futureproof gaming (what configuration to choose)

If you have to choose between this asus g1s or this compal fl90(specs below). Which one of these two would be most futureproof in therms of gaming ??

Asus g1s

CPU: Intel Core 2 duo T7500 2.2 gHz
Ram: 2048Mb (2x 1024)
HD: 160Gb
DVD: Dual Layer DVD-rw
GPU: Nvidia GeForce 8600M GT 256Mb
Screen: 15.4" WXGA
Netwerk: Wireless A/B/G/N - 10/100
OS: Windows Vista Home Premium
Extras: Asus draagtas + Muis
warranty: 2 jaar

Compal fl90

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo T7700
Ram: 4096Mb DDR-2 667
HD: 100Gb 7200 rpm
DVD: DVD-rw
GPU: nVidia Geforce 8600M GT 512Mb
Screen: 15.4" WXGA+ - 1440x900
Netwerk: wired & wireless
OS: Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit oem NL
Extras: Blue Tooth - Robsonmodule 1Gb
Warranty: 2 jaar

 

Their pretty much the same.

 

hmm.... double thread post?
that's a no no...

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=152998

 

Well I think it's obvious the Compal would be.

 

How exactly do you figure that?

The Asus should be the choice because of the DDR3 memory (however small a difference it may be)

If you were going by the 64-bit OS in the Compal, it should be remembered that they're still ironing out the kinks in that, and it may be problematic until that time...

 

Asus with upgrade to 4gb ram & 7200 hd

 

The 7200RPM hd would improve the load times, but the 32 bit OS wouldn't be able to recognize much more than 3GB of RAM.

 

I ll take the g1s becoz of the gddr3 gpu.

 

g1s for the same reasons

 

For Gaming, I'd go with the ASUS. It will have a slightly more robust GPU because of the GDDR3 RAM. Also, the processor in the ASUS, while not as fast as the Compal, is more than adequate for gaming. The extra RAM is very very nice, but if you are using a 32 bit operating system you are only going to be able to utilize about 3.2 GB of that ram anyway.

Even if it is a 5400 RPM drive, I'd also prefer the extra 60GB that the Asus Hard Drive includes, space is at a premium on a mobile computer, 100GB is incredibly constraining, especially when you start installing modern games that take up at least 5GB each.

For gaming, or gaming related anything, the Asus is the way to go.

For general use, the Compal is fine.

I vote for the Asus.

 

I would just get the cheaper one............they both have the same graphics card. The difference between the 256MB and the 512MB is insignificant, especially since the Asus, I believe is DDR3, while the the 512MB card is only DDR2.

 

Well assuming you are using Vista, the saying "don't get what you don't need" actually has performance benefit merit. It seems that Vista's driver model caches a large portion of the video memory in the main system memory. What this means, is that if you have 512MB of VRAM you will actually have less system memory free, than if you have 256MB VRAM. In the rare (for now) worst case scenario where certain modern games use a lot of system memory, having more VRAM can ironically lead to less performance or even crashing if the caching causes the game to use more than the 2GB of RAM that an individual application is permitted.

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3044&p=2

In this case, it's better actually better not to have 512MB of VRAM since the 8600GT isn't powerful enough to use all of it anyways, and it avoids walking unneccessarily into whatever funky thing Vista's driver model is doing.

 

the GDDR3 in the G1S is much better then the 512mb in the compal.

everything else is easily upgradeable, and should be put aside...vista/ram/hdd/proc all play a part, but since the hardest part to upgrade is the GPU, it should take priority over everything else.

 

NO it isn't. People need to stop exaggerating insignificant differences. He is asking about future proofing. GDDR3 over GDDR2 isn't going to future proof anything.

You are right about the GPU taking priority over the other upgradeable components....but in this case...the GPU isn't what matters.

 

They're not "insignificant differences" if you're playing with relatively high settings; the GDDR3 version will come ahead.

 

Again, the OP is asking about future-proofing. Stop mentioning DDR2/3 because it's not going to make the laptop last any longer. Do you understand now?

 

as Osserpse said, if you play with reasonably high settings, with the GDDR3 vs the GDDR2, the GDDR3 will win.

NOW, how does that not mean it is a better card, and how does that not mean it will last a little bit longer?

 

wow....you don't get it do you. The GDDR2 WILL run all the games that the GDDR3 can run. It's the same GPU and the GDDR3 will of course perform better....but in the long term..NO...it does not matter. It won't last a "bit" longer, even.

 

You're right, they'll both probably exist for the same amount of time. But will the GDDR3 version perform better in newer games? Yea.

 

if the GDDR3 edges a few more frames, it can make a game go from unplayable to playable...right?

if that same game in question is next years game of the year, and the 512mb GDDR2 card cant play it (unplayable) but the GDDR3 card can because of said few fps, then yes, it did last a little bit longer.

 

And I said it wouldn't? wow...

Read what you wrote. People like you really annoy the hell out of me.

You're right, they'll both probably exist for the same amount of time.

Yes, I am right. That is the whole point of this thread. He wants the computer that will future proof him. You just agreed with me, idiot. They will last for the same amount of time.

Sorry for using the word idiot, but I had to.

 

I think what illmatic2609 is trying to say is that in the long run, GDDR3 over GDDR2 is not that much of a difference. It would be more worthwhile to save money now to get a new laptop later if the IFL90 is any cheaper.

 

but the difference IS there. and since the GDDR3 IS better, why not get it?

and for illmatic.. there is no reason to call people names on an internet forum...you dont win any prizes..

 

I don't think there will be a real difference in the future either. In 2 years, when you are trying to scrape bare minimum 30fps, even if one is a few percent faster that is still 1 or 2 fps, so it's kind of irrelevent in the long run.

 

Thank you for being one of the two people to agree with me.

Ok, you make me laugh. First of all you already proved you're one of those computer-people who is very picky about parts and what not. Obviously, since you ordered a NP9260. Since he is asking on these forums, he wants the right answer FOR HIM. And yes, there is a right answer. Get the cheaper one. Why? Because for him, that difference between GDDR2 and GDDR3 is not going to make an effin difference.

Second of all, it's funny how you mention prizes for calling people names on the internet. So you mean to say, I can't express my beliefs using a word like idiot? or maybe even a bolder one for someone so arrogant as yourself?

Learn to assist people, instead of telling them what YOU would do. I KNOW GDDR3 is better than GDDR2. Is the difference worth paying that much more money for? Jesus christ, I'm sure this post will not change your mind, anyway......

Thank you for being the other person that agreed with me.

 

If both listed above are the same price I'd personally go with the fl90.

 

Er, I was agreeing with you in a sarcastic, yet literal, tint, which obviously went way over your head. I said exist, because they're both going to run and last (as in continue to operate without breaking) just as long. Which one will perform better in the long run, though? The 8600m GT with the higher clocked GDDR3 memory.

They may both be able to play at the same settings, but the GDDR3 variant can render games at a more comfortable pace, and as such, is more future 'proof', which answers his question correctly: "Which one of these two would be most futureproof in therms of gaming ??" Note the underlined, italicized, and bolded word from the quote.

Is it worth the price premium? I don't think so, but that isn't the question.

You can use whatever word you'd like if it makes you feel important.

 

im not proving anything to anyone. I simply do not like wasting my money on something i will not use. if were in his position i would like to have gddr3 since it would last longer.

so when he asked

"If you have to choose between this asus g1s or this compal fl90(specs below). Which one of these two would be most futureproof in therms of gaming ??"

i am telling him what I would choose, and you are arguing with ME, over what Iwould do. good call.

so when you say

"he wants the right answer FOR HIM. And yes, there is a right answer. Get the cheaper one. Why? Because for him, that difference between GDDR2 and GDDR3 is not going to make an effin difference."

how do you know what the right answer for HIM is? is he telling you what is right for him? no, that is why he is posting on the forum.

you can express your beliefs using anything you want. i dont care if you use every curse in the book. however, i do think that if you want to be taken seriously..you dont have to resort to calling people names like your in 5th grade..

i am "assisting" people. he asked for MY opinion, and I gave it. dont like my opinion? then dont comment on it, and ignore it.

if you "KNOW" GDDR3 is better then GDDR2, then how would it not last longer? since it is BETTER, then it will last LONGER. if he wants this notebook to last as long as possible, then he will take his budget into account and use his head when buying something. if it means paying more then he is willing to, then no it isnt right for him. but you and I and no one else on this forum except HIM can make that decision.

you dont have to get angry and throw a fit when someone disagrees with you, you can simply just ignore me and my opinions.

 

I'm not going to type as much as I did in my last post. I will simply say a few things.

1. I am not/did not throw a "fit".

2. Idiot is a word used in the 5th grade? Ok, I'm sorry. I don't know where you live but here everyone says everything. New York.

3. You're right about him asking the people what they would do. But you should prioritize the OP's needs before yours. I'm not trying to fight with you. I'm trying to get at this point but you don't seem to get it. I didn't expect you would anyway.

The reason I'm saying it's not worth it to get GDDR3 is if it's more expensive by a lot, as a whole laptop...it's not. Yes, it will last longer, You guys are failing to realize I am not disagreeing with you that GDDR3 is "better", but "last longer"? I don't think so. It's the same GPU. You guys are treating this difference like it's a 8800 GTX and a 8800 GTS. We are not comparing a 8600M GT to a 8400M GS. We are comparing a 8600M GT with a 8600M GT.

 

He said what is more futureproof so the better card will be more futureproof? I don't understand why you are arguing that they aren't answering his question. My c90 has the 512 version and it is a good amount less powerful weaker especially if your into overclocking. But if you are not then yes its not a big difference.

 

Ok, so you say it's better. We all agree on that. But, how long do you think GDDR3 version will last over the GDDR2? Whatever....I'll leave it to you guys to "assist" him.

 

Nah I am not against you I partially agree with you but the argument just got too heated. I don't know but me along with the rest of the c90 community and I guess you dell people too (yours is ddr2 right? correct me if i am wrong) were very disappointed since even overclocking it to the max did not reach stock gddr3 standards. Thats in 3dmark06 but I know some people don't trust it sometimes (myself included) but yeah I think when comparing the same card and overclocking and such most people find its helpful but not very reliable when comparing different series of cards and even less reliable when ati vs nvidia.

 

Yes, I have the 256MB version and the one in the Dell is GDDR2 I believe. So far, I have tried many games...the only game that I was dissappointed in the performance of was Rainbow Six:Vegas. Would the GDDR3 have helped in that game? I really can't see how. The game looked horrible even on highest settings. When I lower the settings, the FPS was still horrible.

I don't overclock so I don't know. Many people suggested I don't do it because it will make the warranty complicated.

 

Yeah the gddr3 version overclocks like a beast, you would have noticed signifigant gains in performance. Like I said its disappointing mainly because on full overclock even with the c90s more powerful cpu helping raise the score it does not reach the gddr3 STANDARD. Not to mention if you want to compare further the heat issue since the full overclock will be alot more hot causing more prone to crashing and such but yeah its safe to say the gddr3 is a significant amount better.

 

Fact #1) In terms of gaming, every aspect of both laptops are already futureproof. If anything is to become non-futureproof, it would be the GPU.
Fact #2) GDDR3 performs better than GDDR2
Fact #3) G1S has GDDR3, FL90 has GDDR2

The question:
"Which one of these two would be most futureproof in terms of gaming ??"

The answer:
In terms of gaming, the G1S would be most futureproof out of these two.

 

I agree with the G1S, which is the reason I bought it. I believe that the difference between the 3dmark06 scores between GDDR2 and GDDR3 on the exact same card was around 900-1000 points. I think it was GDDR2 with 2900 to GDDR3 of 3800. It was either that or GDDR2 with 2800 and GDDR3 of 3900.

 

Does the Compal one has a MXM II graphics card slot? If it does then you should go for it since you can upgrade to newer cards when they come out later... As far as I know the G1S does not have MXM slot...

 

Yea, i have to agree.. gddr3 just has more leg room to overclock.. + the resell value of this will be more than the ddr2 versions (never thought of it huh, and it's not just 1 or 2 dollars, it's gonna be a 50 to 100 dollars difference after the next 6 months).. i ll bet on it!
REAL MEN HAVE GDDR3! I m just a kid....

 

I see my tread started a hell of a discusion. Thanks for all the help guys. If The compal should have MXM, that would be great. I' am looking into this right now.

 

No real men have a c90! Look at the sig.

C90 has mxm....

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is how I understand the situation to be: DDR3 will only make a noticebale difference if you are interested in playing at higher resolutions, if you are interested in playing all the latest and most graphics-intensive games at maxed-out settings, or if you are big into overclocking. If you don't mind turning down a setting or two a little bit on some games, and will be playing at lower resolutions, AND never plan to overclock, then DDR3 won't hold any big advantages for you. It may be able to play games at max settings for a tad longer, but in a few years time both DDR3 and 2 will be equally outdated, and neither one will be able to play the latest games at max settings. Just remember, the 8600GT (regardless of version) is still the best card available for a 15.4" nb right now. I don't really buy into the idea that any games will be completely unplayable on DDR2 8600GT's anytime soon. I can play relatively new games on a card that was only mid range 7 years ago! May not look the best, but the games are still playable.

Ask yourself, realistically, how much will it matter to you if you have to turn down a few settings on a few newer games? Once you become immersed in your game, will you really be thinking "it sure as hell bothers me that these graphics are 3 whole notches less intense than what I could have had with a DDR3 card!". How often will you be playing games? How often do you go out to buy the newest games? How graphics-intensive will they be? If you are like me, you only play when you have free time, and the vast majority of your games will be several years old. If you are like me, you only buy a new game maybe once or twice a year, they probably won't be extremely graphics intensive, you game at lower resolutions, and you are perfectly happy with graphics set as low as "med" if that is what is needed. If you are like me then in 2 years you will probably be getting a newer nb anyway. If you are like me, DDR3 won't make a shred of difference over DDR2. But again, that is me. My b/f and I have choosen to go with the Sager 2090 (IFL90) over the ASUS G1s because we are casual gamers who will be playing mostly older games on a WXGA screen (smoother gameplay), we won't be oc'ing, and we didn't feel like paying a couple hundred extra for poorer battery life and a boost in gaming performance that (for us) would be barely if at all noticeable. Plus in a year or two we will probably replace our nb with a newer one since by then, vista, DX10, etc should be more settled in and have better support.