Buying a new Laptop 6 replies

Please wait...

Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#1 13 years ago

Greetings eeryone, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this kind of question and I'm sorry if it isn't but I would like some feedback on a laptop I'm considering buying. I wanted to be able to run a few of the newer games available but I don't know if what I'm looking at will be enough. Here is the specs: Compaq Processor: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Memory: 1024 MB HD: 80 gigs Graphics: 128MB ATI Radeon Xpress Graphics Any comments on this would be great. If you want to look at the full thing the link is: http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0665000FS10059668&catid=22495&logon=&langid=EN Mainly, will 2.0 GHz be enough to last the next few years? Many thanks, IC




Eagle One

:-D

50 XP

22nd December 2003

0 Uploads

2,992 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

that should be play game good, but i have no knowledge about laptop graphics cards what so ever

Mainly, will 2.0 GHz be enough to last the next few years?

its not merly the 2Ghz thst counts, its the Athlon64 3200+ which is good. a 2GHz Athlon64 is a hundred times better than a 2.0Ghz Intel Pentium 4




knipple

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

30th September 2003

0 Uploads

1,739 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

A hundred times huh? sounds like someone has absolutely no research behind what the say, rather you just spout off a number to make Intel look bad.

Next time give some actual information instead of your onesided opinion.

InnerChaos, yah, the Amd 64 is not bad, but keep in mind you won't be using the 64 bit processing for a little bit, windows 64 will run on 64 bit, but I am not sure, I don't think it is fully optimized yet.

Most software applications won't run 64 bit, some will though.




Eagle One

:-D

50 XP

22nd December 2003

0 Uploads

2,992 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

well i was oviously exagerating, but anyway, clock speed is a lot more to intel than it is to amd since amd conserntrate on things like the bus speed and onboard memory controller or somesuch. And its because of the higher clock speed, why Intel have the advantage in video editing or 3d rendering because they need them Ghz, that all important clock speed. While AMDs advantage, gaming, doesnt. A 2.0Ghz Intel Pentium 4 has been out since around early to mid 2002. And a 2.0Ghz Athlon64 came a lot later.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#5 13 years ago

So everything in this should be ok for a good bit? I thank you for your comments, if there is anything else I should know, please let me know. "InnerChaos, yah, the Amd 64 is not bad, but keep in mind you won't be using the 64 bit processing for a little bit, windows 64 will run on 64 bit, but I am not sure, I don't think it is fully optimized yet." I assume it won't have any problems running 32bit progs, correct? Thanks again :) IC EDIT: One more quick question, what does the 2.0 GHz compare to a Pentium speed. (hopefully this question is understandable)?




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

It should be good, though i don't know how good Radeon Xpress graphics cards are, and that 3200+ should be good for quite a while yet, and no, it will have no problem running 32Bit Apps, plus it will already be 64Bit ready when alot of those start popping up. Intels equivalent of a 2.0Ghz 3200+ AMD64 would be a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4, hence the AMDs 3200+ rating. While AMDs equivalent of a 2.0Ghz Intel would be a 1.67Ghz Athlon 2000+




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#7 13 years ago

Good to hear :). I think I'll do a little research on he gfx card before I make the final decision. Thanks again for the comments. IC