Comment has been collapsed.
Guess customers doesn't know what, because AMD has less and less market share with each year ( both in PC CPUs and all (tablets etc.) CPUs sections ).
They were lucky Nvidia decided to skip next-gen and go for mobile market (which can give much more money - smartphones and tablets sold in twice bigger number in 2012 alone than PS3, X360 and Wii during whole generation). That is, unless Nvidia will be successful and make mobile device that can play new-games (they already can play BF3 on mobiles, so who knows what will next few years bring)...
Comment has been collapsed.
True, but that's because there's not many hardcore games on mobiles.
But what if you could play hardcore games anywhere you want? You want to play on TV - you plug it and play, you go out, you plug it out and play outside.
Add Oculus Rift to that and who knows if that's not the future...
Comment has been collapsed.
Considering that I have an I7 3770K, no AMD processor made before this date is better than my processor(without overclocking it first).
Intel makes better CPUs. The best CPUs for desktop computers, really. Still, they're more expensive and AMD nearly matches them in gaming anyways. I only have the 3770K for editing and converting videos.
Comment has been collapsed.
No it won't because it's a laptop. Not anywhere close to as powerful as a high-end PC and cannot compete with the next-gen consoles.
Comment has been collapsed.
As a hardcore PC-only gamer myself, your ignorance disappoints me. This is the problem with fanboyism. His laptop can't even max out some games that are currently out, let alone future next-gen games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sounds like you seem to think a 750M is the same as a its desktop brethren. Yes, maxing out games on PC brings them beyond the consoles, but if he can't even max out current-gen games, he's not going to be able to run next-gen games at a comparable point as the consoles. Again, you're being ignorant.
PS. The last console I bought was the original PlayStation...so yeah, I'm so much a console fanboy :rolleyes:
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed, those cards in SLI I am pretty sure are equivalent to a 560 ti, then he has an i7 and 16gb of ram(Btw rumor has it that the ps4 uses 3.5gbs of ram just for the OS).
So InsomniaNY, you seriously think the new consoles will beat that?
Comment has been collapsed.
The GPU in PS4 is supposedly equivalent to a 7870, which is better than 750M SLI according to that site you linked, if I read it correctly. Not to mention that the laptop will run any CPU heavy games quite poorly. Also having that much RAM doesn't really make any difference since most games don't even use 4GB.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Not to mention that the laptop will run any CPU heavy games quite poorly."
So the Cpu in the PS4 is better then an i5/i7? I really doubt it.
Funny that you say most games don't use more then 4gb of ram, thats going to most likely change in the next few years if you ask me. I
Comment has been collapsed.
Even so....its an i7, no way it will lag behind the consoles CPU, it will outperform it even when compared to console optimization. The PS4 and 360 has been suffering the last couple years if you ask me, games seriously look like crap, sub 720p, bad textures, bad effects, I disagree with you on that.
Comment has been collapsed.
You need to look at the first party games. Both systems have games that look amazing. Not really comparable to a lot of PC games but still very beautiful.
As for the CPU, it's not that impressive. 3rd Generation Intel Core i7-3630QM Processor( 2.40GHz 1600MHz 6MB) It likely has 4 physical cores (8 logical) so it isn't top of the line. Still, both consoles and this laptop should be able to play games. It's just that the laptop will not be able to play demanding games that come out 6-7 years from now while the PS4 and X1 will be able to thanks to them getting slightly watered down visuals.
Comment has been collapsed.
No, they really really don't, they were impressive a few years ago.
i7 is top of the line, consoles won't even come close to matching it and will rely on optimization. I use a Q6600 and max most games now, so yeah I disagree, his comp will be fine for years...its silly to say he wont be able to play games in 6 years, how long have you been PC gaming? I have from the 90's, you don't need the best to play the latest games...
Not gonna argue this to infinity though, time will tell, but if history repeats itself(Always does) I am pretty sure he will be fine, also most people upgrade within 6-7 years.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm actually referring to his video card. His video card is extremely weak by today's standards and probably won't be able to play Crysis 4 or 5. The CPU is okay for gaming. Would probably suck for converting and editing though. The 3770K gets up to 60% resources being used when converting videos on my computer.
Comment has been collapsed.
GDDR5 is a lot different than DDR3. You cannot simply compare the amount (not to mention that Desidiosus is correct, games don't even utilize that much RAM).
Comment has been collapsed.
If the 750m sli is basically at 560 ti levels its not that far off from the 7870 in all honesty. Also its been stated that the next gen systems would be close to 7870, not as powerful from what I have read.
Plus on top of that a PC is much more worth it due to its openness(mods, tweaks etc...), so its kinda rude to bash this guy for buying what he likes and acting like he is gonna be below a console gamer which is untrue.
"Not anywhere close to as powerful as a high-end PC and cannot compete with the next-gen consoles." <--- False statement in other words.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh a PC is absolutely worth it over a console, I don't deny that, but that's not what the OP asked. He asked how performance of his laptop would compare to the PS4/XBO and the fact is, it won't be up to their level. I'm not bashing his decision to buy it, but he should have realistic expectations. If he wanted to beat the next-gen consoles, he should have gone with a desktop PC, but if he wanted portability, then he has to accept the trade-off.
Comment has been collapsed.
He didn't trade much off if any, your first statement is still a flat out lie even if it ends up th consoles being 10 percent better. It doesn't mean "Not anywhere close to as powerful as a high-end PC and cannot compete with the next-gen consoles."
Your post reaks of desktop snobbery...you should try being a bit more realistic here.
Comment has been collapsed.
In what way are the next-gen consoles superior to this laptop? Games will look better on the XBO and PS4 than they will on his laptop, at least while still running at playable frames (30+). Don't know how much clearer I have to be.
Comment has been collapsed.
What do u mean by full support? I've never had a problem like that
Comment has been collapsed.
Some games have problems with laptop graphics cards, because laptops have the integrated card and the discrete cards, some games just look at and use the integrated card on a laptop. This is a result of poor programming on the devs fault and can usually be fixed with a patch or mod, but not always.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes and no, when I get a new game I always go into the nVidia control settings on my laptop and set the .exe for that game to use the nVidia card in my laptop for the graphical work. This forces the game to detect and use the card and in the game that I've played without doing this and the game was playing on the Intel 3000 integrated card I notice an increase in frame rate etc. when I do switch it over to the nVidia.
Haven't played a game yet that won't work on my nVidia card doing this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes and no, when I get a new game I always go into the nVidia control settings on my laptop and set the .exe for that game to use the nVidia card in my laptop for the graphical work. This forces the game to detect and use the card and in the game that I've played without doing this and the game was playing on the Intel 3000 integrated card I notice an increase in frame rate etc. when I do switch it over to the nVidia.
Haven't played a game yet that won't work on my nVidia card doing this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Although Devil is right, most laptops are incapable of recreating the GPU or processing power as a desktop. Take the GT520. A desktop version can run Witcher 2 High settings. The notebook version can typically run Witcher 2 at low. I am not being biased or a smartass, but you are also right notebooks are getting considerably stronger and are capable of beating some computers! :P
Comment has been collapsed.
LMFAO. Someone drank the Razer Kool-Aid.
Laptops are NOT as good as desktops. Period.
Comment has been collapsed.
Would've but I have no room for one and I needed portability. Otherwise I would've
Comment has been collapsed.
By, at most 3% of the whole charge. I've used one for years and it barely affects the battery
Comment has been collapsed.
If you're gaming on a laptop using battery power the miniscule amount of power a couple USB fans uses is the least of your worries. If you're gaming on a laptop using battery power it's not going to run long enough to need a cooling pad in the first place. If you're gaming on a dual GPU i7 laptop using battery power you're doing it wrong. You're going to get maybe 15 minutes of gaming in before it's completely dead.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have an Asus ROG notebook I got last year. A desktop would have been cheaper, and could fit cheaper, better, replaceable parts.
But then I wouldn't have a notebook that's better than current gen consoles and most likely capable of ports from the next gen which should be another 6+ years.
I can easily set it on the table in front of my TV in the living room and plug in the hdmi (which brings 3d to my games as well if I wanted), and sit on couch with wireless controllers.
I can lay in bed and play "real games" on a notebook.
I could take it to a friends house and play (if I had any :p), or use it while traveling.
I got a gaming notebook PC because I wanted a gaming PC. I got a notebook PC because I wanted a notebook PC. I paid a premium for these privileges (around $1200 at the time iir), instead of a cheaper and/or better desktop.
The OP may have similar reasons.
Comment has been collapsed.
better than any console , and a console is made "only for gaming", and a pc like that can do A LOT of other things..
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah , but how much will they sacrifice to be like a PC? for my experience the ps3 doesn't handle internet browsing very well, the downloads (even from ps store) take a lot of time, you don't have a mouse for the fps games, some of the game installs are awful (it took me almost 2 hours to install saints row 3 from ps plus)... and I could keep on.. and don't get me wrong I still use the ps3 and I love some of the games that didn't come to the pc, but ... I rather use the pc.. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
My exact thoughts also. I've had a ps3 for 5 years, but after switching to PC gaming, I'd never switch back
Comment has been collapsed.
Well you got one part a 'bit' bad, your GPU isnt as potent as it would seem since its just a GT, so it'd be around a GTX 460? (both cards that is would equal that). Aside from that pretty good, tho If I remember all PCs are losing to the next gen console on the memory speed part because of the DDR5 units, or was that just some random babble on forums?
And don't go against the AMD CPUs they are pretty good, can't trust all websites that have sponsorships.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure why you're asking this?
If you're talking about real gaming performance, chances are that the consoles, while technologically inferior, will feature better optimisation, and games written directly for them, rather than sloppy ports.
While you might be inclined to wave your wang around (in a virtual sense, or otherwise) while victoriously clutching a spec. sheet which boasts of superior read/write speeds, better RAM performance, more CPU cores, and a legion of spare USB ports, the reality is you will probably find that real-life gaming performance will vary wildly, and may often be second rate in comparison to the console experience.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, consoles will be PCs, so there's hope for better PC optimization. But in the end, if you want PC that will be good for whole next-gen, you need to get components one, two generations better - like in this gen, GeForce 9800 is enough for console-like-quality (low res textures, no serious AAs, etc.) PC-gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
We can only hope.
This was said about the Xbox 1 (original) too, but we still ended up with a few questionable ports :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Only time its really second rate is when its a bad port, and from what I can tell we will be getting very little of those thanks to the architecture of the next gen systems.
Comment has been collapsed.
We buy consoles for the exclusives not for the specs. On top of that it's not going to be like the current generation, now the Ps4 and the Xbox One are both better than a good Pc so no frame drops or 720p only games... not anymore. In time i think everyone will stop comparing these gaming devices and buy the one they like.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well to be fair when the 360 came out it was better then most good PC's also.
Comment has been collapsed.
4k will be here faster then you think if you ask me, maybe 5 years for it to be standard.
Comment has been collapsed.
You really think everyone will play normally without upgrading their computers. It will cost a lot and i'm not counting the monitor. But well technically a top Pc will eventually be better than the consoles but i don't think it worths the money. This is just my opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
So a computer in 5 years wont be worth it against the PS4/one? Yeah ok, now thatss just silly as all hell.
Kinda like saying a good PC right now or 2 years ago even isn't worth it against a PS3 and 360....you know the sub 720p systems where games look like they are running on low.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, consoles have to resort to begging, bribing and threatening game developers to only make games for their consoles. That is their strategy for success.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, that's false. The new generation will be running the x86 architecture, so you can do a pretty solid direct compare in performance.
Comment has been collapsed.
I fail to see how him asking how his computer compares to the new console generation is any of those things. I think he just spent a lot of money on his laptop and is hoping it was actually worth it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because specs for the consoles have already been released. And games don't mean shit if the console can't run them well. I mean, I can release a console that runs every game on the market and several new, really awesome games, but it only runs in 2d. Does that make it a good console? Fuck no it doesn't.
Comment has been collapsed.
But games not running smoothly is not a console fault, it's developer fault. I know consoles had different architecture, so making games on them required some more effort, but the new ones will practically be PCs, so the devs probably won't encounter many problems with coding etc.
Also, it's probably a shitty if it does not work well. By saying games are important, I've meant fun, and even few framedrops here and there don't matter if the game gives you more fun than any other game.
Also, 2D is freaking awesome. It ages much better than 3D.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thinly veiled brag?
Also, everyone knows that consoles stomp PCs-- that extra money is all for case decals and LED lights.
Comment has been collapsed.
the question should be over the PS3
when I had Linux in it benchmarks reported same speed as 24 x Pentium4 @3.0Ghz
same BOINC programs as in windows, I double, triple tested!
used to score 1 million a day, now I am happy if I have 200K with an i7 2600K OC@5.0Ghz (+gfx CUDA card yeah)
too bad its a bitch to code on...
on the regular usage it was not that good tho, only 256MB available for Linux resulted in a massive amount of swap
on the gaming side too bad they will never use the console at 100% power, sucks!
Comment has been collapsed.
Despite what PC fanboys would say, the next-gen consoles are better. Now if you built a high-end desktop instead, you would have won, but not with a notebook. Sorry.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lmao I fucking love these ignorant rubbish posts. So you're insinuating a 780m is weak correct? Do your damn research.
Comment has been collapsed.
What are you even talking about? He has SLI-750M, which performs worse than a single 780M. Maybe you need to do your damn research.
Comment has been collapsed.
Look at the last part of your statement. "but not with a notebook", Notebooks have 780m's in them just like other cards you said he can't achieve next gen consoles with a "notebook". When a 780m at stock is a 660Ti. When overclock starts to beat 660Ti.
Another notebook with two 780m's beats over 90% of all desktops. Having a 18000 gpu score. So no stop posting rubbish, they are notebooks that can beat the next gen and most desktops right now.
Comment has been collapsed.
An Alienware with dual 780m will easily beat any console and almost 95% of all Desktops.
Comment has been collapsed.
You beat out the newer systems already, you will be good for a long while.
Don't let the laptop basher squad get to you, some people still haven't realized that gaming on laptops is fine nowadays, that is if you want to put in the extra cost(Still to overpriced imo compared to building.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Finally the first person that didn't completely bash my choice
Comment has been collapsed.
Its not a bad PC, it will fair well for years most likely.
Enjoy it, ignore the people bashing you, as much as I would never buy a gaming notebook I understand people have different needs then me, if they are willing to pay a bit more for those needs, its there choice and its not a dumb one. People get nutty about gaming notebooks sometimes, I would ignore the hate.
Comment has been collapsed.
I fail to see where he said he wants a good computer for a good price, some people are alright with spending more for what they want, portability for example, we have no clue what this persons life is like, he might be traveling none stop. Maybe he is into lan parties, we really can't assume....
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure is possible, but many people I know don't wanna deal with lugging it around, even the smaller ones.
Notebooks are PC's, its fine to compare them. He is paying for convenience, ever go out to eat? Well thats dumb, you could have cooked for much cheaper :-P. Bad example but I am sure you see the point.
Comment has been collapsed.
49 Comments - Last post 8 seconds ago by funnyduck99
46,806 Comments - Last post 55 minutes ago by theUnStable
60 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by UnknownEAK
848 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by sensualshakti
1,362 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by KjaerBeto
15,336 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by kolja300314
110 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by VahidSlayerOfAll
167 Comments - Last post 11 seconds ago by adam1224
137 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by Sinthoras
2 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by Carenard
180 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by xxxka
34 Comments - Last post 26 minutes ago by Fluffster
36 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by TFrostPG
688 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by EdeHoy
This June, I purchased a Lenovo Y500 (http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/laptops/ideapad/y-series/y500/?redir=y#customize) with dual 750M, 16 GB RAM, 16 GB SSD, i7 3rd gen, 1080P monitor, etc. I was wondering if you guys knew how this compares to the next gen consoles, in terms of graphics and CPU performance, and overall performance. Thanks in advance!
Comment has been collapsed.