but forum members here have benefitted greatly upgrading that model to the T9300.

 

The benefit from upgrading the the T9300 is around 4-5FPS average in game, but a good leap in 3DMark06. Crysis showed the best improvement, with around a 5FPS increase, but a much more stable experience.

Call of Duty 4, however, already runs flawless maxed with a little AA. (1440x900) You will be more than happy with your new system, trust me. x64, and 4Gb of RAM make a world of a difference. Keep in mind that the T5550 is still nothing to frown upon, and still a nice C2D.

 

It's a solid processor, but as lysander said a T9300 or faster processor would smooth out performance and stuttering in some games, especially RTS's.
I wouldn't worry about it too much.. it'll play any game you throw at it with the 8800 by its side

Edit: Is 4GB ram and X64 vista alot better than 2GB and X86?

 

I can tell a noticeable difference, for sure. And the Vaio has a faster CPU, but the x64+4Gb RAM= Much better performance.

 

Processors dont have that much impact on FPS games. it may smooth some stutters in heavy fights (you know, the pause once in a while) , but in RTS games with big maps, you might need it.

 

Actually i've seen several benchmarks where there was an improvement of 10-20fps from going from around a 1.8 mermon to 2.4\5 penryn. Small maps and small number of units yeah no need for a faster processor but who wants to play a RTS like that

 

there are some Supreme commander Geeks outthere believe me... Ive been in one of thier Battles. 8 player map and the game lasted for 5 hours o_0

 

I`ll have to try it tomorrow, I have a day off, finaly, after 80 h of work this week.
Pfff.

Crysis looks awesome on very high though

 

Shut it Eleron... just shut it. I'm perfectly happy with 1280x800, all high... I don't need you rubbing it in my face.

 

Lol. You can always try 800x600 and all very high, and decide which one you like. Sure, there`s going to be some jaggies, but hey, it`s very high, almost life like, and I mean it, it`s worth the res drop.

 

Nuh uh. No chance. 1280x800 all high is nice, and I've never tried to bump up to "Very High". For some reason, 1440x900 doesn't show up in my options on Crysis, and going from 1024x768 to 1280x800 gained me a few FPS!

 

Try Very High and then we`ll talk, adjust the res so that it`ll be playable.
Trust me, the jump from high to very high , in terms of eye candy is unbelieveble.

 

No Eleron, I said no! High is just damn fine!



I feel like I need an attorney.

 

Fine, your loss lol

 

No, your loss.


Fat chicks.




I gotta stop this.

 

the JUMP is only in shaders. Shadows will be a lil bit sharper. other stuff you wont see anything.

 

Well, as I said, I played it on very high and nothing really impresses me so far.
I`ll try triple c and natural mod , maybe that will make a difference.
Nice map find, brainer

 

lol thanks. it was intended to show what Crytek promised the users(that kind of lightning)

 

Can't wait for Warhead. As the Crytek devs said, if you could run Crysis on high, you will have no problem running Warhead on high. (Yay...)

 

Indeed.
For all high, 1280x800 you need an OCed 7950GTX or an OCed 8700M GT, so it`s quite nice actually.

 

i thought that the devs said that if you could run on high you could run warhead perfectly

 

Yes it is. I know a new CPU wouldn't really help the framerate, but when sh*t hits the fan, it would be more stable.

I love my P-FX...

 

Yup its a very great machine, and it will serve you for a plenty of time.

 

After reading into these 7950GTX's, I become more and more impressed. They released what, 2 years ago? And yet still survive the strength required in today's games. Now that's a GPU. The 7 series, to me, was the most impressive. I remember owning a 6800 Ultra, and never being that impressed. (Running BF2 at medium?!) When the 7800 GT came out, I was blown away, but at the price of the GPU ($599), I didn't see the need. Now I see why...

 

the problem with them is the heating you know they are like a reactor

 

Do they really run that hot? My old desktop has dual 7900GT's in SLi, and they don't get too toasty. (But it's also a desktop, and it's rarely ever used, as me and the wife have laptops running out our ears)

 

the Alienware m9750 has a kind of a design flaw. one card has its own fan, the other one shares its fan with the CPU, so its always 8-10 Degrees warmer, and thats whats holding me back from Ocing them. but i'll be considering that when winter comes

 

Ouch, and you use a cooler, right? The P-FX actually has a better cooling design than my Sony. I elevate the computer by putting two DVD cases under the batter, and my max temp is around 65C, idle around 39C-43C.

 

i was supposed to have a zalman nc-2000. till my Cousin robbed me lol

 

Excuse me kind sirs.
You may have had terrible 7th series, but my 7950GTX NEVER goes above 66C on full load, and that`s with auto fans.
With max fans, it maxes out in the low 60s.
So yea , the 7950GTX is a powerbeast STILL.

 

lol i know. as i said.. its a design flaw. when the fan control software is released, i'm definatly gonna make a good use with it

 

Can we take the "M" out of the topic title?

 

Probably should, as it wasn't a mobile GPU.