New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Power vs Resolution

post #1 of 8
7/28/08 at 8:17pm
Thread Starter 
Hello, I was just curious what other people would do in my situation. I am purchasing a 17 inch notebook. It's purpose is for graphic design and gaming.

Would you choose 1920 x 1200 with the T5750 2ghz 2MB L2 Cache version
Or would you choose 1400 x 900 with the T9300 2.5ghz 6MB L2 Cache version.

I am going to have the purchase finalized tomorrow, right now I have chosen more screen real estate over power... starting to wonder if I made a bad decision.

Otherwise, its got 4GB DDR2 ram, an ATI 3560 256mb card and a 320gb SATA hdd.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 8
7/28/08 at 9:26pm
what games do you want to play?

that ati card isnt the best in the world when it comes to decent gaming.

also, pick the 1440, and buy a 22 inch widescreen lcd to hook it up to

they are cheap and pretty dam good, i had a viewsonic 22 incher vx440 i think? was pretty dam nice and huge!
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 8
7/28/08 at 9:49pm
Thread Starter 
Well the point of me going with the 17 inch to begin with is not being near a monitor. I have a great desktop setup, I need something portable.

The card will run pretty well much everything I need, I am not worried about that. I am more concerned if the processor upgrade justifies lowering the resolution!
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 8
7/28/08 at 10:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyb82 View Post
Well the point of me going with the 17 inch to begin with is not being near a monitor. I have a great desktop setup, I need something portable.

The card will run pretty well much everything I need, I am not worried about that. I am more concerned if the processor upgrade justifies lowering the resolution!
well, since youve yet to produce a model for us


google the model for benchmarks and see where they sit at


eaither way, both proc's will do the job.......question is by what % better
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 8
7/28/08 at 10:58pm
^ Jeez dude who spit in your coffee this morning. First you troll on about overclocking in another thread and now you pretty much snot at the OP.

Anyways, 2.5 ghz is overkill for the vast vast majority of users....an obvious exception would be video converters. For both of them, IMO, the resolution is good enough. I run at 1280x800 and it's plenty of desktop real estate for a 15.4"

So I vote for the hi-res slower cpu (which I'm betting is the cheaper one).
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 8
7/28/08 at 11:05pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the opinion, so far thats what I am sitting with. I will finalize my decision tomorrow for sure.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 8
7/30/08 at 6:46pm
I assume it's 3650, not 3560. It's a 128-bit memory bus video card with not so much video RAM so it will be your bottleneck in games with high resolution LCD. If you run games at native LCD resolution, you won't get good frame rates. Lowering resolution for the game would require either auto-scaling, which typically looks horrible on LCDs, or just having smaller image with black border around, which wastes a lot of that 17-inch screen.

For graphic design, 17-inch and high resolution will give you a lot of advantage though.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 8
7/31/08 at 10:00pm
Thread Starter 
Yeah I thought sticking with the 1900 res on a 17 would be best for work.

And you are right, I didn't notice the typo. It sounds like the 3650 will run what I need. I am planning on getting Civ4 on there. For other games, if I have to turn down the res I don't mind. Even if I sacrifice some quality.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Notebook Forums - General