PC Gaming Performance: Laptop vs Desktop

So I built myself a custom gaming rig last summer, and it’s been pretty good so far (I’ve been building them for over a decade). Then, a few weeks ago, I started researching the latest gaming laptops with the new GTX 9xx GPUs. I had purchased (and subsequently returned) the Lenovo Y50 last summer, and I’ve been toying around with the Acer V Nitro for about a week (check my sig for my quick reviews).

All this got me thinking: historically, the common wisdom was that for the same price, a gaming desktop was quite a bit more powerful than a laptop. From another point of view, to get the same performance, you’d have to spend more on a laptop. These days though, it seems as if the price/performance gap is narrowing.

The new ASUS G751JT just went on sale last week at CanadaComputers, so I picked one up, and pit it against my desktop. Here’s the rundown on the costs.

DISCLAIMER: I live in Toronto, Canada. So all prices quoted here are $CAD, and since we have to pay 13% sales tax, that’s included in the final total. I bought the components either from local stores or online, trying to find the best prices I could at the time I built the system.

Desktop:
GPU:ASUS nVidia GTX 770 2GB - $359
CPU: Intel Core i5-4690k - $249
CPU Cooler: Corsair H60 Hydro Series - $58
PSU: Seasonic 550W G-550 - $90
RAM: 2x4GB ADATA XPG V2 Series Gold DDR 1600Mhz - $80
Case: Corsair Obsidian Series 350D Micro ATX - $95
Motherboard: Gigabyte Z97M-D3H - $120
Wireless Adapter: ASUS N600 PCE-N53 - $40
DVD: ASUS 24x DVD-RW - $18
SSD: Crucial MX100 512GB - $220
OS: Windows 8.1 pro 64-bit - $105
Merc Stealth Keyboard - $80
LG 23MP75 display - $220

Total cost: $1,734
Total with tax: $1,959


ASUS G751
Model: G751JT-DH72-CA
CPU: Intel Core i7-4710HQ
GPU: nVidia GTX 970M 3GB
RAM: 16GB DDR3
HDD: 2TB
17.3” FHD IPS display

Sale price: $1,699
With tax: $1,919

Some items I got for my desktop were on sale, some weren’t. The G751 was on sale, regular price is $1,800 + tax. Bottom line is, both systems cost me about the same. I didn’t include the cost of a headset or mouse since I bought those regardless of the system. Now, obviously the desktop has an edge with that SSD, but I could easily sell the 2x1TB HDD’s in the ASUS G751 and use the proceeds to fund (most of) the purchase of a Crucial MX100.


Performance

Desktop
Firestrike: 6849
3DMARK 11: P9548

ASUS G751
Firestrike:6664
3DMARK 11: P9585


Now, you can argue I’m comparing the just-released 9xx series of GPU’s against the older GTX 770 - which is true. But I’m more concerned with comparing performance at equal price levels. What we have here is a laptop and desktop, priced almost identically (where I live, anyway) providing roughly the same level of performance. This may change going forward, as the new Maxwell architecture becomes the norm and all desktop GPUs gain the performance/efficiency boost.

Thoughts? Is this just a freak accident, since we’re at the crossroads of a new GPU architecture? Will this happen each time we get a substantial performance/efficiency boost? Can I simply not do math?

 

Comparing last summer desktop prices to today's notebook prices isn't possible with regards to gaming performance.

Not even apples and oranges. More like space dust to a planet. Even if the space dust and planet weighed the same.

Buy a GTX 970 for your desktop and also drop in another 8GB of RAM and then compare (yeah; prices be damned).

 

Laptops are definitely closing the gap, but desktop is still ahead. Sure stuff bought 1-2 years ago will always lag behind the cost curve, but comparing a $2k desktop build today vs a $2k laptop build, the desktop build will always beat the laptop. That being said, you can get a base GTX 970m laptop with 8GB RAM for < $1300, and add an SSD + another 8GB RAM for additional $250, and you're golden. It is also getting to the point where today's top end mobile GPU's should last a long time at 1080p since most games run at 100FPS+ with max details. It will be the 4k gaming that will kill current gen video cards, even desktop. So all gets down to need. $2k laptop will get within 20% performance of a $2k desktop, but give you portability.

 

Indeed, it's insane how much power such a small machine gets.

 

If I do that, then the desktop will be quite a bit more expensive. If I try to build a $2k desktop with today's newest GPUs, I'd have to cut $200-$300 on the other components to fit a GTX 970 in there. So maybe a Core i3 and a regular HDD, instead of a Core i5 and SSD. Because you're entirely correct - if I add 8GB of RAM and a GTX 970, then ASUS G751 will fall behind. But then, the price won't be comparable.

The entire point is this: I spent roughly $2k on each machine (though about 6 months apart) - and their performance is similar. Though I did check the prices recently, and they haven't changed much. Were I to build that same desktop today, the price would be comparable. The only real change that's occurred since last summer is the new Maxwell GPU.

I'm comparing performance at the same price point. Though it is true that a 6 month time gap is significant in technology terms, so it's not quite a fair comparison.

Essentially, my point is that it appears to me that these days, if you spend the same amount of money on a desktop and a laptop, the performance will be much closer than it used to be.

 

This is probably one of the major differences based on where I live. I can't seem to find a laptop with a GTX 970M for anything less than $1600 after tax - and that's without a SSD.

 

There are two problems that I see with this kind of comparison.

1. A lot of costs can be cut from a desktop build. In your example, you threw a lot of money at things that were nice but that make no difference towards gaming performance. Spending $80 on a keyboard, $90 on a power supply, etc. all really add up while not giving you additional performance. Taking your laptop as a starting point, one could build a desktop of comparable gaming performance for far less than the $1700 plus tax that you spent on it, and that is buying everything brand new. If you can go without certain features such as a case or wireless, don't mind using some last-gen parts, or are willing to go on ebay and computer forums for used parts, costs of a powerful gaming desktop can really hit rock-bottom.

2. In a couple of years when you want to buy a new laptop, you need to buy a completely new laptop. The desktop really shines when it comes to upgrading. You can upgrade any part you want at any time. Also even if you do a complete overhaul of the system, you are going to leave a ton of parts in place. So down the road, the desktop's costs are going to be far lower, probably about half, of a laptop's costs. You aren't going to pay for a new case, optical drive, monitor, etc. when you want a new desktop. With a new laptop, you need to buy a whole new package and only possibly your RAM and hard drive can carry over if they are recent and good parts.

 

@ Qing Dao

I agree that the ease of upgrade of desktops is a prime selling feature, much like portability is for laptops. However, the point is to compare buying a brand new system, from scratch.

However, I would have to somewhat disagree with your first statement. If you're putting in high-end GPUs, CPUs - you don't mix them with low-end parts. What is the point of having a SSD, GTX 980 and a Core i7 while mixing it with a sub-par PSU, crappy keyboard, low-quality display...

You're either building a high-end rig, a mid-range rig, or a low-end one. You wouldn't buy a motherboard like the ASUS Maximus Hero just to slap in a Core i3. You also wouldn't pair a GTX 980 with a low-quality 19" monitor. You have to be consistent when building a rig. Otherwise, you're like that guy who drives a BMW but lives in a trailer park.

A gaming machine isn't just about performance - it's about the overall experience. A bad mouse, keyboard and monitor will completely spoil the gaming experience, making that high-end GPU irrelevant. A WIFI card is necessary if you can't plug in an ethernet cable. Besides, good luck finding a good gaming mouse that doesn't cost at least $50. A decent monitor can't be had where I live for much less than $200. A modular PSU that doesn't suck will cost at least $75. I picked that case because it was solidly built, was easy to work in (making those future upgrades painless to install), provided good airflow (keeping temps and therefore noise low) and looked decent. I could have saved $40 by buying a cheapo case, but why would I do that? You can't expect a laptop to have a sleek, quality case, but then be ok with comparing it to a desktop that has a crappy, heavy, noisy case, just because you want to have good performance while keeping costs down. The standards that you apply to laptops must be the same you apply to a desktop, if you want a fair comparison.

Bottom line - if you're building a desktop, you can't buy a GTX 980, a Core i7, a SSD, then scour craigslist for cheap, used parts just to make a "high-end" gaming rig for cheap. Because a high-end gaming rig is about more than just performance - it's about the gaming experience.

Besides, you're trying to compare building a desktop with cheap, used parts and then comparing it to a brand-new laptop.

Apples to oranges.

TL;DR
I picked my parts to make an overall good gaming machine, which is as much about a pleasant gaming experience as it is about performance. There's no point in having a powerful gaming machine if using it is unpleasant. Every part I picked added to that experience - only picking parts that add to the performance will make for a bad gaming machine.

 

Thank you for the comparison. I, for one, really enjoyed it. Laptop vs desktop gap used to be 2 years, then 18 months, then 12. Now you're getting about 6 months gap. Just shows that the narrowing continues. Is it perfect? Is it comprehensive? No. But that's okay. Good work!

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

 

As others have pointed out, there are some issues with my comparison. It isn't entirely scientific.

But I remember several years ago, comparing a laptop and desktop of equal price - the desktop just blew the laptop out of the water.

Now, the difference is much smaller. It should get even better with Broadwell and other improvements to efficiency, as heat is what laptops have issues with. I would think that by the end of the year, assuming Broadwell delivers on its promises, the performance gap might get to 10%-15%. Which would be nice, because I'd gladly give up 10% performance for the portability of a laptop.

 

No, you're missing the point, totally.

You are not comparing anything comparable here. For example, the first desktop GTX 970 DX11 scores I find are:

See:
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 970 G1 Gaming review - DX11: Futuremark 3DMark 11


And they are ~50% faster than either of your scores.


Again; this is a useless comparison, even if the 'same money' argument is used - it is still 6 months (which equals an eternity in tech) apart.

More importantly; notebook computers are nowhere close to desktop systems at the same price point. Keep dreaming...

And adding $$ for keyboard, mouse, etc. doesn't count towards the cost of the desktop in my books either.

 

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Do you plan on using your psychic powers to play games on your desktop? Last I checked, you need a keyboard and mouse to play games on a desktop.

 

Actually, what I see there is that the GTX 970 does about 30% better than the GTX 770 (and the GTX 970M performs about on par with the 770). Which is exactly what I expected, as nVidia themselves apparently stated that with the new 9xx GPUs, the mobile versions were only about 30% behind their desktop counterparts, performance-wise.

If you feel this is a useless comparison, feel free to stop reading and go elsewhere.

Comments such as this: "More importantly; notebook computers are nowhere close to desktop systems at the same price point. Keep dreaming..." don't really add much to the discussion. You simply present that statement as fact. No data, no tests to back it up. Just...a statement.

HTWingNut thinks the performance gap is around 20% at the same price point. I think that sounds about right. And to me, being within 20% or so of the performance of a desktop (at roughly the same price range) is what I would call close. So no, I'm not dreaming.

 

If you want the standards to apply across the board, how about the small laptop screen, loud fans, crappy chiclet keyboard, and touchpad? If for you a gaming desktop isn't about the performance but it is "feel" of it or something like that, and you feel the need to spend lots of money on non-performance related parts, why start a thread talking about performance for the money? Your criteria to judge a gaming laptop on is a lot more than just about performance, so why not apply that same criteria to a laptop? If you buy a laptop and want to get a good experience, you will need an external monitor, mouse, and keyboard anyway.

Someone building a gaming desktop most certainly can. That is all I did through high school and college. My gaming experience was most certainly not hampered by the fact that I had the motherboard sitting on top of the cardboard box it shipped in or that the DVD-ROM drive was pulled from an old discarded desktop. For you maybe a high end gaming machine is about a warm fuzzy feeling it gives you when you go to sleep at night, but for many people it is about the performance. When you are looking at a computer monitor and trying to get as many frames per second as you can, I don't see how a modular power supply or a light-weight case plays any role in that experience.

No I am not. I mentioned it as simply a further cost-cutting option available when building a desktop that doesn't exist when you want to buy a laptop. When the sole criteria is performance for the money, I can shop for all brand new parts and come out ahead with a desktop.

You feel the need to spend lots of extra money on things that are irrelevant to performance, and then come here and tell us that the price/performance for a laptop and desktop is about the same? Please. Your gaming desktop is decent, but overall it ranks very poorly on price/performance.

 

I never said performance wasn't a factor - that's you putting words in my mouth. Performance for the money, as far as I'm concerned, includes spending money on components that don't necessarily increase performance. Given that most people build "normal" desktops, factoring in a certain cost for a case, mouse, keyboard, screen and so on is a given.

That's because I personally wouldn't dream of putting together a machine that was just about performance, if the gaming experience on it wasn't up to par. The motherboard lying on a table? I guess this comes down to personal taste - my experience would be very much degraded if I were to build a system like you described.

If all you're looking for is raw performance, you have a point. I'm looking for an overall enjoyable gaming experience, which I wouldn't get from the setup you described.

And yes, I (like many others, I'm sure) do spend money on things that don't increase performance. Just because you're ok with having your motherboard lying on top of cardboard boxes doesn't mean everyone else is too. Performance isn't the sole criteria - it is the main criteria. I would assume this goes without saying, though I might assume wrong.

I mean, you wouldn't buy a BMW without doors, just to save on costs would you? In that case, why buy a BMW at all?

I guess you and I have different standards and ideas when it comes to a gaming desktop. I simply cannot have my components lying around on a box. I want a good keyboard, and a good mouse, otherwise there isn't a point to building a system in the first place.

Essentially, what you're describing isn't "building a desktop". You're hooking up components in whatever fashion is needed to obtain maximum performance at minimal cost. Not that that's a bad thing, mind you. It's actually pretty cool. But when people say "I'm building a desktop", I'm pretty sure they mean, you know, actually building a desktop with a proper case, and obtaining a certain level of aesthetics.

It's the same thing with a laptop. It isn't JUST about performance - if the screen is bad, or the keyboard sucks, it does't matter how powerful it is.

In other words, price/performance, but assuming a certain level of overall quality (screen, keyboard, aesthetics, etc.). Because I assumed (wrongly?) that most people would factor in the overall experience, not just raw performance.

I expect a certain level of quality from a laptop (decent screen, decent keyboard, good build quality - relatively speaking to laptops, that is). I therefore expect the same from a desktop. And adopting your approach would not satisfy that.

If you think differently, that's fine. But this thread was started with people like me in mind, not extreme-performance enthusiasts.

Please keep in mind that I'm not insulting you or dismissing your way of doing things (even though you seem to like being rude and making disparaging comments about how I'm all about "feel" rather than performance). I enjoy seeing what extreme performance people can squeeze out of their systems using "unconventional" setups. I'm just saying this thread was more about "price vs performance" for the mainstream people, those of us who build systems with a main (not sole) focus on performance.

 

Again, I am simply saying that this is one option available that doesn't exist when one is buying a gaming laptop.

You demand a lot more from your gaming desktop than your gaming laptop as far as your "gaming experience" is concerned, you buy lots of parts that are good but are questionable from a performance for the money standpoint, and then start a thread about how gaming desktops and laptops offer the same performance for the money. Your gaming desktop, even considering you are buying everything for it and are buying all of those parts brand new, is not a good example of lots of gaming performance, measured in detail settings and FPS, for the money spent on it. If someone takes your laptop as a benchmark, one could build a full gaming desktop that offers equivalent gaming performance for considerably cheaper.

This build is basically an apples to apples your laptop in desktop form. All prices include shipping:
Motherboard: $45 BIOSTAR B85MG Ver. 6.x LGA 1150 Intel B85 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Newegg.com
CPU + HSF: $190 Intel Core i5-4460 Haswell Quad-Core 3.2GHz LGA 1150 Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 4600 BX80646I54460 - Newegg.com
Video Card: $225 MSI N760-2GD5/OC G-SYNC Support GeForce GTX 760 2GB 256-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 SLI Support Video Card - Newegg.com
Memory: $120 Team Elite Plus 16GB (2 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model TPD316G1600C11DC01 - Newegg.com
Hard Drive: $70 Western Digital 2TB 7200RPM 64MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" (Heavy Duty) Internal Hard Drive - For PC/Mac/NAS/CCTV DVR - Newegg.com
Case+PSU: $57 Cooler Master Elite 350 - Mid Tower Computer Case with 500W Power Supply and Blue LED Light Strip - Newegg.com
DVD Burner: $20 LITE-ON DVD Burner 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 24X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM SATA Model iHAS124-14 - CD / DVD Burners - Newegg.com
Wireless: $48 Intel 7260HMWDTX1 Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260 for DesktopIEEE 802.11ac, IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n PCIe x1 Up to 867/300Mbps Wireless Data Rates - Newegg.com
Windoze: $103 Windows 8.1 64-bit | Windows Operating Systems - Newegg.com
Keyboard: $10 Rosewill RK-200 Black 107 Normal Keys USB Wired Standard Keyboard - Newegg.com
Monitor: $120 HP W2271d W2271d Black 21.5" 5ms Widescreen LED Backlight LCD Monitor 200 cd/m2 3,000,000:1 (600:1) - Newegg.com
Total: $1008
USD-CAD: $1200

Your laptop costs 42% more than this desktop for identical or slightly worse gaming performance. This isn't a ghetto build, with no case and trying to scavenge parts from Ebay and computer forums. Paying for anything more or anything better than these parts is departing from your laptop's specs and performance. Everything is brand new and full price. Quickly perusing Newegg.ca instead of Newegg.com shows that the prices including shipping are nearly identical after factoring in the exchange rate. I'm sure that looking for deals or sales on new components would reduce the price further compared to the on-sale price you got your laptop for.

 

hmm...my .02 on gaming... The gaming laptop Rigs will hit hardware level expansion while a Desktop/Tower one can expand and upgrade hardware to burn the house down unlike laptop hardware. Also Cooling/OCing becomes a major factor when one wants more fps with higher OCing and that requires liquid cooling something no laptop will ever match or compete with. If you look at all those Lan War Games what do you see most?? Modded and Heavy Modded Desktop/Tower and few scattered Gaming Laptops. That should tell one which one is winning this War Game scenario here by any stretch of the imagination. But Desktop/Tower has far more options and expansion potential compare vs Gaming Laptop and one isn't restricted to that manufacture hardware but can mixed and match in Desktop/Tower Gaming Rigs to their hearts' content.

 

You're comparing a 2012 desktop GPU (770 is a rebadged 680) vs. a 2014/2015 mobile GPU on a brand new architecture.

 

You are stating the obvious. What is the point you are trying to make?

 

That it's an invalid comparison. At least make the effort to compare two cards from the same release cycle. Choosing an outdated desktop GPU is just making it look much worse than it actually is.

Wow you're cranky today.

 

That doesn't make any sense to me. We can't compare two graphics cards that aren't from the same generation? The only desktop cards that offer similar performance to the GTX 970M are previous generation cards.

 

I thought this was about perf/price? I can easily build a Z97/4790K and 970 SLI system right now that'll smack the living daylights out of the ASUS laptop for the same price.

 

He's not comparing hardware, he's comparing value.

Some people here sound like the good old apple vs Windows people you used to see a decade ago.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

 

Ok, now I get you. I was looking at it from the perspective of how much a comparable desktop system to his laptop would actually cost, and you are just looking at it from the perspective of how much desktop you can build for the same money. Two sides of the same coin.

 

A valid point, and one of the reasons I like building desktops - you can scavenge, and aren't forced to pay retail price. For the record, I very rarely buy brand-new video cards. You can find very good deals for used cards (easily 50% of the price of a brand new one) and you lose nothing in regards to performance.

The one part you're missing is that the laptops I look at (and in this case, the ASUS) aren't bare-bones ones. They have quality builds, great screens (compared to other laptops), great keyboards (again, compared to other laptops). In other words, if you want to compare to the laptop, you can't just look at performance - you have to match the overall quality of the build. Because otherwise, I could probably go out there and find a cheapo laptop with a Core i7 and a GTX 970M that costs $1200 (such as a Sager sold by XoticPC - $1200). In this case, comparing apples to apples means a desktop build that is equivalent in quality (in comparison to other desktops).

Your point is well-made: if you go as cheap as you can, you can put together a machine that is comparable (performance-wise). Though you should have used a GTX 770, as the GTX 970M performs about on par with the GTX 770, not the 760 (add an extra $120). Also, in Canada (where I live) I pay 13% sales tax. If the goods are imported, I'll pay customs duties of around 13%. So, that $1200 is now just under $1500. Still $400 cheaper, I agree. So a 25% price difference. Remember, we don't all have the luxury of cheap US pricing.

I guess the fundamental difference is that you're focusing purely on performance, and paying the bare minimum needed to achieve that.

I look at performance, but will also pay a bit more in order to match the overall quality. I'm not going to buy (or use) a $10 keyboard. If I'm using a desktop, it will be with a decently large display (at least a 23" IPS). Which makes sense, since the ASUS has a very good keyboard (relative to other laptops) and has one of the better (and largest) displays vs other laptops. This is the whole "matching the quality" thing. I want a modular power supply, to keep the clutter to a bare minimum. Because if I don't have these things, why am I building a custom desktop to begin with?

But yes, your point is made - for equal performance, desktops still cost less. I just like to have a nice machine, not just one that performs. It has never really occurred to me to cheap out as much as possible on all the components to get maximum price/performance. For the same reason that I don't just gravitate towards the absolute cheapest price/performance laptop.

I also just found I can get a GTX 970 for under $400 CAD brand new. Not too shabby. Not much point in paying $350 for a GTX 770 when you can get a GTX 970 for $40 more.

 

Wouldnt it be better to just get a 980? Same cost, but probably better performance in most games.

I'm trying to put together a SLI build with those 970s, but after sales tax I just can't seem to get it to $1900 CAD.

 

Actually, you see what you want to see.

Stop comparing components by using another component to compare them to. Does not compute. 'About' and 'it is what NVidia said' is a poor way to see any real value in different components.

What MY comparison was; a mobile gpu vs. a desktop gpu (same model is key...) and there is no comparison. ~50% difference is at least a generation or two difference so, in 2017, come back and let us know how the notebook platform is as good as the true desktop comparison then.

Further, you discount what I say with 'doesn't add to the discussion...' because I am presenting the valid point that your comparison is useless. Yet, you agree with HTWingNut simply on the fact that he agrees with you. sigh.


Yeah; you're dreaming.

As has already been mentioned: set a budget and build/buy the most powerful platform you can 'now' - one a desktop, one a notebook. There is no way that that platform will be the notebook. At least not when performance is the goal.

Sweet dreams.

 

Perf/price wise 970 SLI >>> 980 if game supports SLI.

Going by US pricing, buying stuff on sale whenever possible, and cutting out extraneous luxuries that don't affect performance a great deal, I'm pretty sure what I said is feasible, going by ballpark estimates of current market value for popular components. Can't be bothered to create a PCPartPicker build to prove a point. I'm not in the market for new desktop just yet.

 

AKA bang for the buck. In which case the prize will almost always go to the desktop. Nevertheless, in some rare cases you will find one that falls outside the curve. But it certainly is not the norm, or to be expected.