computer question..

Status
Not open for further replies.
My friends have Thinkpads R52 laptops. Having the same graphics card and ram as the laptop I'm planning on getting, games run pretty damn good on them. Even with all that security shit my school put on them. I saw a kid playing doom 3 on one of them(I'd say it ran at about 15-20 fps, resolution-unkown(looked like 640x480), detail in everything unkown too). Then I saw another kid playing Halo(probably 30-50 fps, everything looked as good as it should). But then again Thinkpads are somewhat different. If I feel the processor sucks in the laptop, I'll just swap it with this one and compare, assuming I don't mess everything up.
Oh yeah, I was planning on putting XP Pro SP2 on the laptop, but yesterday I find the disc in 4 pieces in my brothers backpack, what a retard :roll: .
 
Yeah! The acer aspire laptop finally came in!

I tried some games on it and it actually works pretty well!

Thanks for helping me decide guys. I'm lovin this laptop :mrgreen:
 
I f you want a laptop go with the HP DV8000z model it packs a punch and it uses a ATI card that isn't bad. Heck it has alot o featcure that would make me happy.
 
Brianv, I should totally beat your face in for even THINKING about getting ANY computer with Intel crap. That was a totally moronic decision.

Anyways...

ATI Xpress chips are on-board, but seeing as their from a company that makes high-end video-cards, I can very well understand why it has more features than the Intel Integrated Crap. Intel's chipsets can't even do Transform and Lighting!

What's really funny is looking at the "Compatability" page they have for their chipsets. Most games have things that say "Too slow to be playable" and then "Intel is not aware of a fix or workaround for this issue.".
 
FoxBlitzz said:
Brianv, I should totally beat your face in for even THINKING about getting ANY computer with Intel crap. That was a totally moronic decision.

Anyways...

ATI Xpress chips are on-board, but seeing as their from a company that makes high-end video-cards, I can very well understand why it has more features than the Intel Integrated Crap. Intel's chipsets can't even do Transform and Lighting!

What's really funny is looking at the "Compatability" page they have for their chipsets. Most games have things that say "Too slow to be playable" and then "Intel is not aware of a fix or workaround for this issue.".
Click to expand...
Halo worked fine. Minor fps slowdowns once in a while, but still fine with all the settings on high. Intel isn't that bad, I mean Apple is using Intel chips for their macs now(owning an intel based imac, I'd say runs a little better than powerpc macs, plus having the option to use windows on it :P). The only downside I found to this laptop is that it has 2 seperate partitions on the hdd. Each containing only about 16-17gb each, so I just have to save stuff to both no big deal..Plus the widescreen is sexy :D

Oh yea, foxblitz, T&L runs off the cpu for intel chips.
 
Hey, Brianv.

You are correct that it can do T&L, BUT it emulates it!!! Most games REQUIRE IT TO BE ON THE GRAPHICS CARD! If the card doesn't have it, it won't even run!!

The intel processor is okay for laptops, AMD are not that good yet because they generate a lot of heat.

Sonict

P.S I bet Halo doesn't even use T&L which is why it can run well.
 
Halo got a really crappy PC port, anyway. Apparently, big, bad computers with all those GeForce 7900 GTXs in SLI still have slowdown problems (well, probably not, but the equivalents of them on its launch day). Hopefully they handle Halo 2 better... and include co-op.
 
Don't get me started too late!!!

AMD is great, they will be bringing the more than 2 core prossesors out next year and in '08 Level 3 cache! Yes now intel has nothing to say is better than
Amd.

But I always like the P3 and older ones they seem very nicley worked with.
 
Yes, because we all know that everything is programmed for dual core processors and they will make a huge difference. :roll:
 
We'd have to wait until Windows Vista comes out before we can truly take advantage of Dual Core for multiple applications.
 
This would be true, Xp can do it a bit but Vista should do it perfectly! Man I wan't Vista but I have to wait. My friend RJ has Vista Beta. He says it works great and man the screeny he sent made me drool!
 
Another thing, most AMD processors are 64-bit so they're all Vista-ready. Shame that Intel doesn't have most of their processors 64-bit. >:)
 
RyanHedge said:
Not yet but at least they can switch apps around on each core. I would know I have a dual P3 that did it.
Click to expand...
I don't see the point. At the speeds we have, why do we need to switch which CPU the application is running on? I'm sure you won't be running two games at once.
 
FoxBlitzz said:
Another thing, most AMD processors are 64-bit so they're all Vista-ready. Shame that Intel doesn't have most of their processors 64-bit. >:)
Click to expand...

Pentium 4, Extreme Edition, Pentium D, (Believe it or not) Celeron D, and Pentium M. Plenty, but not as much as AMD.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Back
Top