This is what little I understand: depends on its slowest component. If you're interested in benchmarks though, here's a link:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2013/benchmarks-1,129.html

If you're looking for a gaming laptop, the difference for loading a game between SSD and hard drive is probably a matter of seconds while start up of the laptop may be up to a minute in difference. And unless you're that impatient, it might not be worth it to you.

What's your budget?

---------- Post automerged at 12:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 AM ----------

This is not an option from the manufacturer; this has to be done on your own and I heard, has a chance of failing.

 

It is an option from this manufacturer, that's why "build time" is approx two weeks. The ODD conversion is covered by the warranty.

 

:O
I missed that and am very surprised that the manufacturer offers it. I stand corrected.

 

I don't know about you guys, but I don't have more than 5 games installed on my computer at any time -- and I use a 500Gb platter drive as my primary HDD. I still have roughly ~200GB free space left, after games, programs, downloads, etc.

If you're dead set on getting an SSD, then a ~200Gb SSD would be a decent start. Anything less would lead you to playing the digital shuffle game, and anything more is just a money grab (unless you can afford it).

If regular SSDs are priced cheaper (talking about the Aus) elsewhere, then buy it and put it into the ODD conversion kit. I find that most manufacturer "add-on" are seriously overpriced for what it is, and I'm not sure if the trend follows for the market in the Aus.

But yes, I would recommend the SSD/HDD combo, if you can afford it. Many people have gone that route for years, and it works well. OS/select games on SSD, rest of the programs installed on the HDD.

If not, then a regular old platter drive works as well. I'm doing just fine gaming on a platter drive -- they're fast enough for me.

 

Does having a SSD instead of a normal HD make a huge difference? Because to be honest, I really don't know all that much about computers and it sounds like I'll need to know what I'm doing to get the most out of having one.

 

Yes the booting time is amazing. I have a 120GB SSD for Win 7 and 1TB HDD for stuff. Boot time is under 20 s.

 

Honestly? If you don't know enough about computers, I'd recommend that you just skip on the SSD for the time being. Yes, SSDs are good, but they're not that good to warrant learning about computers to begin with.

I mean, boot time difference with an SSD and a HDD is measured in seconds, and outside the responsiveness (programs open a tad bit quicker on SSDs -- same for games, they load a tad bit quicker), you really won't notice the difference.

It's up to you, but my recommendation? Just stick to a regular HDD for now.

 

Awesome, I have no problems with waiting for a few seconds for stuff to load, is there anything else that could be improved with it? Also, just looking at some of the other laptops, and http://www.logicalblueone.com.au/store/478-asus-g74sx-bbk9-notebook-pc-pre-order.html is right at the top of my price range, as such, is there any reason to upgrade to it instead of getting http://www.logicalblueone.com.au/store/559-horize-w670sr-multimedia-notebook.html ?

 

It's not just about performance. Regular HDDs are the most vulnerable component of any computer system, super prone to failures. SSDs don't have that problem.

 

You say "for now", but upgrading to an SSD later is not easy. The most basic method would require re-installing the OS onto the SSD. If Mishie wants an SSD, then it's much easier to have it first rather than trying to migrate a Windows installation onto it later.

Mishie, I'll give you two decent paths:

1. Get a decently sized SSD [say Crucial 240GB min]. And get the ODD Conversion Kit for Extra Hard Disk [NO HDD]. That costs $1,487.00. The idea is that you'd buy a platter HDD to go in the ODD Conversion and an external Bluray drive later on when you had more money.

That's quite a way beyond your budget though.

2. Get the default options, as is, and forget the SSD. $1,199.00. That means you get a DVD drive, but no Bluray. Like I mentioned before, a slim portable Bluray drive costs the same amount as the manufacturer's upgrade, so there's no reason not to delay that purchase until you really need it.

Oh, and Windows will cost you an extra $100-200 dollars depending on which version you choose in the purchase options. So add that on to your final costing.

That $1199 is really $1298 or $1398 unless you're providing your own copy of Windows.

---------- Post automerged at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:43 ----------

The bad: The Asus has a slower CPU, half the RAM, smaller HDD, an older but approx equivalent video GPU, and a glossy display [it costs $199 to change it to a matte display].

The good: Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit included in the price. An empty 2nd HDD bay for later upgrades.

I'd suggest sticking with the Horize in this case.

 

I agree with yak... the Asus one isn't a good buy. Sure, it has some redeeming factors, but it's outweighed by the loss of several crucial specs.

Stick with the horizon one for now... you can skate by on a semi-legal w7 install until you buy a license.

 

I had a look at LBO's range of gaming laptops around that price point, and the Horize w670sr you've been looking at seems to be the best option - especially if you want a large screen.

If you've got money to spare, then consider upgrading the wireless card to this one:

Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260 2x2 AC +BT HMC [Add $49.00]

It supports the latest wifi specs, plus blutooth, and operates in dual band mode. You'll have a more robust wireless connection than you would with the standard wireless card.

Save the rest of your money for an slim external Bluray drive or a good laptop bag, imo.

 

Quickish question: so my ASUS G71Gx that I got in 2009 finally shit out on me - the power jack shorted out. Got a new jack and a soldering iron, put it in, but nope. Completely fried.

So, to the actual question, would I be able to find a computer with similar to slightly better specs for just a bit over that $550 (ultimate budget probably $900. lucked out by having my parents say they'd match whatever $ I put up, and $400-450 is about that limit)? I know that RAM is getting cheaper and it's hard to find a laptop that doesn't come stock with 8 gigs of DDR3 stock anymore, but I haven't really started looking yet, and I'd like to have DLP narrow my search parameters a bit.

To highlight my needs: ability to play Skyrim heavily modded on high graphic settings, Civilization V (which stressed my ASUS more than skyrim, perplexing) and Dragon Age Origins are probably my highest stress games, the rest are are a indie steam games, and Dragon Age: Inquisition is on the horizon. I don't use photoshop or any of that graphics editing so that's not a need. I'll watch movies but if it can handle good games it can handle movies. Blu-Ray would be nice but only if it doesn't stupidly inflate the price. Storage isn't that important for me since I have a pair of terabyte externals. Brands, I don't really care as long as it's not HP or Acer. My past ASUS had been kind to me and I wouldn't mind another, and my buddy has a Lenovo that's sexy. I've also heard good things about MSi.

Oh, and regarding screen size and resolution, 1900x1200 would probably be preferred, but my old asus was 1440x900 on a 17.1 screen and that was fine. I don't need another huge screen to be honest - I can always just HDMI it to my TV.

Thanks bros

 

You probably won't find any (in stock) that are under $600, but a quick search on Newegg and Amazon pulled up a decent number of laptops that fall within your price range and match/beat your desired specs, like:

ASUS R510DP-FH11

Lenovo IdeaPad Z71

ASUS N550JV-DB72T

 

That 15.6", $700 ASUS looks really intriguing, and that Lenovo was actually one I was looking at before I even posted, but I'm not a fan of touchscreen laptops. I mean a quick glance at the specs has that touchscreen laptop as basically the same as the other asus, but $300 more expensive Anyone have experience with 1900x1200 on a 15.6" screen? Everything look kosher?

I'm guessing that AMD Radeon HD 8670M GPU is similar to the NVIDIA GeForce 750M that I've been seeing all over the place on the computer rangers I'm looking for. Are they both mid range GPUs of their generation? I also have a question about processors. How important is it? Most of the laptops I'm looking at are in the ~2.5 gHZ range. Would it behoove me to find other laptops that are higher or is that good? My old one was 2.53 and I didn't notice any problems with it

Thanks.

 

If you're going to get a Lenovo and you want to save a bit of money it might be better to get it directly from the source. They ship from NC so it might take a little longer than the 2 days from Amazon with Prime, but they knock down the prices all the time. The same model right now is around 10 bucks less, though how tax is calculated might be a bitch to figure.

Also, the Y-series, one of which I ordered right before Christmas, are marketed as more premium performance oriented machines while the Z-series are more mainstream. The GT755 on those have faster cores and shaders than the GT745. The screens only come in 14.1" and 15.6" at 1366x7688 or 1600x900, but that shouldn't really matter if you're hooking it up to your TV.

If you're really patient, really lucky, catch shiny pokemanz all the time and don't care about refurbished condition, you might be able to find a Y-series on the Lenovo outlet. I saw one once at around ~650, but I failed to get it.

MSI have been moving towards the gaming laptop market so don't expect to find much for >$1000. Also, their website is complete ass.

As far as processor clock speed, the raw number shouldn't make as much difference for heavy gaming as whether it has dual cores or quad cores. Look for the 'Q', as in i7 4200MQ.

 

Hm, aight. Guessing Q indicates quad core, but is that immediately preferable to dual core? I'm guessing that more cores more power, but I could be wrong. As a hypothetical, would it be worth shelling out $X more money for more cores?

For that ASUS R510DP-FH11, it has the proc listed as AMD A10-5750M 2.5 GHz. What would that one be? (edit: google said that the M-core is a dual core).

Thanks for being patient with me, guys. Also, is buying directly from the manufacturer's site generally preferable to buying from a newegg or amazon or is that just Lenovo? I mean I've got time and this isn't a life or death immediate decision. Won't even be getting it til late January around birthday time.

What about this Lenovo?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834313584 (i looked for it on the Lenovo site and couldn't find another one that had twin GPUs, but they were just a bit more expensive than that $700 ASUS)

It has a dual core rather than the quad core that the above 15.6" ASUS, and more hard drive space, but the main difference is the 2x SLI NVIDIA cards. Is dual running graphics cards worth the extra ~$250?

 

Functionally identical to what I have (Y500) except that it has the mSATA SSD and an extra graphic card.

Note: it's not dual core.

Good price too. Lenovo sells this same laptop for $1200 + tax.

Honestly though? SLI isn't worth the headache and extra heat. I'm speaking from experience here.

This laptop, Y410, is a great buy. Spec wise, it's functionally identical to my Y500, except that it has a smaller screen and a newer graphic card (GT750M in Y500 vs GT755M in Y410). But in all other aspect, it is identical. Mind you, I game pretty heavily on my laptop with all settings maxed out and I haven't run into a problem yet.

To be fair, I haven't played skyrim yet, but Diablo 3, Torchlight 2, DOTA, Darksiders I and II, Starcraft 2 and a bunch of other games ran flawlessly at max settings at 1920x1080.

 

If you stick to playing games that aren't more demanding than Skyrim or Civilazation, then a Quad Core isn't worth the extra money or power consumption. As for the site you buy from; just buy from whichever site has the better deal, return policy, and warranty. Regardless of the site you buy from, make sure to take pictures/videos of the laptop being unwrapped and it's condition upon delivery. I don't know about Amazon, but Newegg is hyper anal about providing proof of damage for returns. They're known for laying the blame on the customer unless you provide proof.

 

Oh, here we go. I'm not going to rehash the age old argument of dual core vs quad core for gaming -- and beside, it's not relevant today. This was a real issue back in 2005 or 2006, back then when quad cores cost $300+ and dual cores half of that.

Nowadays, quad core computers are a dime a dozen. Shit, I can't even throw a rock at my local computer shop without hitting a dozen quad core laptops -- that's how common they are.

They're right there, the price is cheap, and future games will be multithread aware (ala battlefield 4 and newer games that will be coded for the next gen consoles).

So, he's not wrong in wanting a quad core.