Does this laptop sound future proof?

i7-3610QM 2.3 - 3.3 Ghz (6mb cache, 45w TDP)
GT650M GDDR5 past GTX660M levels
4gb RAM 1600 Mhz
750gb HDD 5,200 RPM
How long would I get decent performance in new games for?

 

No such thing as future proof, that said you will have a good 2-3 years out of it, more if you're willing to drop settings lower after that period.

 

Thanks, once I'm 18, I'll be able to upgrade again so that's perfect

 

You might want to increase your RAM though. 4GB is a tad bit low now, might not be a good match for a year and half down the line.

 

RAM will only get cheaper and cheaper so might as well wait until then xD

 

You want at least 8GB of ram if you want this to last a few years. I think 4GB is OK these days, but a little on the low side. You should probably just buy a 16GB RAM kit for $70 and install it yourself.

I think the 650m should hold up a few years as a decent card.

 

Good platform (IB), very good gpu, inadequate RAM and circa 2009 storage subsystem... definitely not 'future-proof' as is.

Upgrade the RAM to 16GB DDR3 12800MHz (2x 8GB Sodimms) and consider at least a 750GB Hybrid HDD or go straight to an SSD (240GB/256GB or larger).

Then, I can agree that you'll be 'future proof' (at least for the foreseeable future).

 

Agreed on no such thing as future proof but you could say you're highest level at the moment. A position that is transitory, especially in the computer world.

As for RAM, I believe the idea of more is purely preferential. It's like a horsepower thing without the mileage penalty: considering the limitations and constraints on the road, would a 200 hp car get you to your destination any better than a 300 hp car, or a 500 hp car?

If the mileage was the same for all of these, who wouldn't advise you get the most you could? However, unless you had some specific need, would you ever use it?

I think they're advising you on the old adage, "better to have it, and not need it, than to need it and not have it." And it's so cheap, why not?

 

If the most intensive thing you do is game then you won't need more than 8gb of RAM. 16gb+ is for when you want to do heavy video/photo editing. VMs, etc.

 

Do you think I'll be able to play ArmA 3 with satisfactory settings in the future?

 

Define satisfactory settings, it's rather subjective. Is medium ok for you or you want near max?

 

I would say near max... I can get near max on ArmA 2 with satisfactory frames as long as I keep off AA and put shadows to medium... I would assume ArmA 3 will be more optimized than ArmA 2... BTW, Tijo, you got steam? XD

 

Krane, why do you want more RAM?

Because that is what unleashes the CPU's HP...

CPU + RAM = WORK done.

Why would you want 3,4 and 500+ HP when everyone and their grandmother is saying 50HP is good enough?

Because we don't just cruise to our next destination (at some arbitrary speed limit called 'good enough'), sometimes we need to use the passing lane, climb a mountain or simply buy/use different software than when the system was originally bought.

And even if 50HP (whether we're talking about an older platform, or a newer platform that is crippled with only 4GB RAM and/or a 5400RPM HDD...) is seemingly enough for us; when the O/S (Win7 and Win8 x64) can put the additional RAM to use, then it is not enough.

Sometimes, running a 500HP 'engine' moderately is better than running a 50HP 'engine' at it's limits (whether it's from day one or a couple of years down the road).

It's especially unwise when getting that extra HP is a mere $100 more (in a $1K - $2K system) for the RAM and about double that for the storage subsystem. (i.e., a ~15% price increase for essentially 200% more performance (or more).

See? It's not about mileage; it's about driveability and useability.

 

I was on a budget, so I couldn't afford the RAM or HDD upgrades, even if I could, I would've upgraded to the GTX 660m instead.

 

Now I didn't say I disagreed did I?

It's just that these RAM absolutes bother me--especially without substantiation. Until a few years ago, we were all fat, dumb, and happy and living in a 32 bit world with less than 4GB. Now we absolutely positive must have 8GB? Really? Do I have 8GBs, yes. Do I use 8GBs, yes! But do I NEED 8 GB? Yes! (Did I really think this through? ) But that's only because I use AE. That's the only program I've ever used that has take the full amount and asked for more.

 

2 years' time you'll need to run low settings at 1366x768. You'll be lucky to make 3 with newer games. In any case, decent specs, enjoy it while you have it, and if you don't have to play the absolute latest games at the highest settings you'll be fine.

If you can swing it get an SSD in your primary bay (even 64GB) for Windows and apps with an HDD in the optical drive for games and storage.

And yes, 8GB is a must. Both SSD and RAM is easy enough to upgrade later though.

 

My G73 still holds it's own pretty well after 2.5 years, sure the most demanding titles made for the PC require medium settings with no AA at 1080p, but it's not at requiring low at 1366x768 yet for 30fps or more.

 

The 5870 was also top end for a little while. The 650m is a mid-grade GPU from the beginning. It's like having bought a 5830 clocked to 5850 speeds (like OP is doing with 650m)

I'm not saying it won't last, just that I think people have rose colored glasses when it comes to buying laptops with dedicated GPU's. If you end up playing MW3/4 and BF3 for the next few years you'll be ok. But in two years if you want to play GTA 6 and BF5, your machine will likely struggle. If you want a laptop to truly last 3 years with ability to play latest games at decent resolution and/or detail, buy a top end GPU, period.

 

True, there will always be a few games that will kill all but the highest end mobile GPUs, but for most games, it'll perform just fine. I don't expect it to run The Witcher 3 (if they make one) all that well for example, but for most other games, it should hold up pretty well down to medium/high settings without AA. After two years, it will come down to tweaking the settings for each game and finding which one is the biggest hog.

 

Probably but with highly reduced settings, i.e. no AA and reduced textures, hell, Arma 2 already stresses my desktop OCed GTX 570 SLI system with mild 2xMSAA.
Frigging hell that game is brutal, 3 teraflops of processing power with 160Gb/s vRAM bandwidth and I can still only get high 70ish FPS with 1920x1080.

"future proof" means different things to different people. FPS games typically require at least 45 Frames per second performance to feel smooth as the action is fast paced. RPGs and non-competitive strategy games can still feel very adequate at 30FPS.

I'd recommend getting a dual channel 8gb or 16gb RAM kit. More RAM gives your system more breathing space, it allows you to run more programs in parallel without lagging. I'm not a fan of 16gb kits myself since its technically using more power for limited gain, its an uncommon person who uses VMs or something that needs that much RAM without already using ECC + Buffered RAM since the hard memory faults will become much more prevalent.

BUT before any of this, get an SSD, the improvement is immediately noticeable. I'm pretty sure those specs are for a 15.6" machine so you can jam that 750GB HDD in to the CDROM bay to backup your limited SSD storage.

 

We're on the verge of "next gen" gaming, too. We will be seeing much more demanding titles with better tech in about a year, assuming that's when the ps4 and new xbox launch. I'll be happy with my 7970 until then, but I don't expect it to max out those games. I'll need to upgrade to something better when the time comes.

 

Any guesses on what level GPU they are planning to put in those, I know that the Xbox has the equivalent of a GeForce 7600 GT IITC, but I'm not completely sure

 

I wish I knew man. All I know is today's mobile cards won't be maxing next gen games out at steady framerates. The 7970 and 680m have trouble hitting 30fps in a few of today's games, so I'm sure they won't be running games maxed out 2 years down the road.

 

I think this question is better posted in the gaming forum ~~

Ivybridge will be able to handle dairy OS task probably until windows 10 or 11.
As a whole, it will hold up as a typewriter for at least 5 years.

 

But the bigger question, is will it stand up to meat OS tasks for that long

 

IB as a typewriter? At least 15 years!!!

 

don't know , maybe keyboard are outdated in 10 years, brain wave data entry ftw!!!. (or eyeball ...)

 

I wonder if we'll still get typos... hmmmm

 

That's why you get a laptop now with USB 3.0.

 

The answer to whether something is future-proof is always No. Even something that has a much longer shelf life than the average technology (which is identical the the shelf life of a banana), such as floppy disks, eventually becomes obsolete.

I'll let others argue about the GPU; I am not up to speed on current mobile GPUs. The CPU is probably overreaching for what you should get. If there's an i5 option, it's probably worth the savings to go with it instead.

The HDD speed is rather slow, but even 5400 RPM drives these days are decently fast. It's no SSD, but it's got the capacity that's what you really need. Only you can guess if 750 GB is enough for your needs, but I would not say you need an SSD to be "future-proof". Running out of space is what really is a show-stopper; it running faster is a nice benefit, but if you avoid having 100 processes start with Windows, even a 5400 RPM drive should be sufficient for the forseeable future.

Because it's what they say in advertising, where the goal is that you spend money. And, money doesn't grow on trees. VaultBoy is right that RAM will, most likely, only get cheaper, so why buy it now? Unless there's a killer deal (which is unlikely), might as well wait. And even if he upgraded, 6 or 8 GB would likely be a better value than 16 GB.