Tsunami Gaming

Games are mainly GPU dependant these days. If I played on my old pentium 4 processor with my current Video card, I really would not notice a huge difference. So dont upgrade the processor for gaming, because thats becoming next to useless.

STEREODOG wrote:I would still buy the cheaper processor and get a solid state drive as it only consumes 2 watts max compared to the 12.6 watts the regular drive takes. Lasts longer is faster and the price of them are dropping like a rock.

I need at least 320GB

and that as a solid state drive.. is totally out of my budget =/ lol

Charge up whenever you're not at university. And if you're going to be traveling, charge up completely before you leave. Even if you get the slightly more efficient one, it's not going to be a dramatic difference (ie. a difference of 4+ hours).

I would still buy the cheaper processor and get a solid state drive as it only consumes 2 watts max compared to the 12.6 watts the regular drive takes. Lasts longer is faster and the price of them are dropping like a rock.

fl00d3d wrote:

Core 2 Duo T9400 (2 x 2.54 Ghz) 1066Mhz FSB/6MB L2 Cache £836

^Get this one. It's most cost-effective, and for your energy concerns: PLUG IN. You don't travel, so who cares about battery life.

This is supposed to be for when im at university. I doubt ill be able to plug in when im in a lecture will i? lol And when im on train home from/to uni as well. - Which is what i really need the battery life for.

I assume the post deleted by guest was by stasy, just a useless comment.

On topic!

Good luck making all these tough decisions, I wouldn't know what one of these are.

medici wrote:You're not funny Stasy.

?

Core 2 Duo T9400 (2 x 2.54 Ghz) 1066Mhz FSB/6MB L2 Cache £836

^Get this one. It's most cost-effective, and for your energy concerns: PLUG IN. You don't travel, so who cares about battery life.

You're not funny Stasy.

My desktop only has 2x 2.0Ghz and that's plenty fast enough for me

Also, I replied on Ren Forums, since I saw the post there first.

STEREODOG wrote:Always go for the best you can afford as the software developes so rapidly that makes the better processor keep its value for a longer period. Personally I would change the hard drive to the new solid state drive as it is way quicker (loading and start up), more energy efficient (by far), has more cashe, very fast seek times, quick read and write times, way more impact resistant and can come in 60, 120 and 250gb. This is where I would put more money when building a laptop.

http://www.xpresscanada.com/index.php?d ... id=990.545

Solid State drives are completely outside my budget - I did look into them before.

Best chip is clearly the P9500, but its really really pushing my budget, its really between the other 2 chips tbh =/

A case of... performance... or battery power... is 6MB going to make that much of a difference? And exactly how much battery power will i be loseing?

Get it with a AMD chip..run cooler-faster-less energy-simpler designed architecture,, just far better than Pentium stuff by far!! and cheaper to

and besides that, Intel has foked over so many share holder and employes for millions..be noble !!

Always go for the best you can afford as the software developes so rapidly that makes the better processor keep its value for a longer period. Personally I would change the hard drive to the new solid state drive as it is way quicker (loading and start up), more energy efficient (by far), has more cashe, very fast seek times, quick read and write times, way more impact resistant and can come in 60, 120 and 250gb. This is where I would put more money when building a laptop.

http://www.xpresscanada.com/index.php?d ... id=990.545

Alright, im currently searching for a new laptop!

Ive already got my specs sorted just having some issues picking the CPU! :O

Heres what i have so far:

RAM: 4GB CORSAIR XMS2 800MHz
HDD: 320GB 16MB cache + 7200rpm
Graphics: 512MB GEFORCE 9600GT + HDMI + D-SUB

+ 9 cell battery (claims to give me up to 4 hours of batt life)

CPU wise, im stuck between:

Core 2 Duo P8600 (2 x 2.40 Ghz) 1066Mhz FSB/3MB L2 Cache £775
Core 2 Duo T9400 (2 x 2.54 Ghz) 1066Mhz FSB/6MB L2 Cache £836
Core 2 Duo P9500 (2 x 2.54 Ghz) 1066Mhz FSB/6MB L2 Cache £954

(the price given is the overal price of the laptop with just the CPU changed)

The P series is exactly the same as the T series but uses alot less energy (meaning longer battery lifes)

Price wise.. thats a HUGE jump from £775 to £954, what im asking is...

Performance wise... ovbiously i wont notice much difference betwen 2.40 Ghz and 2.54 Ghz,but how much difference will that 3MB jump in cache size make? Is it worth the price difference? Also.. exactly how much battery life will i get on average if i opted for the P9500 over the T9400? - Im planning to use this for both development and gaming.

Thanks