# Call for help!



## Lina Loaded (Jul 6, 2007)

I've been beating myself in the head trying to think of a laptop I'd be satisfied with, since I can't make this choice twice. And if I'm not fast, not at all. D: And then suddenly this section popped into my mind! What better way to get help than to ask you guys? None! ..I hope. 

So hopefully you guys(and gals) can help me. I need a laptop with enough juice to run say.. NWN2 but not go beyond 3k CDN. 2k I'd love, but that's just delrium. Sadly. Doesn't have to be big name, but I'd rather not sacrifice quality for price. I can't have this sucker bite the big one within a a couple years. 

(NWN2 Minimum system requirements
Operating System: Windows XP 
Processor: Intel Pentium 4 2.4 GHz or AMD Athlon XP 2000 or equivalent 
Memory: 512MB RAM 
Hard Disk Space: 5.5GB Free 
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive: 4x(DVD) 8x(CD) 
Video: 128MB Pixel Shader 2.0 (ATI 9700 Pro or nVidia 6800 or better) )

Thank you folks so much in advance.


----------



## Rilvor (Jul 6, 2007)

I'd happily help you if I could =


----------



## Janglur (Jul 6, 2007)

Does newegg ship to Canada?

I'm looking at laptops now, and they're about A LOT more than an equivalent desktop.Â Â Those Specs could be met for less than $700k CAD if it was a desktop.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834146285Â Â Â Â This is the best match I can find, as cheap as it gets and still be in the 'extreme durability' and 'high performance' range.Â Â Thinkpads are tough as nails, I adore them.Â Â Roughly $1250 CAD
Edit:  D'OH.  Only 64 MB Vidmem.


Try this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834110258    $1375 CAD, approx.  Very high end on the graphics, but the battery life is atrocious.  (That's the price you pay for a gaming laptop.  That and very short parts life, due to overheating)


----------



## Janglur (Jul 6, 2007)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834280002

Now this is what I want.  $565 with shipping.  Ultra-low voltage, ultra-low wattage.  The CPU and Video structure can be cooled passively with a very small aluminium heatsink (or none at all under normal and idle use!)
Very light and ultra portable.

And the reason for my wanting it?  IN-SANE battery life.  Exceeds all Intel/AMD based CPU laptops on the market for batlife.
The CPU isn't fast by default, but that's an easy fix by formatting and installing XP.  This also fixes a TON of bugs, since the system certified for Vista, only compatible.



Note:  LOL!  Almost ALL the feedback is Vista's fault.  Vista's massive 512-MB Chuggery necessitates a RAM upgrade.  God, Vista, you are such a failure.  Even when you do have a multi-thousand dollar PC, you still run like shit.


----------



## Cybergarou (Jul 6, 2007)

It's easy to find a laptop with a Core 2 Duo equivalent CPU and 2 GB of memory for under 2k. That would keep your computer above the required specs for a few years. Any place that lets you upgrade components in the order will work.

The thing that's going to let you down first is the graphics card. Stay away from integrated graphics and go for an actual card. The better the graphics card is the longer your computer will be able to handle new releases. If it's in your budget go for a card with DirectX 10 support. Unfortunately it is harder to find places that let you upgrade the graphics card on a laptop. They normally limit you to a selection that won't last long. 6 months and I'm already looking to upgrade mine and I got the best they offered. If you find a place that offers a good choice in graphics cards that will likely be your best bet.

You really only have to worry about brands if you plan on going back to them for support if something goes wrong.


----------



## eb7w5yfe (Jul 7, 2007)

This is an excellent guide for anyone considering buying a laptop.  I highly recommend that you read it: The Hellion Prime Guide To Notebooks, v. 0.6

One of the more important things to know is that most companies have two lines of laptops: one for consumers, and one for businesses.  In general, the consumer laptops are cheap junk, and the business laptops are built better.  You will probably want to buy one of the business laptops, especially if you will be carrying it around much.


----------



## Lina Loaded (Jul 7, 2007)

Thank you guys for all your help! Looks like I've found what I wanted. ( In case your wondering; http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834220182 )

Now, just how I'll *get it* is another matter... _As they apparently don't ship to us in Canada. I'm asking asap._


----------



## Kougar (Jul 8, 2007)

Newegg does not ship to Canada... they announced they were planning to a few years ago, but then it simply never happened as "has been in the works" ever since. 

That laptop has a 5400RPM drive, so do not expect desktop performance or desktop responsiveness. A 7200RPM drive will be needed if ya don't want to suffer the performance loss. And they claim 2 hours of battery life... You can be sure it will get a bit less since manufacturers always give the best case scenario numbers. After a year it's going to lose ~30 minutes off that number as well as the battery ages, just so you know in advance.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jul 8, 2007)

Well you can always have it shipped to someone here you trust and give them the money to ship it to Canada if you really want to get a laptop from newegg. I just bought one recently from there and I love it. Ran me $1200 US after tax and shipping.

This is what I got: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834220167&Tpk=A7T%2b-%2bX1

For $600 US more you can get a more powerful version with an Intel Core 2 Duo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=A7S&x=0&y=0

Keep in mind anything with an Intel Extreme graphics card and anything that uses "Shared Memory" sucks for gaming when it comes to laptops. Anything with a Radeon Mobility or nVidia Geforce Go/M chipset will usually have its own dedicated set of vram and are better overall GPUs. The laptop you chose is pretty good, my guess is the Intel chip and the GPU suck more juice out of the battery then mine which would explain why you have an hour less battery life then mine.


----------



## Lina Loaded (Jul 8, 2007)

Yes, sadly I've found that out. What Ron's suggesting is what I'm thinking of doing. I have a pal I'm trying to visit in Aug, so it would work out well.  

And thank you very much. I expected that to be the case. How would I go about trying to change the drive then? Desktop I know and understand. Laptops are forigen to me.


----------



## Kougar (Jul 8, 2007)

Changing the drive would be simple, usually it just requires removing a few screws and sliding it out the side of the laptop. The newegg link shows a picture of where the HDD is located though. 

Newegg does not appear to have any 2.5" laptop hard drives that are SATA based, let alone 7200RPM ones. That'll take a bit of shopping around to find and it'll likely be another $110 for a 100GB sized model since the majority of laptop drives are still IDE based. Don't forget if ya switch drives you'll need to reinstall the OS or use the quickrestore discs on the new drive.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jul 8, 2007)

Also.. word from the wise.. goto ASUS's website, download all the XP drivers, and blow away Vista. Vista is horrible for gaming and actually slows the laptop down. I downgraded mine from Vista to XP for that reason.


----------



## Janglur (Jul 8, 2007)

100% agreed with Ron.

Benches show Vista hurts gaming performance approximately 40% on average (based on Stalker)


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jul 8, 2007)

Janglur said:
			
		

> 100% agreed with Ron.
> 
> Benches show Vista hurts gaming performance approximately 40% on average (based on Stalker)



Thats because of 2 things which make nVidia & ATi's jobs harder.

1. Vista not only doesn't come with OpenGL, but forces you to use a wrapper that GPU manufacturers have to work around to forcefully install OpenGL.

2. Direct X 10 is NOT backwards compatable. Direct X 9 and below are forced through a wrapper to make them work.

The latter is what hurts games the most since a majority support DX9 by default and have no DX10 support. This is the biggest hurdle for game and gpu devs when it comes to Vista support. Many game devs have put 2 separate sets of system requirements on game boxes with Vista requiring double that of XP's to run at the same speed. Many have gotten around this by forcefully downgrading DX10 to DX9, but the lack luster driver support because of M$'s hurdles hurts the young OS.


----------



## Zero_Point (Jul 8, 2007)

Yeah, don't get Vista. Anyone I know who has used it personally says it's a disaster. The tax office where my sister works almost upgraded all their machines to Vista against my recommendations, but then the big boss got a lap-top with Vista and that settled that. NO VISTA FOR THEM!!!


----------



## Lina Loaded (Jul 8, 2007)

Alright, what with all of that fun stuff to do.. I think I'll pass on newegg period. I've spotted this, and may as well run it by you guys. 

http://cgi.ebay.com/Alienware-Laptop-Aurora-m7700-Dual-Core-Gaming-Laptop_W0QQitemZ230149880919QQihZ013QQcategoryZ46323QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem
Yeah, ebay. Any thoughts?


----------



## Janglur (Jul 8, 2007)

No.

Nonononono.Â Â First of all, it's on ebay.Â Â And it's ALienware.
Why would Alienware be on Newegg?

Alienware are more expensive than generic equivalents because they're ultra-high quality (generics too) and designed not just for casual but extreme gaming.

Noone sane would put an Alienware on Ebay for less than Alienware sells it themselves, unless something's wrong with it.
If I had a buck every time someone got ripped by such, i'd buy your house.

Plus:  Vista.  So it's only 60% as good as it would be otherwise.  Unless you have a copy of XP (or don't mind buying one) and know how to install it, pass.


----------



## Aikon (Jul 9, 2007)

Ever thought about switching to Apple?  Apple makes some of the sweetest looking computers out there, and they're right in your price range:

MacBook Pro:  Clicky

You can also dual boot into XP with Boot Camp so you can get your game on.

You can go cheaper too with the MacBook, if you want to save some $$$.  Just throwing something different in the mix.


----------



## Janglur (Jul 9, 2007)

He has a point.

Macs use Intel processors now.  So they're just x86's.
You wouldn't really be jumping platform at all.


----------



## HaTcH (Jul 9, 2007)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> Also.. word from the wise.. goto ASUS's website, download all the XP drivers, and blow away Vista. Vista is horrible for gaming and actually slows the laptop down. I downgraded mine from Vista to XP for that reason.



Vista is _supposed_ to be faster than XP, and my guess is if you turn off all the funky crap it would be. HOWEVER, when you bought your system, did you take into account the advice of the OEM that said 'so-so recommends at least 2 GB of RAM for Vista'?

I seriously love how computer manufacturers are selling computers that are basically incapable of running the operating system right. WTF is with them offering a choice of 512Mb with a vista computer???

Also, if you are replacing your old computer with a new Vista one, save your old XP license information. Uninstall it from your other computer and slap it on your new one. So long as the CD matches the key, you won't have any problems. AND doing such is perfectly fine. MS may give you an issue with activation but if you call them for activation basically heres what happens:
1. you say your CD Key to a machine.
2a. the machine gives you an activation code
2b. the machine transfers you to a person...
2b2. the person asks you, 'is this copy of windows only on 1 computer?'
2b3. you answer 'yeah, I had to re-install'
2b4. the person gives you an activation code.
Done!


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Jul 9, 2007)

HaTcH said:
			
		

> Vista is _supposed_ to be faster than XP, and my guess is if you turn off all the funky crap it would be. HOWEVER, when you bought your system, did you take into account the advice of the OEM that said 'so-so recommends at least 2 GB of RAM for Vista'?



Except the reality is actually the opposite. I've tested out Vista before, even with all the Areo crap disabled Vista is still a bad performer when compared to XP. It does get a little boost, but its still a far cry from XP's performance. And yes I'm well aware of the 2 gig RAM requirement of Vista, but I didn't buy the laptop for Vista, I bought it because it matched the hardware specs I was looking for. My past experiences with Vista told me to blow it away the moment I got it.


----------



## net-cat (Jul 9, 2007)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> 1. Vista not only doesn't come with OpenGL, but forces you to use a wrapper that GPU manufacturers have to work around to forcefully install OpenGL.


No, no and no. This is 110% Slashdot FUD. I use Vista Business on my laptop (for various reasons) and it's not without it's problems. But this statement is an outright lie.

(That's how it's configured by default if you use the drivers that come on the Vista DVD. But hardware and driver developers are free to implement OpenGL however they want.)

(Source)



			
				HaTcH said:
			
		

> Also, if you are replacing your old computer with a new Vista one, save your old XP license information. Uninstall it from your other computer and slap it on your new one. So long as the CD matches the key, you won't have any problems. AND doing such is perfectly fine. MS may give you an issue with activation but if you call them for activation basically heres what happens:
> 1. you say your CD Key to a machine.
> 2a. the machine gives you an activation code
> 2b. the machine transfers you to a person...
> ...


Actually, last time I had to call, all that was entirely automated.


----------



## Kougar (Jul 10, 2007)

Janglur said:
			
		

> 100% agreed with Ron.
> 
> Benches show Vista hurts gaming performance approximately 40% on average (based on Stalker)



Never base such a blanket statement like that off one game. Anyone can point to any single game and say what they please because each game is different. This is also true of any single demo within the same game, the scores can change completely around depending on where the demo was recorded and the resolution and settings used. 

On average the 40% performance loss you claim in STALKER is only true under special conditions as seen here. Vista actually offers higher performance than XP in the next STALKER benchmark, fact in a good many of them. No where near close to that 40% performance loss blanket statement... http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=400&Itemid=29&limit=1&limitstart=5



			
				Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> Thats because of 2 things which make nVidia & ATi's jobs harder.
> 
> 1. Vista not only doesn't come with OpenGL, but forces you to use a wrapper that GPU manufacturers have to work around to forcefully install OpenGL.
> 
> ...



Net-cat got it correct again, that is complete nonsense only perpetuated by those that enjoy piling on all the random negatives they can get away with regarding Vista. Sure Vista has its issues, but at least check the facts or roughly understand how the OS functions please before further spreading everything ya read, even from slashdot. Good technical starter articles: Vista: Under the Hood and also More info on Vista's workings Another good article on DX10 & Vista.

Both of those points are completely false. The only grain of truth is that DX10 is not backwards compatible, the rest is genuine BS to be polite about it. If you do not have DX10 compliant hardware then Vista uses what has been termed DX9.0L instead of DX9.0C. DX9L is not a wrapper, that is akin to calling OpenGL itself a wrapper. That much is given in the above links. 

The only thing hurting gaming performance is the newness of the OS, it would be quite naive to expect a newly launched OS to even offer the same performance out of the gate as XP, when both Nvidia and ATI have been fine turning their XP drivers for years. Also part of the issue is both ATI and Nvidia have been forced to create an honest driver that doesn't hack the OS like their XP drivers, simply because Vista won't let them pull what they did with their XP drivers and take shortcuts to help with stability issues.

Anyone can compare a review made within the last month to a review made back in January and see how much of a difference driver improvements in particular have made. Nvidia especially is actually further behind ATI when it comes to dual-GPU drivers, as evidenced by two HD 2900s in Crossfire trumping a pair of 8800 Ultras in SLI which cost at least $700 more. LinkThis is more than a bit ironic since Vista and the G80 hardware has been on the market for about 8 months longer than ATI's own giving Nvidia an 8-month lead on drivers... 

If anything, Vista is startingÂ Â to take the performance edge more often than XP does, and these particular reviews are several driver relases out of date already. ATI DX9 Performance under Vista and Nvidia DX9 SLI Performance under Vista


----------



## net-cat (Jul 10, 2007)

I had a feeling that second point was false, I just didn't feel like doing the legwork to back it up. So, thank you for that.

I believe that DX9L also supports a subset of the DX10 API. (I/E: Supports everything but the features that specifically need DX10 hardware.)


----------



## Janglur (Jul 10, 2007)

Then, Kouger, explain why every single game I own is significantly slower, even unplayable in some cases, in Vista?

Sometimes, blanket statements are true.

If the vast majority of users experience vastly hurt performance, it's safe to say the problem's there.


----------



## Rhainor (Jul 10, 2007)

Janglur, I don't know what to tell ya, man.  I've got Vista Business and I used to have XP SP2.  I had both Unreal Tournament 2004 and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion installed under both, with no noticeable difference in performance.

And no, Vista does not require 2GB of RAM.  Recommended, perhaps, but by no means vital.  I'm running it just fine with 1GB of DDR2.


----------



## net-cat (Jul 10, 2007)

Vista is also "usable" with 512MB in the same way that XP is "usable" with 256MB.


----------



## Kougar (Jul 10, 2007)

Jangular, it could be anything. I don't know your system, but simply hating the OS certainly won't fix it. I could ask you to explain why other people get BETTER performance with Vista. 

I will say that if you did an in place upgrade of Vista then that would be your problem. To many different drivers muck up the in-place upgrades as Vista tries to keep them all to keep the installed programs working. No one should do an in-place upgrade from XP and expect to get the same performance (if it even manages to work) as a clean install of Vista.


----------



## Janglur (Jul 10, 2007)

Honestly, I have to question if anyone HAS.
I'm a computer technician.  I fix computers, upgrade computers, and build computers.

In every case, a system with Vista comes back within 10 days with the buyer very upset about the horrible performance.
Every system i've installed it on, Vista has had horrible performance.
On my own system, Vista has horrible performance.

You can yell at me all you want and call me a liar, but when 9 out of 9 systems i've dealt with agree, i'm accepting it at fact.


----------



## Bloodangel (Jul 10, 2007)

About 10 of my friends bought new computers with Vista. 6 of those were sitting in the "Vista is shit" camp before they used it. Now, they all have taken their words back, saying it's a good OS. They all used it for different things i.e some using rigs as a gameing comp, one using his as a buisness laptop for demo purposes, one using his for his art design course in college etc etc blah blah blah. Thats gotta stand for something.

And you can all sit there and bitch, but first lets all think about how Vista has to be a jack of all trades. You wouldn't complain if a game company released a patch for their game because there was a bug in it, so why should it be different for an OS? An OS also has to work with a lot more random crap going on. Does a game have to care about your printer? Your scanner? Your modem? No? And do they get it right first time, every time? No? You can't be expected to cater for everyone and be perfect at the same time.

You'll all end up using it in the end. It happened with XP, it'll happen with Vista.


----------



## Zero_Point (Jul 11, 2007)

Meh, I'll say what I've been telling all the other Pro-Vista people: "When they come out with a service pack or two, THEN I'll consider upgrading."


----------



## Kougar (Jul 11, 2007)

Janglur said:
			
		

> Honestly, I have to question if anyone HAS.
> I'm a computer technician.Â Â I fix computers, upgrade computers, and build computers.
> 
> In every case, a system with Vista comes back within 10 days with the buyer very upset about the horrible performance.
> ...



You made my point... people are going to come to you to fix their computers, so you are naturally in a position to see how everything can go wrong with Vista. They won't be going to you to fix a working Vista system.  I'm sure you've seen some pretty bad cases regarding Vista, I've seen plenty of botched installs from in-place upgrades alone for instance. 

I have also seen users that were quite happy with the OS, and not simply because of the looks. After personally using Vista and having a good idea how it operates under the hood (And differs from XP), I consider myself in the same camp as those that were happy to switch to it from XP. My biggest gripe is the lack of x64 driver support, but that is out of MS's hands and therefore not their fault.


----------

