Which one should I buy?

[Maguspk]

Ok I've gone around to different sites, building PCs and seeing that kind of deals I could get, it seems I've hit this hard cap of spending about 2.6k to get a decent laptop, which I'm totally ok with.

Anyway, here they are.

PROCESSOR Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile Processor T7200 at 2.00 GHz, 667MHz FSB, 4M Cache
NOTEBOOK COLOR Black
MB CORE LOGIC Intel 945PM + ICH7-M Chipset w/667MHz FSB
SCREEN SIZE 17" WUXGA 1920x1200 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
MEMORY 2GB Corsair SODIMM PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz Memory (2 X 1024MB)
HARD DRIVE 100GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
VIDEO CARD nVidia GeForce Go 7950 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
OPTICAL DRIVE Internal DVD+CDRW Combo Drive 8X24X16X24
RECORDING SOFTWARE Bundled DVD/CDRW Software
SOUND Sound Blaster Pro Compatible, High Definition 7.1 Audio w/ SRS WOW
WIRELESS NETWORK WiFi Wireless Intel 3945 802.11a/b/g Wireless Card with Bluetooth Built-in
NETWORK PORT Built-in Gigabit 10/100/1000 Mbps NIC
MODEM 56K Modem with V.90 Technology
I/O PORTS 4 USB, Firewire, S-Video, DVI, Infrared, Serial, Express Card Slot, and 4-in-1 Card reader for MMC/SD/MS/MS Pro
CAMERA Intergrated 1.3M High-Resolution Digital Video Camera
OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
OPTIONAL MOUSE None.
EXTERNAL FLOPPY DRIVE None.
DIMENSIONS 15.60" Width X 10.94" Depth X 1.35" Height. 9.14lbs.
MOBILE TRANSPORT Free Mobile Transport Bag (MSRP $69.99)
SERVICE Standard 1 Year Limited Parts and Labor Warranty
EXTRA BATTERY None.
TV TUNER None.
STORAGE MEDIA None.
SOFTWARE BUNDLE None.
ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE None.
Price: $2582.00

My personal favorite, the only drawback I can forsee is it doesn't have dual video cards like the alienware, but instead it has the duo processor which is great and effectively doubles the processor the Alienware is using. This is also very slim, at 1.35 inches high and weighing in at 9.2 lbs.

PROCESSOR AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ Processor at 2.4GHz, 2000MHz FSB, 512KB X 2 Cache
NOTEBOOK COLOR Silver
MB CORE LOGIC VIA K8T890CE + VT8237R Chipset w/2000MHz FSB
SCREEN SIZE 17" WSXGA+ 1680x1050 ClearView Glossy-Glass Wide Screen TFT LCD Display
MEMORY 2GB Corsair SODIMM PC-3200 DDR 400MHz Memory (2 X 1024MB)
HARD DRIVE 1 100GB Ultra Performance S-ATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
HARD DRIVE 2 None.
RAID SETTING None.
VIDEO CARD nVidia GeForce Go 7900 GTX 512MB DDR3 16X PCI Express
OPTICAL DRIVE 1 Internal 8X Super Multi DVD+/-R/RW (4X+DL) + 24X CDRW Drive
OPTICAL DRIVE 2 None.
RECORDING SOFTWARE Bundled DVD/CDRW Software
SOUND Sound Blaster Pro Compatible, High Definition 7.1 Audio w/ SRS WOW
WIRELESS NETWORK Built-in WiFi Wireless 802.11b/g Wireless Card
NETWORK PORT Built-in Gigabit 10/100/1000 Mbps NIC
MODEM 56K Modem with V.90 Technology
I/O PORTS 4 USB, 2 Firewire, PS/2, S-Video In/Out, DVI, Infrared, Serial, Parellel, PCMCIA II and 7-in-1 Card reader
CAMERA Intergrated 1.3M High-Resolution Digital Video Camera
OPERATING SYSTEM Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition SP2 w/Original Disc
OPTIONAL MOUSE None.
EXTERNAL FLOPPY DRIVE None.
DIMENSIONS 15.50" Width X 11.75" Depth X 1.95" Height. 12.5lbs.
MOBILE TRANSPORT Free Mobile Transport Bag (MSRP $69.99)
SERVICE Standard 1 Year Limited Parts and Labor Warranty
EXTRA BATTERY None.
TV TUNER None.
STORAGE MEDIA None.
SOFTWARE BUNDLE None.
ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE None.
Price: $2678.00

This one gives me the benefit of the AMD processor versus the Intel, and the AMD processor as you can see if a FUCKTON better, with .8 Ghz more processing power and more than 2x the FBS. Is this going to give it a big enough boost over the Artorius to warrant the purchase? Also, the memory provided with this runs at 400 Mhz not 667 MHz, what's up with that, isn't 667 better since the processor runs fast enough to work with it at that speed? Also worth noting this bad boy is 2 inches high and 12.5 lbs... my arms

Processor: AMD Turion™ 64 Mobile ML40 2.2GHz 800MHz FSB 1MB L2 Cache
Operating System (Office software not included): Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005 - Without Remote Control or TV Tuner
Chassis: 17" WideUXGA 1920 x 1200 LCD with Clearview Technology - Saucer Silver
Motherboard: Alienware® NVIDIA® Mobile SLi Chipset
Memory: 2GB Dual Channel DDR SO-DIMM at 400MHz - 2 x 1024MB
System Drive: Single Drive Configuration - 100GB Serial ATA 1.5Gb/s 7,200 RPM w/ NCQ & 8MB Cache
Optical Drive: 8x Dual Layer CD-RW/DVD±RW w/ Nero Software
Video/Graphics Card: Dual 256MB NVidia® GeForce™ Go 7900 GS - SLI Enabled
Sound Card: High-Definition Audio with surround sound
Wireless Network Card: Internal 802.11b/g WiFi Card
Communications: Integrated 10/1000Mb Gigabit Ethernet & 56K V.92 Modem
Bluetooth: Integrated Bluetooth® Device
Primary Battery: Alienware® m9700 12-cell Lithium-Ion Smart Battery Pack
Warranty: 1-Year AlienCare Toll-Free 24/7 Phone Support w/ Onsite Service
Alienware Extras: Alienware® Mousepad
Alienware Extras: AlienInspection - Exclusive Integration and Inspection - $100 Value - FREE!
Free Alienware® T-Shirt: Free Alienware® T-Shirt - Black
Price: $2,768.00

This is my least favorite at the moment, despite all the good reviews I've read. They really are pissing me off with this single processor bullshit on ALL their notebooks. What the fuck? Even their 4k laptop is pretty shitty and still only offers 2 GB memory as a max, and the only real upgrade are the video cards. Kind of sad. Also note the 400 Mhz memory issue again? Is the shitty 2.4 Ghz processor worth the dual video cards; will the dual video cards be worth it?

Really as you can see there are really only 2 factors deciding which ones to get.

While the Artorius is slim it offers a great processor and good graphics card for the lowest price, a good deal I'd think.
The Augustus steps it up with a much better processor, but a larger size and slightly larger price tag.
The Alienware is somewhere between the Artorius and the Augustus as far as size goes, and it's processor looks to be shit to me... seriously wtf @ not dual processor core. But it does have the double graphics cards for the same realitve price range. Will the double 256 MB out perform the 512 MB cards on the Artorius and the Augustus?

P.S. I'm a PC noob so if any of my observations or conclusions are wrong please correct me. That's why I'm posting here, so I can get feedback, positive or negative on my conclusions and make a better final decision before I blow this 3k on the notebook.
Also, if you can find a better deal or suggest a better manufacturer, by all means please do, I'd love to spend less and end up with an equal and/or better notebook. What I was aiming for was a high end notebook that could play games my desktop can't (really shitty dell that just runs FF and WoW) and will last me for a few years and then some with minor upgrades.

[Shuemue]

I like the look of the Alienware personally.

[evilbau]

good lord 12.5 lbs lol

[Maguspk]

I like the look of the Alienware personally.

But does it warrant the SHITTY processor?

Seriously am I missing something because 2.4 processor really sucks... and 2.6 is the max for like 400 dollars more.


helps

[Skyylya]

When debating between intel and amd, don't go by the ghz as they arent really comparable. an AMD at 1.8ghz is equivalent to an intel at about 2.8 or so. ghz simply measures clock speed, an intel processor goes faster cause it has more things to do in order to get the job done. AMD can do a slower clock speed, because it can do more, in the slower clock speed.

http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/forums/t ... C_ID=11193

read this and it'll explain it better than i can. But i'd go with the intel one myself. You don't really need 2 video cards unless you have a 24 inch monitor or are doing dual screen. The intel one is the best i would say.

You're not gonna get the same performance out of a laptop that you will with a desktop, simply because in order to get the higher performance you need the airflow and 3rd party cooling. Those laptops all look great, i wouldn't get the alienware at all. Either the amd or the intel one and as i said, the intel one looks best to me.

[evilbau]

When debating between intel and amd, don't go by the ghz as they arent really comparable. an AMD at 1.8ghz is equivalent to an intel at about 2.8 or so. ghz simply measures clock speed, an intel processor goes faster cause it has more things to do in order to get the job done. AMD can do a slower clock speed, because it can do more, in the slower clock speed.

http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/forums/t ... C_ID=11193

read this and it'll explain it better than i can. But i'd go with the intel one myself. You don't really need 2 video cards unless you have a 24 inch monitor or are doing dual screen. The intel one is the best i would say.

You're not gonna get the same performance out of a laptop that you will with a desktop, simply because in order to get the higher performance you need the airflow and 3rd party cooling. Those laptops all look great, i wouldn't get the alienware at all. Either the amd or the intel one and as i said, the intel one looks best to me.

those comments are soooo old, it isn't the case anymore. You could definitely say that comparing '05 processors because like i said in another thread, P4 was designed to hit high clock speeds and use clock cycles inefficiently compared to amd's then-current chips.

C2D is same or better at the same clock speed which is why intel is the current cpu of choice. 6 mo. to a year ago i would have said amd, but right now intel's chips are superior. i subscribe to the religion of performance not branding just in case people think i'm a intel fanboy i've bought my share of amd chips.

p.s. i'm not saying you are advocating amd chips because i can see you are just trying to indicate that clock speed isn't the only important number, and i agree, but that info is outdated and doesn't apply to the current chips. the post i made previously i said the same info but i put it into context of current chips

[Maguspk]

The only thing I'm worried about now is the fact that the video card on the intel will be pretty shady...

No SLI means lowered performance right? Aren't the dual video cards Alienware provides superior simple because the work is spread out? Read: Two 256MB cards outperform a 512MB ? Or am I mistaken or is the increase not noticeable because the cost difference is negligable if the processor difference is too. Because if the single core processor on the Alienware is more than enough then the dual video cards would be better for the small price hike, eh?

Also, the FBS of the AMD is freakin crazy... does that even matter? Or is the 667 on the intel sufficient for interacting with the memory and other aspects of the system? Also, the AMD are all 64 bit enabled, whatever that means, are the Intels 64 bit enabled too? I'm more worried about the loss of FBS though, 1600 to 667 is a big delta.

I just don't wannar end up with a laptop that can't even handle what I want it to do. Play WoW and random FPS and still be able to browse the internet while doing so without any lag, whatsoever. Will all these curent systems be able to do that and last me a good while? That's another thing I'm interested in, longevity.

[Avanarius]

you can't directly compare an AMD cpu to an Intel cpu without looking at it's performance. This is not something where you can just look at which has the higher numbers. Currently, the top line of the CD2's from intel will out perform most of what AMD has to offer.

I looked over the specs of the 3 laptops again and I would definitely go for the first one without a question. SLI on a laptop seems overly performance debatable to justify the purchase.

[evilbau]

sli seems extreme for a laptop since current vid cards are a huge power draw these days (can't get around cpu drawing power, since everything has a cpu lol) so having SLI on a laptop is going to seriously affect battery life. SLI is faster (basically each vid card is rendering every other line) but not worth it imo

[Skyylya]

When debating between intel and amd, don't go by the ghz as they arent really comparable. an AMD at 1.8ghz is equivalent to an intel at about 2.8 or so. ghz simply measures clock speed, an intel processor goes faster cause it has more things to do in order to get the job done. AMD can do a slower clock speed, because it can do more, in the slower clock speed.

http://www.buildyourown.org.uk/forums/t ... C_ID=11193

read this and it'll explain it better than i can. But i'd go with the intel one myself. You don't really need 2 video cards unless you have a 24 inch monitor or are doing dual screen. The intel one is the best i would say.

You're not gonna get the same performance out of a laptop that you will with a desktop, simply because in order to get the higher performance you need the airflow and 3rd party cooling. Those laptops all look great, i wouldn't get the alienware at all. Either the amd or the intel one and as i said, the intel one looks best to me.

those comments are soooo old, it isn't the case anymore. You could definitely say that comparing '05 processors because like i said in another thread, P4 was designed to hit high clock speeds and use clock cycles inefficiently compared to amd's then-current chips.

C2D is same or better at the same clock speed which is why intel is the current cpu of choice. 6 mo. to a year ago i would have said amd, but right now intel's chips are superior. i subscribe to the religion of performance not branding just in case people think i'm a intel fanboy i've bought my share of amd chips.

p.s. i'm not saying you are advocating amd chips because i can see you are just trying to indicate that clock speed isn't the only important number, and i agree, but that info is outdated and doesn't apply to the current chips. the post i made previously i said the same info but i put it into context of current chips

You know i didn't even look at the date of those lol. It made sense when i read it though. I've heard that the new C2D's are just as good if not better than the AMD's, but i assumed that the mhz rating was still under the same guidelines.

I prefer Intel, always have and unless something drastic happens always will. I like nvidia over radeon too, and from what i see the compatibility is intel > nvidia and amd>radeon.

[evilbau]

another victim of corporate branding lol

i'm glad their marketing dept is earning their keep

[Skyylya]

another victim of corporate branding lol

i'm glad their marketing dept is earning their keep

It's got nothing to do with marketing. I've always had intel's since i upgraded from my 486 dx 4/100 to my first pentium processor that ran at 33 mhz. I've never had any problems with an intel product. And i've used nvidia since i can remember as well. It's repeat business more than good marketing.

[GSDragoon]

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ Processor at 2.4GHz, 2000MHz FSB

Did they get rid of hyper transport? That's not socket M2, right? Anyways, the regular athlon64's don't have a FSB. Hypertransport and the on-CPU memory controller kill the need for one. I'm assuming the the 2000 number is the hyper transport buss, which is not the same as the front side.

Core 2 Duo all the way though. They are awesome processors. Don't worry about SLI(2 video cards.). They are buggy and not really much faster than 1.

[Shuemue]

another victim of corporate branding lol

i'm glad their marketing dept is earning their keep

It's got nothing to do with marketing. I've always had intel's since i upgraded from my 486 dx 4/100 to my first pentium processor that ran at 33 mhz. I've never had any problems with an intel product. And i've used nvidia since i can remember as well. It's repeat business more than good marketing.

Slowest Pentium was a 60 mhz. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium

[Skyylya]

another victim of corporate branding lol

i'm glad their marketing dept is earning their keep

It's got nothing to do with marketing. I've always had intel's since i upgraded from my 486 dx 4/100 to my first pentium processor that ran at 33 mhz. I've never had any problems with an intel product. And i've used nvidia since i can remember as well. It's repeat business more than good marketing.

Slowest Pentium was a 60 mhz. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium

I'm pretty sure the first one i got was a 33mhz but it was like 12 years ago so my memory might be a little off. It may have been 60. Either way i've used intel since those processors came out.

[Shuemue]

Eh it must have been 60 or higher, unless Intel sent you a totally secret experimental 33mhz chip :D

[Skyylya]

Eh it must have been 60 or higher, unless Intel sent you a totally secret experimental 33mhz chip :D

maybe i'm confusing it with the 133 and forgetting the 1, but i know that's not the first chip i used.

I really wanna build an old ass computer, there are so many older games that were fun as hell that dont run on new machines.

like lord of the realms 2, conqueror 1086ad, worms2, leisure suit larry the original vga, carmageddon 2, i know there's more but i can't think of them off the top of my head.

[Shuemue]

DOS emulator?

[Skyylya]

Dunno, i can't even intall these let alone run them. Can you till access dos anymore? I haven't seen the option, not even ms-dos prompt since i had windows ME

[Shuemue]

You can get software that'll emulate DOS and allow you to run old games, something like http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1