2 Spec's - is the more expensive one worth the money?

[SuperMeggido]

Got two laptops specs. Is the Optimus IV spec (£128 more) worth the extra money, compared to the Enigma IV?
As to use, for Gaming and Student purposes. I would like to play new releases at medium, higher if possible, if not medium is fine.

<--- arrows point towards relevant differences



Chassis & Display
Enigma IV: 15.6" Glossy HD LED Backlit Widescreen (1366x768) <---
Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™i5 Dual Core Mobile Processor i5-3210M (2.50GHz) 3MB
Memory (RAM)
8GB SAMSUNG 1600MHz SODIMM DDR3 MEMORY (2 x 4GB)
Graphics Card
NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 650M - 2.0GB DDR3 Video RAM - DirectX® 11 <---
Memory - Hard Disk
750GB WD SCORPIO BLACK WD7500BPKT, SATA 3 Gb/s, 16MB CACHE (7200 rpm)
DVD/BLU-RAY Drive
8x SATA DVD±R/RW/Dual Layer (+ 24x CD-RW)
Memory Card Reader
Integrated 3 in 1 Memory Card Reader (SD, MMC, MS)
Sound Card
SRS 2 Channel High Definition Audio + MIC/Headphone Jack
Bluetooth & Wireless
ENIGMA SERIES GIGABIT LAN & WIRELESS 802.11N + BLUETOOTH 3.0 <---
USB Options
2 x USB 3.0 PORTS + 2 x USB 2.0 PORTS AS STANDARD
Battery
Enigma Series 6 Cell Lithium Ion Battery (5,200 mAH)
Power Lead & Adaptor
1 x UK Power Lead & 90W AC Adaptor
Operating System
Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit w/SP1 - inc DVD & Licence (£79)
Office Software
FREE 60 Day Trial of Microsoft® Office® 2010 Professional Edition
Anti-Virus
NO ANTI-VIRUS SOFTWARE
Keyboard Language
INTEGRATED UK KEYBOARD
Notebook Mouse
INTEGRATED 2 BUTTON TOUCHPAD MOUSE
Webcam
INTEGRATED 1.3 MEGAPIXEL WEBCAM
Warranty
3 Year Silver Warranty (1 Year Collect & Return, 1 Year Parts, 3 Year Labour) (£5)
Insurance
1 Month Free Laptop Insurance inc. Accidental Damage & Theft
Delivery
STANDARD INSURED DELIVERY TO UK MAINLAND (MON-FRI)
Build Time
Standard Build - Approximately 7 to 9 working days
Quantity
1

Price: £632.00 including VAT and delivery.




Chassis & Display
Optimus Series: 15.6" Glossy Full HD LED Widescreen (1920x1080) <---
Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™i5 Dual Core Mobile Processor i5-3210M (2.50GHz) 3MB
Memory (RAM)
8GB SAMSUNG 1600MHz SODIMM DDR3 MEMORY (2 x 4GB)
Graphics Card
NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 660M - 2.0GB DDR5 Video RAM - DirectX® 11 <---
Memory - Hard Disk
750GB WD SCORPIO BLACK WD7500BPKT, SATA 3 Gb/s, 16MB CACHE (7200 rpm)
DVD/BLU-RAY Drive
8x SATA DVD±R/RW/Dual Layer (+ 24x CD-RW)
Memory Card Reader
Internal 9 in 1 Card Reader (MMC/RSMMC/SD: Mini, XC & HC/MS: Pro & Duo)
Thermal Paste
ARCTIC MX-4 EXTREME THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY COMPOUND (£9) <---
Sound Card
Intel 2 Channel High Definition Audio + MIC/Headphone Jack
Bluetooth & Wireless
GIGABIT LAN & WIRELESS INTEL® N135 802.11N (150Mbps) + BLUETOOTH <---
USB Options
3 x USB 3.0 PORTS + 1 x USB 2.0 PORT AS STANDARD
Battery
Optimus Series 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery (5,200 mAh/76.96WH)
Power Lead & Adaptor
1 x UK Power Lead & 120W AC Adaptor
Operating System
Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit w/SP1 - inc DVD & Licence (£79)
Office Software
FREE 60 Day Trial of Microsoft® Office® 2010 Professional Edition
Anti-Virus
NO ANTI-VIRUS SOFTWARE
Keyboard Language
INTEGRATED UK KEYBOARD WITH NUMBER PAD
Notebook Mouse
INTEGRATED 2 BUTTON TOUCHPAD MOUSE
Webcam
INTEGRATED 1.3 MEGAPIXEL WEBCAM
Warranty
3 Year Silver Warranty (1 Year Collect & Return, 1 Year Parts, 3 Year Labour) (£5)
Intel Anti-Theft Technology
FREE 90 Day Intel Anti-Theft Trial - Prevent Data Access upon Theft
Insurance
1 Month Free Laptop Insurance inc. Accidental Damage & Theft
Delivery
STANDARD INSURED DELIVERY TO UK MAINLAND (MON-FRI)
Build Time
Standard Build - Approximately 7 to 9 working days
Quantity
1

Price: £750.00 including VAT and delivery.


Any bottlenecks, critic or recommendations are welcome

Thanks in advance :tank:

 

[marbro22]

I definitely think the £750 one is worth the extra money

 

[SuperMeggido]

I don't mind playing at 1366x768 , versus 1920x1080, and the thermal paste is a bonus. However does the GTX 660M - 2.0GB DDR5, compared to the GT 650M - 2.0GB DDR3, really justify a £100+ difference?

 

[SlickShoes]

It is at least 12% better according to benchmarks, so if you think 12% performance increase is worth £120 then you would find your answer there.

 

[BobbySixKiller]

I'd definately keep the upgraded paste, personally I think the Optimus is a great value machine and worth the extra

 

[SuperMeggido]

Thanks for the feedback, well i will buy this around beginning of April, if i can extend my budget (yet again) then i will try to go for the Optimus IV setup, if not i guess Enigma IV it is. One more question though, how long do you think either specs will last up to? In terms of processor and ram when they become standard or below, and graphics card not being able to play new releases at Medium or even Low?

Again Thanks in advance :tank:

 

[scoboy]

I have the Enigma on order (with i7-3630QM / 8gb ram / GT 650M) and I would fully expect to play new releases on at least medium settings for a good few years yet.

My old desktop (nearly 5 years old) - Intel® Core™ 2 Quad-Core Processor Q6600 (2.40Ghz, 1066MHz FSB, 8MB cache), 4gb ddr2 ram, and upgraded last year to GeForce GTX 550 Ti. Not the best spec in the world (and it's running pretty sluggishly), but still runs The Secret World (relatively new and highish performance requirements) on low > mid settings and Eve Online on near max.

So, basically either spec you mentioned should last you a decent amount of time.

I don't know a great deal about the tech side, but what I read before researching my purchase last week was that games generally don't use more than 4gb ram and not many use quad core processors *right now*. So 8gb ram will serve you well, but you might want to consider upgrading to a quad core processor for the future. Maybe someone else can comment on this.

While the GPU may offer a performance increase, realistically (I think) you'll still be in the mid to high ballpark for most games and may need to starting spending a lot more to get improvements that you'd a) notice or b) really care about.

Also, another thing I read was Kingston > Samsung ram - I made the switch when ordering, but to be honest I'm not really basing that only any particularly knowledge of the subject.

BTW you can get a 1920x1080 option for the Enigma.

Going for the higher spec is always tempting, but realistically you're going to be happy with whatever you decide on in the £600-700 range and it should last a while.

 

[SlickShoes]

I would compare the spec of the Optimus with quad core i7 and 660M to in 2011 when i bought my macbook pro, quad core i7 and amd 6750m.

I have been playing games on that for 2 full years now and have never needed to play anything on low settings, medium and native resolution for most games. I would say a quad core i7 and 660M should last you 2 years of gaming on medium to high settings, maybe not all games at 1920x1080 though. Once you are in to that third year you will start having to play on lower settings and then you will start wanting a new computer.

I think in my case I have benefited a bit from this console generation lagging a bit, so most console games play better on my macbook pro than they do these 7 year old consoles.

 

[Toxophilix]

One thing to consider, in comparing the GPUs, is the difference in screen resolution. I mean, you'd want to compare benchmarks of the 650M at 1366x768 vs the 660M at 1920x1080 (don't have them to hand or I would link).

 

[SlickShoes]

One thing to consider, in comparing the GPUs, is the difference in screen resolution. I mean, you'd want to compare benchmarks of the 650M at 1366x768 vs the 660M at 1920x1080 (don't have them to hand or I would link).

Yep and the benchmarks on notebookcheck are all at 1366x768, so what ever that says for the 660M playing at 1920x1080 means you will be turning settings down or playing at a non native res.

One of the reasons I think my macbook pro still does reasonably well is that it's max res on the laptop is 1440x900, when I plug it in to my TV and play games at 1920x1080 then the only things I can really play smoothly at that res are games that are a few years old.

 

[SuperMeggido]

I have the Enigma on order (with i7-3630QM / 8gb ram / GT 650M) and I would fully expect to play new releases on at least medium settings for a good few years yet.

My old desktop (nearly 5 years old) - Intel® Core™ 2 Quad-Core Processor Q6600 (2.40Ghz, 1066MHz FSB, 8MB cache), 4gb ddr2 ram, and upgraded last year to GeForce GTX 550 Ti. Not the best spec in the world (and it's running pretty sluggishly), but still runs The Secret World (relatively new and highish performance requirements) on low > mid settings and Eve Online on near max.

So, basically either spec you mentioned should last you a decent amount of time.

I don't know a great deal about the tech side, but what I read before researching my purchase last week was that games generally don't use more than 4gb ram and not many use quad core processors *right now*. So 8gb ram will serve you well, but you might want to consider upgrading to a quad core processor for the future. Maybe someone else can comment on this.

While the GPU may offer a performance increase, realistically (I think) you'll still be in the mid to high ballpark for most games and may need to starting spending a lot more to get improvements that you'd a) notice or b) really care about.

Also, another thing I read was Kingston > Samsung ram - I made the switch when ordering, but to be honest I'm not really basing that only any particularly knowledge of the subject.

BTW you can get a 1920x1080 option for the Enigma.

Going for the higher spec is always tempting, but realistically you're going to be happy with whatever you decide on in the £600-700 range and it should last a while.

Going for the cheapest I7 quad core (2.40ghz) will push the enigma spec to £701 and the optimus spec to £806. While £700 is doable (i pray:sweatdrop, £800 is just not a budget i have at the moment, so if i were to go for it i would delay getting the laptop by many months so it remains to be seen if i have the patience .

I agree that the quad core upgrade may not provide immediately useful, but will definitely help future proof the build and prolong its usability as well as getting the most out of games.

As for the ram well they only have 4gb and 8gb and more, i use 4gb on my current laptop and it does the job but sometimes it slows down noticeably, seen as 4gb is the industry standard i went with 8gb. Yes Kingston > Samsung, pre-build laptops (non custom) all pretty much have Samsung rams, the Kingston ones are faster however i'm not aware by how much (could be by little, could be by a lot).

As to the resolution for the Engima IV i have chosen 1366x768, because the GT650 is DDR3 and not DRR5 (which for lack of better words the DDR5 is usually the stronger/faster version, depending on the card). Chosen 1920x1080 WILL result in lower fps than its less and as the card is not high end, but more low high end (if that makes sense :S), i prefer the higher fps than the smoother graphics.

Thanks your post was really helpful

 

[SuperMeggido]

I would compare the spec of the Optimus with quad core i7 and 660M to in 2011 when i bought my macbook pro, quad core i7 and amd 6750m.

I have been playing games on that for 2 full years now and have never needed to play anything on low settings, medium and native resolution for most games. I would say a quad core i7 and 660M should last you 2 years of gaming on medium to high settings, maybe not all games at 1920x1080 though. Once you are in to that third year you will start having to play on lower settings and then you will start wanting a new computer.

I think in my case I have benefited a bit from this console generation lagging a bit, so most console games play better on my macbook pro than they do these 7 year old consoles.

Yeah i'm not expecting Med after 3/4 years, but that fine most likely gonna either renew the spec or buy a new in in 3 or 4 years

 

[SuperMeggido]

One thing to consider, in comparing the GPUs, is the difference in screen resolution. I mean, you'd want to compare benchmarks of the 650M at 1366x768 vs the 660M at 1920x1080 (don't have them to hand or I would link).

Yes DEFINITELY to look out for!!

Otherswise you may not get what you expected and you just got yourself to blame

 

[SuperMeggido]

Yep and the benchmarks on notebookcheck are all at 1366x768, so what ever that says for the 660M playing at 1920x1080 means you will be turning settings down or playing at a non native res.

One of the reasons I think my macbook pro still does reasonably well is that it's max res on the laptop is 1440x900, when I plug it in to my TV and play games at 1920x1080 then the only things I can really play smoothly at that res are games that are a few years old.

I'm thinking along the same lines lower resolution, higher standard for longer

(Sorry for spamming with the posts, multi replying with quotes just doesn't work or i don't know how to operate properly, either way Sorry

 

[Rakk]

(Sorry for spamming with the posts, multi replying with quotes just doesn't work or i don't know how to operate properly, either way Sorry

You see the little quote type symbol with a + next to it (on the right of the 'reply with quote' button), click on those for each post you want to quote, and then on the final one you want to quote, press 'reply with quote' and it will include all the ones you selected

 

[scoboy]

As to the resolution for the Engima IV i have chosen 1366x768, because the GT650 is DDR3 and not DRR5 (which for lack of better words the DDR5 is usually the stronger/faster version, depending on the card). Chosen 1920x1080 WILL result in lower fps than its less and as the card is not high end, but more low high end (if that makes sense :S), i prefer the higher fps than the smoother graphics.

Now I'm concerned I opted for the wrong screen myself haha! Is the lower FPS significant enough to a problem?

 

[SlickShoes]

Now I'm concerned I opted for the wrong screen myself haha! Is the lower FPS significant enough to a problem?

For every day use the 1920x1080 will be fantastic and give you much more screen real estate to use. Most games from 2011 and older will play fine at 1920x1080 on that chip, not amazing or ultra settings but they should look good, unless its something like Metro2033 which stil stresses desktops now.

Some games you may have to run at a lower res, but the trade off may be play at 1920x1080 on medium settings or play on a lower res at high settings.

It's hard to tell from game to game, the only benefit you would get from the lower res panel is that you wouldnt need to set your games to that lower res and they would look a tiny bit better as that is the native resolution of the screen.

When I scale down the res for games I often choose to play the game windowed as I think it ends up looking better rather than being stretched to fit the screen.

You will only really notice the difference because 1920x1080 looks so crisp so when you scale a game down to a lower res it makes it a bit obvious.

 

[scoboy]

Thanks for that. Not hugely concerned about ultra setting performance for games - I'm fairly content if I can play stuff lag-free at mid settings or more and the extra real estate will be handy for occasional design stuff.

 

[SlickShoes]

Well for an example my 2 year old macbook pro with the AMD 6750 plays Bioshock on high settings on my TV at 1920x1080, Counter Strike Go on high settings at 1920x1080, far cry 3 played at 1920x1080 and was playable but i was on lowest settings. So i think you will be fine for the majority of games

 

[SuperMeggido]

Yeah pretty much what SlickShoes says is on point, Thanks for the explanation couldn't have said it better myself

Also a question about I5-3210m (2.50ghz) versus I7-3630QM (2.40ghz), i know that the quad core will drain the battery faster or more than the I5 chip, but does it also produce more heat and noise, and by how much?

In addition is the I5-3210m at 2.50ghz not more powerful than the I7-3630QM at 2.40ghz, but the I7-3630QM is better at multitasking and can divide one thing into four parts for each core to work on so the work/stress is lower/halved? I'm not sure on that :S

Help appreciated b Thanks in advance :tank: