Unsure about which Components to get

Hello everyone, so I have some really quick questions I was hoping someone might be able to answer on here. I'm getting a new laptop and still currently debating which hardware to get.

1) I'm hoping to play games for at least 4 years on this machine. HERE'S THE THING THOUGH: I am more than happy to play on lower settings to get better frames, so I'll play on the lowest setting possible in those end years if I still get decent frames. I know this requires some speculation but does this sound possible? (Read below for my information)

2) My GPU will be the NVIDIA 650M with 2GB VRAM, and my RAM will be 6GB if that matters. The processor will be 3rd generation Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3210M Processor (2.5 GHz with Turbo Boost up to 3.1 GHz), which is the new Ivy Bridge. The laptop is the HP dv6t-7000.

What I'm really unsure of, is what processor to get. I was told by many that the i5 Ivy Bridge will suffice for my needs above. The other options were an i7 and i7 quad core. I would MUCH RATHER take the i5 if people don't believe many games will utilize an i5 or i7 with more cores and still hold its worth in 4 years; it will save me both money and create a little bit less heat, I would just like to know if the above sounds feasible with the i5 processor I mentioned.

Thanks for the replies!

 

In theory, it sounds feasible.

My recommendations?

Is the 2GB VRAM DDR3 or DDR5? (Get DDR5 if you can).

8GB RAM (16GB not out of the question, even for just 'gaming').

i7 QC (at least the 3610QM).

Win7 for now - upgrade to Win8 (assuming your games will work, of course) ASAP after it goes RTM.

With the above setup; heat will not be an issue (I'm assuming the cooling system for the DV6 is more than adequate to prevent throttling, of course) and each item will help ensure that in ~4 years time, you should still be able to game (if only at minimum settings).

While with your version of a new system; it would be more like work than play in much less than 4 years time.

Good luck.

 

The VRAM is DDR5, sorry for not including that in the previous post. I might buy the extra 2GB RAM later, but I'm not too sure how much of a notable difference it will make.

Why do you recommend the i7 QC? I know the general assumption is the later the processor (i5 vs. i7), the better and the same applies for more cores to allow for more tasks; BUT keep in mind I'm not looking to spend money unnecessarily. If you speculate that I won't need or optimize the i7 or quad cores over the i5 in those 4 years then I would take the i5 any day.

 

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/678340-3520m-3610qm.html


Especially look at HTWingNut's responses (page 3, I think).

I definitely recommend an i7 QC going forward (and as much RAM as you can afford).

 

What games are you planning to play? Getting the quad ensures that you won't be CPU bound as games get more multithreaded/CPU intensive. For example, mainstream games BF3 and Metro 2033 both benefit from having a quad core. 6gb RAM is fine for gaming.

 

I see, thanks for showing me the proof! Just when I was about ready to lock-in my decision of an i5 too. I'll definitely have to think about it a little more since it does come with the extra fee. I also read till the end and HTWingNut said he still needed an actual dual core so the test is still plausible/not-definitive.

It makes sense if one concludes that a quad core would be better for a multiplayer aspect since more tasks are being presented that aren't pre-rendered in the game's single player; the real question to me though, was what settings was he using? One of the MAIN points I was trying to make obvious was that I prefer performance over graphical quality. I'd happily play on lower settings to get better frames as I could care less about AA and maximum texture quality or shadows.

 

Try asking him in that thread (or ask someone with a dual core and a quad core to replicate/confirm his findings at the resolutions/quality you prefer).

In my mind, it shows just how much a quad core cpu is needed today (no matter what the quality settings are - the lower they are the higher the FPS will be, of course) and how much more they'll be needed in the future (2016, in your case!!!).

When you consider that you'll be enjoying the new system for 4 years (or more) it makes little sense to try to save ~100 today, imo.

 

I just messaged him, thanks.

Also re-read this thread and noticed I forgot to answer one of your previous questions, sorry. The games I play are pretty diverse; there's not really a one-genre-fits-all for me. From scanning upcoming games I can tell you that these interest me: Assassin's Creed 3, Guild Wars 2, Borderlands 2, Resident Evil 6, Dead Space 3; I wish I could make a general category of what I play but there's a lot.

It's really tough to choose though, a lot of people think my machine will be irrelevant before I even really cap out with my i5. It's really tempting to save that $150 too.