i5-520m vs i7-720qm for Starcraft 2

I'm buying a dell laptop for Starcraft 2 and I'm trying to decide on my processor. I need to choose between:

i5-520M 2.40GHz (2.93Ghz Turbo Mode, 3M cache)
and
i7-720QM Quad Core Processor 1.6GHz (2.8GHz Turbo Mode, 6MB Cache)

Money isn't an issue since the price between the two is similar. I'd prefer whichever will run faster. I don't know if I should pay more attention to the turbo mode speed, the GHz the Cache or the Quad core for running games like starcraft.

I'd also hope to use it for Fallout Vegas, Portal 2, Diablo 3, and GW2 if and when they come out.

(Additional question: would it benefit me to pay extra for 6GB memory instead of the usual 4GB, or will the kind of games I'm interested in run to their best capacity with 4GB ram?)

 

Is there a particular reason you have chosen Dell over... other laptops? If you are interested in gaming then there are many other brands to consider.

 

what's your budget, what you want out of the laptop, size ?
maybe members here can help you with better choice than dell....doesn't hurt to try

 

For Starcraft 2 go for an i7 quad.

Additional question's answer: no, not today, maybe in a year or two.

 

4GB should be enough for anything right now. For SC2, it should benefit from Quad Core.

But you mention the price being quite similar. Are the GPUs for both of them the same?

 

Thanks so much for the information! For the response questions:

1. I honestly don't know what GPU is. They're both studio 17s. The prices are not the same, but they're within a hundred dollars of each other so I'd rather go with whichever of the two is faster (for such a small difference in price.)
2. As for why I want a dell, I don't know much about computers but I had a pretty good experience with my last dell laptop. It lasted a long time and never gave me any troubles, so I'd prefer to try them again.

 

Studio 17 has a HD5650 option. That's the highest which will be able to play SCII. If want a faster gpu and a lighter chassis then consider a MSI GX640/740 equivalent:

US$1200 17" MSI MS-1651-ID4 i7-720M 16 4GB 500GB HD5850 W7HP 1680x1050
US$1130 17" MSI E7405-080US i5-430M 2.26 4GB 500GB HD5870 W7HP 1680x1050 + ~ US$260 i7-720QM from ebay.

 

I would say take a look at this, will run SC2 fine
Sager NP7110
Sager NP7110 (Built on Clevo B7110M)

 

Okay just realized GPU meant graphics card. The two graphics cards were different indeed (which is probably why the two were so close in price even though one was an i7). The difference was:

1GB ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 560v Video Card (with the i7)
vs
ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 5650, 1GB with TV Tuner (with the i5)

I believe the 5650 is a better card which explains what is going on with the price.

 

Good thing you're here.

In another post on here I recall someone citing information saying that SC2 doesn't utilize quad core as well as it should. I'll look for it.

 

I don't think this is the link i was thinking, but this is very relevant to your topic
Starcraft 2 Beta: CPU benchmarks ? Core i5/i7 leading - Starcraft 2 Beta, Test, CPU, Processor, Benchmark, Performance - PC Games Hardware

 

I'm running SC2 on a i5-520m and a ATI 5650 on high settings @ 1600X900 res and it runs smooth as butter. It does slow down a bit during huge massive battles, and I mean HUGE battles but besides that its very smooth.

 

Thanks so much for the advice and info. I guess as a last question, if choosing between:

i5-520M 2.40GHz (2.93Ghz Turbo Mode, 3M cache) with
ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 5650, 1GB

and

i7-720QM Quad Core Processor 1.6GHz (2.8GHz Turbo Mode, 6MB Cache) with
1GB ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 560v Video Card

and all other things including price pretty much the same, which might be a better option for gaming? (I'll be trying to play Starcraft, Diablo, Guild Wars 2, Portal 2, etc.) I know the 560v is basically the same as a 4650 which is not supposed to be too hot for gaming, but the i7 is tempting too.

 

If you want to be able to play stacraft 2 smoothly (as well as the future games you mentioned at decent quality and performance), go for the MSI GX740. It's graphics card is vastly better. Though, anything with an ati 5870 will do like the ASUS G73 (careful with GSODs on this one), sagers, clevos, or Alienware m17x.

 

^^ second that. Price wise - Sager/Clevo

 

pricewise is the MSI lol.

 

Sager 7110 in 17'' is good in price aswell

 

Its well established that SC2 only uses two cores. Four (Eight virtual) cores may be overkill for this specific game.

 

If that's the case then that's pretty pathetic, as a game like this would benefit from the 2 extra cores.

 

what do you mean with "GSODs" ?

 

Then why do all 4 cores stay very active on a 720QM if it doesn't use more than 2?

 

Any chance we'll see a patch somewhere down the road that'll allow SC2 to make use of all 4?

 

^
Most likely not. Blizzard is a cater to the masses company, and the masses use dual core and single gpu. WoW is an example of that.

Plus, some idiots will complain that the extra cores give an advantage. Which is a load of house but blizzard would listen.

 

It's confirmed SC II is dual core optimized.

Here is an extensive benchmark comparison (CPU and GPU):

Starcraft 2 CPU benchmarks: Intel on top, quads without performance benefit - - PC Games Hardware

Quote:

"First point: Starcraft 2 doesn't take advantage of more than two cores, so the Core 2 Quad Q6600 isn't faster than its dual core equivalent Core 2 Duo E6600. Second point: More cache boosts the framerate. "

This correlates to the early benchmarking done with the BETA here: http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...CPU-benchmarks-x-Core-i5/i7-leading/Practice/

In the end, two cores running as fast as possible with as much cache as possible is the optimum setup for SC II.

Laptop wise, a 920xm or 940xm with 8mb of cache and throttlestop allowing dual cores to run at 3.2/3.33 is the killer config for SC II.

This is followed by a 640M (when available), 840QM, 620M

 

That all depends on the percentage being used on each Core.