Hardware Buying a laptop, need some guidance

[AceEvo]

So I've recently decided to invest in a laptop. I need it partly for school, but only for typing the occasional document and such. My main reason is that my desktop computer is getting outdated and rarely used, but I enjoy the occasional PC game. I don't own a home console, and have no interest in buying one (I prefer mouse and keyboard over controller). So my compromise is to buy a decent laptop that won't break the bank. I don't need top of the line hardware like Alienware, but I'd like to be able to run a modern game like Skyrim or MW3. To narrow down my options further, I'm looking for a windows 7 laptop rather than a windows 8 laptop, as I've read poor reviews and after trying to navigate Windows 8 on my friend's laptop, I found that the traditional windows experience feels far more user-friendly.

So, fellow Tempers, I'm enlisting your help. If you know of a decent laptop that comes out-of-the-box game-ready, or can suggest graphics cards or even brand to stay away from, any and all help is appreciated.

Right now, I'm considering the Dell Inspiron 15R. I'd link you to the Dell page for it, but I'm on my phone and cannot access the desktop site. My one concern with it is that it uses Intel HD Graphics 4000, and I've not been able to find any decent reviews on how that handles modern "resource intensive" gaming.

Again, thank you for any help you can offer!
-AceEvo

 

[Rydian]

Upgrading the graphics card in a laptop is a no-go. Even in the very few cases where it's technically viable to do, it's too expensive and way too much of a headache... so make sure you pick a model with a decent card to begin with, because you're stuck with it for the lifetime of the machine.

Intel integrated graphics are not meant for gaming, and seriously lack compared to graphics from AMD/ATi and Nvidia.

When you are going to pick out a video card you need to be VERY careful with the model number.

ATi (later bought by AMD) released GPUs with series designations in this order:

1. Wonder
2. Mach
3. Rage
4. Radeon 7000
5. Radeon 8000
6. Radeon 9000
7. Radeon X300, X500, X700
8. Radeon X1000 (Shortly after, ATi was bought by AMD)
9. Radeon HD 2000
10. Radeon HD 3000
11. Radeon HD 4000
12. Radeon HD 5000
13. Radeon 6000 (Current series)
14. Radeon 7000 (Due in a few weeks to months)

NVIDIA has an equally long history:

1. RIVA
2. RIVA TNT
3. Vanta
4. RIVA TNT2
5. GeForce
6. GeForce 2
7. GeForce 3
8. GeForce 4
9. GeForce FX 5000
10. GeForce 6000
11. GeForce 7000
12. GeForce 8000
13. GeForce 9000
14. GeForce GT100 (Rebranded 9000, because GT200 designs were delayed)
15. GeForce GT200
16. GeForce GT300 (Rebranded GT200s, OEM-only, GT400 was delayed)
17. GeForce 400 (The first of the "Fermi" GPUs)
18. GeForce 500 (Current series)

Each one of those series is a different generation of hardware. The GeForce 4 was replaced with GeForce FX, and so on. Except where I've noted, each new generation introduced significant new features.

Both companies follow a fairly predictable pattern:
With AMD GPUs, in the 4-digit designations (3000, 4000, and so on), the second digit indicates which market it's intended for. For example, 5500 is entry-level graphics for the 5000 series, 5700 is mid-range enthusiast, 5900 is high-end enthusiast, and 5300 is meant for very cheap systems.
Likewise, NVIDIA uses the second digit to indicate the market. 580 is high-end enthusiast, 570 is mid-range enthusiast, 550 is entry-level gamer, and anything less is meant for super-cheap and OEM systems.

The third (and sometimes fourth) digit indicates relative performance in its class. A GeForce 465 is an underpowered version of the 470. A Radeon 6970 is a souped-up 6950.

NVIDIA also uses another designation: GS is generally the least powerful design. GTS is usually more powerful than GS, but is intended to be cheap. GT is middle-of-the-road. GTX is generally high-end. It's a separate, but related, designation to the second digit of the model number.

The highest-end GPUs like the Radeon 6990 or the GeForce GTX 590 are actually single-card, multi-GPU configurations. The 6990 is a pair of 6970s on a single card, and likewise, the GTX 590 is a pair of GTX 580s. This is similar to getting a pair of 6970s or GTX580s and using Crossfire (AMD) or SLi (NVIDIA) to slave the cards together for better performance. The difference is that being on a single physical card, the 6990 and GTX590 can get slightly better performance, and it allows you to go even crazier with multi-GPU configurations.

It gets a bit ridiculous.

Going back to generations, you often see games that require a "DirectX 9c-compatible card" or something like that. What that means is that it's looking for a specific set of features provided by the GPU.

In general:

• DirectX 9 requires any thing newer than the Radeon 9000 series or the GeForce FX 5000 series.
• DirectX 9.0b starts with the Radeon X700 and X800, and the GeForce 6000 series.
• DirectX 9.0c starts with the Radeon X1000 series (but not the X1200) and the GeForce 6000.
• DirectX 10.0 starts with the Radeon HD 2000 series and the GeForce 8000.
• DirectX 10.1 starts with Radeon HD 3000 and the low-end GeForce GT200 (anything below 240), the GT300 (except the GT330), and the GT400 (the whole series). Unfortunately, NVIDIA had a lot of problems getting their new Fermi cards out, and that delayed their DX10.1 support.
• DirectX 11 support starts with the Radeon HD 5000 and the GeForce GT400.

In all cases, actually using DirectX 10 requires at least Windows Vista. XP is limited to DX9.

OpenGL support is a little trickier to track, but suffice to say most OpenGL games require OpenGL 2.1, which tracked with DirectX 9.0a. OpenGL 3.3 is about the same level as DirectX 10.1, and OpenGL 4.1 and up track with DirectX 11. Newer OpenGL features are only limited on the Mac, before OS X Lion, which are all locked at 2.1. Lion supports 4.2. Windows and Linux have no such limitation.

... I think that's everything.

Check these two links for more details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_NVIDIA_graphics_processing_units

The best way to check how well a card will perform versus other cards is to look up benchmarks of the card in question. This is where sites run the card on certain games, measure how well it performs numerically, and then compare it to other cards. Simply googling for a benchmark of the card you're looking at should return results on how well it performs in games. Take note of two things.

1. Some benchmarks are done with benchmarking software instead of games.
   http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
   These are known as "synthetic" benchmarks and while they do measure a card's computational power, the results don't always match up to how well games will run. It's better to look at actual game benchmarks than synthetic ones if you're unsure.
   
2. Laptop/notebook graphics are different models than desktop cards, so for example a desktop HD 4850 is more powerful than a laptop one. This is done so laptop cards can save on battery power. Laptop models usually have "mobility" or "M" in the name. As it's harder to find benchmarks for laptop cards (are they're often not replaceable) a good resource for an overview of laptop graphics cards is here.

 

[Lanlan]

What is your budget? I recommend a Laptop with an AMD A series APU. Great for gaming.

 

[Originality]

For this case, I would go with an AMD A series APU too. Weak processor, good integrated graphics, low price.

 

[AceEvo]

Thank you all for your help. As you can tell, I'm not very knowledgeable in the realm of laptops. After reading your suggestions, I did find a laptop that seems suitable and reasonably priced.

http://www.walmart.com/msharbor/ip/21777787?adid=1500000000000012981640&veh=mweb

I'm hoping that link works, I find that sometimes switching to desktop mode from and iPhone makes links redirect to strange places. Assuming it does, could somebody check it out and perhaps point out any flaws in the setup that I didn't catch? It's the Acer Silky Silver 15.6" Aspire V5-551-8401 Laptop PC with AMD A8-4555M Accelerated Processor and Windows 8. As I said, I'd prefer a Windows 7 laptop and if anyone could find either the same laptop with 7 or a W7 laptop with an equal setup, that would be greatly appreciated.

Again, thank you for your help.
-AceEvo

 

[Rydian]

That one would be alright for less-demanding gaming (notebootcheck reports the performance around a low-end 7500M series), but you can probably find a little better.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834310645
This one has a slightly-higher model graphics card, but also has double the harddrive space, more RAM, etc. (thus the higher price), and it seems to be built better (Acer's Aspire series is sort of low-end)... but it's Windows 8 again.

Here is a custom search for windows 7 machines with (what I consider to be) acceptable graphics cards for $750 and less.

 

[AceEvo]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834246492

So I used your search and found the laptop I linked above. It's got a Nvidia chip, decent ram and it's one of the cheaper ones on the list. I know AMD was the suggestion by you guys, but Nvidia has a better rep as a video card maker for games, right?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834158578
Here's an AMD laptop, little more expensive but seems reasonable as well.

Between the two of them (or another one that's better for the same price), what would you guys suggest?

 

[Rydian]

Nvidia and ATI/AMD's cards for games both focus on games and both work fine. Both manufacturers do make video cards that aren't oriented for games, but those are rarer and have different designations/names, they're for 3D modeling and such.

The first looks slightly more powerful than the second, though the way the second is built could mean better battery life.

Do note I said "could". Manufacturers are known to take a laptop with less power drain and simply stick a weaker battery in it so the life is about the same and it costs less for them to make.

 

[AceEvo]

Battery life is not extremely important, as it'll be mostly home use where an outlet is always nearby (and the odd occasion where I need it at school).

I'll look into the laptop a little deeper and check out some reviews before making a final decision, up until this point I've been looking purely at specs.