Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Laptop Specifications
#1
Not expecting much out of this but...

I started playing Persona 3 on my mother's old laptop, which has an Intel Integrated Graphics Card (yes, I know...), and it would run very slowly, at about 30 fps normally and down to 10 fps during battles. Now I am planning to buy a new computer and PCSX2 would be a side thing. So would this be an improvement on the one before.

Before (Mom's Laptop)
Intel Core 2 Duo T7100 @ 1.8 GHz
2GB RAM
Vista Home Premium SP2
Mobile Intel 965 Express Chipset

After
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM with Turbo Boost to 2.8 GHz
4GB RAM
Windows 7 Home Premium
NVIDIA GEforce 310M

I do realize that the Graphics Card on the new one is quite bad (entry level), but how much can I expect. Will it run fairly fast or will it lag as much? (Image quality barely bothers me, I just want the game running as close to normal speed as possible)

If anyone has other suggestions around the 800-900 price range for decent PCSX2 compatible computers, leave a suggestion.
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
You should know that when one of the new Core i5/i7 processors states an "up to..." speed, it's usually refering to what Ghz it can reach when running a single threaded application. That 720QM will only reach 2.398Ghz when running 2 threads, which is what PCSX2 currently runs as. 2.4Ghz isn't horrible, but definitely not worth the price, if your primary concern is capablities with PCSX2.

Also, that 310M isn't that great, either. FYI The second digit of a graphics card (the "1" in this case) is usually more of an indication of how good it is. IIRC a 230M is better than a 320M, even.

As far as prices, there has been a couple recent threads regarding laptops. In one, that price range. I have already posted my advice, so I probably shouldn't "Double Post". They shouldn't be hard to find, though. Smile
Reply
#3
(04-30-2010, 12:43 AM)luciavg Wrote: AfterIf anyone has other suggestions around the 800-900 price range for decent PCSX2 compatible computers, leave a suggestion.
this build at newegg.com will do fine for pcsx2 and any pc game for that matter
3 bucks over your budget but i take it that won't be a problem
[Image: 903.jpg]

2x 5770 is about as fast as a single 5870
get a cpu cooler for overclocking the cpu once you get more money
you may notice the motherboard can only crossfire in pci-e x8 but the difference is 2% or so in compare to x16 in performence so it's neglectable
[Image: 1454055.png]
Reply
#4
Nice. That PC build could handle PCSX2 like a dream. Too bad it's not a laptop. Smile
Reply
#5
(04-30-2010, 12:43 AM)luciavg Wrote: Not expecting much out of this but...

After
Intel® Core™ i7-720QM with Turbo Boost to 2.8 GHz
4GB RAM
Windows 7 Home Premium
NVIDIA GEforce 310M

I do realize that the Graphics Card on the new one is quite bad (entry level), but how much can I expect. Will it run fairly fast or will it lag as much? (Image quality barely bothers me, I just want the game running as close to normal speed as possible)

If anyone has other suggestions around the 800-900 price range for decent PCSX2 compatible computers, leave a suggestion.

First, I'm going to save you from committing a blunder. Those exact specs are referring to the hp dv7t or dv6t correct? Rip off, complete waste of money even. Do not go near HP laptops unless they have coupons available or something.

$800-$900..... If you can squeeze in an extra $200, I would suggest getting THIS ASUS

It has a much better card then the 310m, more hardrive space, a usb 3.0 port, direct x 11 support as well. If you want a bigger resolution, maybe THIS SAGER EDIT - the i7-620m would be best for pcsx2.

If you can't go over $900, then maybe THIS ONE It still has a better video card then the 230m. Its only a duo core but for pcsx2, you can get up to 2.8ghz around the $900 price range.... But I would try going for an i5.
Windows 7 - Asus G73jh-a1 - 17-720qm @ 1.6 GHz (2.8 GHz)(2.4ghz)(1.73ghz) - ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5870 @ 700/1000 (sometimes oc to 800/1100) - 8 gig ram
Reply
#6
If you have the money, that SAGER with the Core i7-620M is definitely the best. The 720QM and 820QM definitely ARE NOT the best choice. Actually, the Core i5-520M is better than the 720QM. I'd even guess a T9600 2.8Ghz would be the same, if not, better than the 720QM (at 2.4Ghz as 2 cores/threads).

That ATI 5650 (or 5730) I would think is overkill if your only looking to play games at normal or slightly enhanced resolutions. It is, however, a very sweet GPU and and great buy with a Core i7-620M for $1200.

Also, what makes a ATI 4650 better than a nVidia 230M? Don't take me the wrong way, I'm not trying to argue or "start somethin'". Smile I'm only after why you say it's better. When I looked at the specs, I couldn't say for sure which looked better for PCSX2 (a bit of "this-for-that" IMO). The PC benchmarks do put the 4650 a bit above the 230M, but I understand those ratings don't necessarily represent PCSX2. Could you possibly enlighten me as to why it's better? Would 4x the amount of pipelines be indefinitely better than 2x the shader speed and 2x the V-RAM? Those seemed to be the major differences.
Reply
#7
@Rezard on paper, the 4650 should be the better card however my 1GB GT130M beats the 4650 of a friend
[Image: 1454055.png]
Reply
#8
If a GT 130M is better than a 4650, it seems likely that higher speed(s) is more (or more often) benificial to PCSX2 than more pipelines. However, to what degree might be seen if you were to compared with stock GPU speed and OC'ed. What speed(s) are %26 OC'ed on your GPU? Sorry, I'm not too familiar with exactly which speed(s) can be OC'ed. Is it just Core Speed?
Reply
#9
Wait a tic. If this is right, a GT 130M beats a GT 230M (PCSX2-wise). The 130M has higher speeds all around. The 130M does benchmark (on paper) only 200 points under the 230M, which is 2000 points below the 4650. The perfect example of how PC benchmarks poorly reflect PCSX2 usage, huh?

Sorry, I'm getting a bit off-topic. Based on your statements, luciavg, any of these 3 graphics cards should satisfy your needs. The 310M would be worse.
Reply
#10
@Rezard
running stock my GT130M still beats his 4650 and yes it's GDDR3
do realize that 3Dmark in general says nothing about games
i currently don't run overclocked anymore due to bad nvidia drivers (196.75) wich damaged my gpu
[Image: 1454055.png]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)