Laptop choice and windows 8?

[Noltyboy]

Hello guys.

 

Im looking at upgrading my laptop and getting back into CMBN. Would this choice be ok and does CMBN work ok with windows 8?

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-15-6-inch-Notebook-i7-4710HQ-Graphics/dp/B00P17KCSW

[Thewood1]

I have an MSI with very similar specs and it runs CM2 large scenarios at highest level with only a few minor hitches here and there.  Every other game from DCS to ARMA3 runs almost perfectly on it within reason.  The key is cooling.  My MSI has a great cooling system that turns the i7 loose at 3.5MHz on boost.  It cost be $899 US.

[Pak40]

I have an MSI with very similar specs and it runs CM2 large scenarios at highest level with only a few minor hitches here and there.  Every other game from DCS to ARMA3 runs almost perfectly on it within reason.  The key is cooling.  My MSI has a great cooling system that turns the i7 loose at 3.5MHz on boost.  It cost be $899 US.

 

It's not the i7 processor that giving you the umphhh for games like ARMA and CM. It's the GTX860m graphics chip (in the case of the Asus rig in the link above). Honestly he'd be better off with a higher clocked i5 and with the money saved on the processor he could get a better graphics card.

[A Canadian Cat]

I think CM is CPU bound rather than GPU bound.  Not that I am saying use a poor graphics card I am just saying that I think for CM you should trade the other way - get the second or third best video card and use that to get a faster CPU.

 

Mind you I am very happy running the game with my machine which has an i5 CPU.  I saved on not getting the top GPU and pocketed the savings and stayed with the i5 chip

Not a laptop mind you but I play with the quality settings on Best and any sized scenario I care to:

Core i5-4670, 3.4GHz
GTX760 2GB
Windows 7
16Gb memory
SanDisk Ultra Plus 256Gb SSD drive
Western Digital 1 Tb 7200rpm

 

With all the problems AMD have with the OpenGL standard I would recommend you pick an nVida based card.

[Pak40]

I think CM is CPU bound rather than GPU bound.  Not that I am saying use a poor graphics card I am just saying that I think for CM you should trade the other way - get the second or third best video card and use that to get a faster CPU.

 

Mind you I am very happy running the game with my machine which has an i5 CPU.  I saved on not getting the top GPU and pocketed the savings and stayed with the i5 chip

Not a laptop mind you but I play with the quality settings on Best and any sized scenario I care to:

Core i5-4670, 3.4GHz

GTX760 2GB

Windows 7

16Gb memory

SanDisk Ultra Plus 256Gb SSD drive

Western Digital 1 Tb 7200rpm

 

With all the problems AMD have with the OpenGL standard I would recommend you pick an nVida based card.

 

I agree that CM uses more CPU than your norm 3D game - after all it tracks trajectory of all projectiles, TacAI, and relative spotting etc... However, unless you've heard something else from Steve, Moon, or Charles, I think the GPU is still where any 3D game will require more power. There are times when my machine starts to chug on very large maps, an obvious sign of the graphics being strained. The CPU is relatively idle at that point because it's between turns.

 

My point above is that he should spend money on a highly clocked i5 rather than a low clocked i7. Your i5 at 3.4 GHz will outperform that i7 at 2.7 in a single core test. The i7 may have more cores or be able to do hyperthreading but since CM does not use that, it's wasted money. ARMA may use more than 1 core, I can't remember, but I still think a 2 or 4 core i5 @3.7 GHz will outperform that i7 @ 2.7GHz. Almost all game/hardware publications recommend this approach.

 

Obviously with a new machine and the fact that he plays other games that use multi-core processing, he must also look towards the future. More and more games are supporting multi-core these days. But, I think for the foreseeable future 4 cores is plenty.

[A Canadian Cat]

You make a good point about the clock speed for sure.  I would agree about not skimping on a GPU but CM does not need the very top of the line either.  When I bought my GTX760 there were two cards in the line up that were faster which cost lots more $ and I do not believe they would have given me any better game experience in CM than what I have. 

[Thewood1]

Yeah, but unless CM is the ONLY thing you play or do, the i7 is a better choice. I have found that i5 prices vs i7, at least on MSI midrange laptops, isn't that much different.  On Arma, the GPU and an i7 can make a difference.

 

Steve has stated multiple times its mostly about CPU raw clock speed.

[A Canadian Cat]

That is very true.

[Pak40]

You make a good point about the clock speed for sure.  I would agree about not skimping on a GPU but CM does not need the very top of the line either.  When I bought my GTX760 there were two cards in the line up that were faster which cost lots more $ and I do not believe they would have given me any better game experience in CM than what I have. 

 

Yea, I have a GTX 570 and it does an admirable job. Anything faster will certainly handle CM well. I guess it also depends on what resolution you want to run. 

 

Yeah, but unless CM is the ONLY thing you play or do, the i7 is a better choice. I have found that i5 prices vs i7, at least on MSI midrange laptops, isn't that much different.  On Arma, the GPU and an i7 can make a difference.

 

Steve has stated multiple times its mostly about CPU raw clock speed.

 

Not all i7s are created equal. The i7s you're talking about may very well be slower in clock speed than the i5s you're comparing them to, hence the minor price difference. So if you're just comparing prices of i5s vs i7s without taking their clock speeds into consideration then might end up with an i7 that is actually slower than an i5.

[bangalor44]

I have windows 8.1 all games and modules work fine.My comp is 3.30 ghz with 6 gigs of ram.on board intel graphics.All runs fine.

Edited May 2, 2015 by bangalor44