Question about laptop specs and processor and gaming?

[sc2alex]

Okay, so here's the deal. The laptop that I am planning to get is the MSI GE60 customized. Here are the specs:

Resolution: 15.6" 16:9 1920X1080 Full HD LED backlight Ultra Bright, 95% NTSC Color Gamut, Anti-Glare

Graphics Card: nVidia GeForce GTX 660M 2GB GDDR5 DX11 w/Optimus Technology

3rd Gen Intel Ivy Bridge Core i7-3940XM, 3.0-3.9GHz, 22nm, 8MB, 55W

16GB DDR3 1600/PC3 Dual-Channel (8G X 2)

750GB 7200rpm SATA II 16MB 3GB/s (Standard)

Killer Wireless-N 1103 2.4Ghz/5.0Ghz Dual-Band 450 Mbps with 3 antenna


First of all, will these specs be good enough for gaming? How well will I be able to run games like BF3? What will the fps range be? (Don't tell me bulll**** like "oh, laptops can't run BF3")

Also, the non-customized original laptop has the processor of 3rd Gen Intel Ivy Bridge Core i7-3630QM, 2.4~3.4GHz, 22nm, 6MB, 45W.

How different is the i7-3940XM, 3.0-3.9GHz, 22nm, 8MB, 55W than the i7-3630QM, 2.4~3.4GHz, 22nm, 6MB, 45W? Will the processor make any difference in gaming and fps results? How much will the extreme processor improve the game?

Lastly, is this laptop better than the New Razer Blade (Razer Blade R2)? I am also considering the blade too. I know I am asking a lot but it would be great if someone could give me a thorough answer for all my questions!!!

 

[Knufire]

AFAIK they're the same CPU, the only difference is the clock speed. GPU matters more anyway.

Specs seem to be about the same as the Blade.

Except around 40FPS average on high on BF3.

 

[sc2alex]

Does the clock speed improve framerate? Also, so this will handle BF3 better than the blade?

 

[Knufire]

It matters. How much, I'm not sure. It'll make a small difference.

Mostly your GPU and to an extent your CPU is what determines frame rate, nothing else. The Blade has the same GPU and the same CPU (Ivy Bridge core) that turbos to 3.2GHz.

 

[sc2alex]

No, the GE60 turbos to 3.99GHz and the blade turbos to 3.2GHz. Will that make a difference?

 

[Mod-R]

Based on tests it seems BF3 will run just as smoothly with the same GPU and varying CPUs, except with Dual Core where there's a prominent drop. On the other hand, using the same CPU and varying GPUs there is pretty much a directly proportional and linear drop with each downgrade of GPU (from GTX670 to 660, to 650, ...), and the same goes as well with ATI, as a matter of fact. So basically BF3 is more GPU intensive. With the same GPU and 2GB of dedicated memory, both laptops would theoretically give you the same results. Of course there's half the RAM for the Razer Blade R2 compared to the MSI, but still the GPU will pretty much keep you covered in that area. On the other hand, the R2 does pack a SSD, which won't change a thing to your gaming, but makes for a much better overall experience. Also, the R2 is quite another league, and twice the price it seems. 1 cm thinner, pretty close to the Ultrabook form factor, 17-inches Full HD, gamer keyboard with Switchblade UI, Macros and all the mumbo-jumbo.

Not to dismiss the MSI, which is quite an offer in it's price bracket.

Also, don't post things like "(Don't tell me bulll**** like "oh, laptops can't run BF3")", that's judgmental and quite rude, you don't know anything about the experienced people gathered here, and why on earth wouldn't a laptop run BF3 anyway, if it has that kind of power both the R2 and the GE60 are packing? That kind of comment is not the best way to get help.

Have a nice deliberation... but if money is squeezing you into the MSI don't feel too bad, it's well thought and designed, and packs the very best internal hardware.

 

[sc2alex]

Oh sorry, I copied and pasted this from yahoo answers and forgot to take that out. But wouldn't the CPU with 3.9GHz be much better?

 

[Mod-R]

No it wouldn't, not in any noticeable way... as Knufire already answered.

You want proofs....? Look at those.

http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7986&pageid=8147

http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7985&pageid=8141

 

[Knufire]

I meant the same CPU design. The physical chip is the same. Note that you're on overclockers.com, overclocking is the ability to set your chip at whatever clockspeed you want.

It's better depending on the task. For gaming, it's going to make a difference but not a major one. For the third time, GPU matters more than CPU.

 

[sc2alex]

So, should I get the Razer Blade? I mean, it looks a lot nicer, and it is a lot slimmer. I also don't have a budget, but I want something portable under 6.8lbs preferably.

 

[Mod-R]

BTW what I meant is that the razer blade is a much more advanced and complete gaming config, not that it has more raw power. The MSI got the high hand on that.

Look at the links I posted, it says everything you need to know. Like, for instance, that the difference between a 1st gen i7 @ 2.66 GHz and a 1st gen i7 @ 3.5 GHz is next to nothing. Just like results between 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gen with about the same clock...

 

[Knufire]

If you really have that much money to burn, go ahead. Frankly, there's much more powerful laptops you can get than the MSI or the Blade (they're considered mid-range gaming laptops). They're just not as portable. I'd rather have the performance of say, a Sager.

 

[Mod-R]

Portable goes to the Razer, though it is bit more heavy.

 

[sc2alex]

Is it advanced because of the Switchblad UI? I don't think I will be using that too much. What else?

 

[Mod-R]

The Sager is quite another league, GPU wise, indeed. For BF3 it would be a better buy all around - and advanced in a cleverer way.

 

[sc2alex]

Yeah, but not as portable or nice looking.

 

[Knufire]

Is it advanced because of the Switchblad UI? I don't think I will be using that too much. What else?

It's advanced because they've managed to squeeze the parts into a smaller space. The hardest part about designing a laptop is keeping the CPU and GPU cool. More space means you can have bigger heatsinks. Less space means that you gotta be smarter and engineer better.

What do you want the laptop for? Showing off or playing games? . The portability is a legit concern though.

 

[sc2alex]

It's advanced because they've managed to squeeze the parts into a smaller space. The hardest part about designing a laptop is keeping the CPU and GPU cool. More space means you can have bigger heatsinks. Less space means that you gotta be smarter and engineer better.

What do you want the laptop for? Showing off or playing games? . The portability is a legit concern though.

Mostly portability, but I also care about the looks too. I don't need a powerhouse though. I'm not much of a hardcore gamer, so I really don't need like Ultra quality on every game I buy. I'd stick to portability.

 

[sc2alex]

Oh, and should I get a Win7 or Win8? Which one's better for gaming?

 

[Knufire]

Then get the Blade. Just remember your posting on a more budget and performance focused forum, so the advice we give you is going to be biased towards that. We want as much power as we can get for as little money as possible, and most don't care about much else.

I've heard of some games glitching on Windows 8. I'd stick to 7 personally.