Current laptop owners, I have some questions.

[PepperBreath]

I recently purchased and later returned a Dell Inspiron B120. For me, the screen was too small for the size of the machine which bothered me. I really didn't like the screen quality either.. Just today, I bought a Compaq V2000 but again, I called up OD and decided to cancel that order.

I'm having a hell of a time deciding on a laptop. My main usage will be internet browsing and word processing. However, I would like the option of playing a few non-intensive games like Pirates!, Civilization 4, Age of Empires 3, etc. I definitely don't think I'll be playing more intensive games like F.E.A.R. because I have a decently spec'ed PC at home for that.

My question is this, to play games like Civ 4 and Pirates!, would an integrated chipset like the Intel Accelerator 900 be ok? I really don't think games are going to be a priority but I would like the option of playing those strategy/sim games on occasion when I'm not at home.

It seems like my laptop choices are firmly on the low end integrated graphics stuff or the high end GeForce 7800 Go stuff with little in-between. One exception is a Compaq I saw with Radeon X700 graphics for around $880.

Any help would be appreciated. This issue has been torturing me for the past month or more. I simply can't decide if a low end will be enough for the occasional game.

 

[AmigaMan]

I don't know that the Intel GMA can do 3d, can it? If I were you, i'd choose something that has a dedicated GPU, perhaps an Inspiron 6000 or a lower-end thinkpad. You could probably pick up a decent Inspiron 9200 from Ebay (or I could sell you mine

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: PepperBreath
I recently purchased and later returned a Dell Inspiron B120. For me, the screen was too small for the size of the machine which bothered me. I really didn't like the screen quality either.. Just today, I bought a Compaq V2000 but again, I called up OD and decided to cancel that order.

I'm having a hell of a time deciding on a laptop. My main usage will be internet browsing and word processing. However, I would like the option of playing a few non-intensive games like Pirates!, Civilization 4, Age of Empires 3, etc. I definitely don't think I'll be playing more intensive games like F.E.A.R. because I have a decently spec'ed PC at home for that.

My question is this, to play games like Civ 4 and Pirates!, would an integrated chipset like the Intel Accelerator 900 be ok? I really don't think games are going to be a priority but I would like the option of playing those strategy/sim games on occasion when I'm not at home.

It seems like my laptop choices are firmly on the low end integrated graphics stuff or the high end GeForce 7800 Go stuff with little in-between. One exception is a Compaq I saw with Radeon X700 graphics for around $880.

Any help would be appreciated. This issue has been torturing me for the past month or more. I simply can't decide if a low end will be enough for the occasional game.

To play civ4, you def need a dedicated Video card. A 7200RPM HD would not hurt either, and 1gig of ram is a must. 1.5 gigs is better. Civ4 is not your average game. It requires ALOT of resources, since it was coded so poorly.

 

[PepperBreath]

Originally posted by: AmigaMan
I don't know that the Intel GMA can do 3d, can it? If I were you, i'd choose something that has a dedicated GPU, perhaps an Inspiron 6000 or a lower-end thinkpad. You could probably pick up a decent Inspiron 9200 from Ebay (or I could sell you mine

what videocard does your laptop have? What are the specs and how much would you ask for it?

 

[Trippytiger]

There's lot of laptops with decent mid-range video cards out there; the real question is, what else do you need? Budget, screen size, portability, battery life, et cetera.

 

[PepperBreath]

Originally posted by: Trippytiger
There's lot of laptops with decent mid-range video cards out there; the real question is, what else do you need? Budget, screen size, portability, battery life, et cetera.

Well, I am going to be taking it with me to school and on trips but I do want a nice screen. I've seen some 15" screens and I think that's about as big as I want to go.

I could spend 1500 on a laptop but really I don't want to go above 800-900. I was looking at a Compaq for 880 but outside of the Radeon X700, it was pretty barren. Only 256mb ram, 40gb 4200rpm HDD, etc.

Batt size isn't a huge concern. I'd like maybe 2 hours with light use (web browsing) whereas if I want to do word processing or gaming, I'd probably plug it in somewhere.

Gaming performance doesn't have to be paramount. I just want to be able to play some 3d games if I do get the desire to play. If I can get that even with an integrated video solution, I'd be willing to go that route.

 

[Trippytiger]

Good; that narrows things down a bit.

The Dell Inspiron 6000 with an X300 can probably do what you need, and it should fit into your budget. My friend has one that he carries around campus all day, so apparently it's portable despite being rather enormous. The screen is a little disappointing, though, IMO.

There are a lot of options for you, but I'm not terribly familiar with a lot of laptops in that segment. Hopefully someone can give you some more suggestions.

 

[Hacp]

I would go with the x700 graphics compaq. You DEF need something better than an x300 to play Civ4 as it requires that just to pass everything on Low 1024/786.

 

[Trippytiger]

Wow, that's a lot of graphics power for a strategy game.

 

[Ionizer86]

Agreed. Civ 4 even runs like molasses on my my MX460 with XP1600+ at home. Here on my laptop (Intel Extreme 2) half the textures don't even show up.

BTW, the i6000 is a chunky laptop, as are most 15.4's. It probably won't be any smaller than that B120, though the B120's big problem is putting a 14" screen in a 15.4" frame.

On IBM EPP there's a T42 with Radeon 9600. For $975 that might be a good fit laptop too, especially if you still want portability.

 

[PepperBreath]

IBM EPP?

Is the Radeon 9600 better or worse than the X700?

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: PepperBreath
I recently purchased and later returned a Dell Inspiron B120. For me, the screen was too small for the size of the machine which bothered me. I really didn't like the screen quality either.. Just today, I bought a Compaq V2000 but again, I called up OD and decided to cancel that order.

I'm having a hell of a time deciding on a laptop. My main usage will be internet browsing and word processing. However, I would like the option of playing a few non-intensive games like Pirates!, Civilization 4, Age of Empires 3, etc. I definitely don't think I'll be playing more intensive games like F.E.A.R. because I have a decently spec'ed PC at home for that.

My question is this, to play games like Civ 4 and Pirates!, would an integrated chipset like the Intel Accelerator 900 be ok? I really don't think games are going to be a priority but I would like the option of playing those strategy/sim games on occasion when I'm not at home.

It seems like my laptop choices are firmly on the low end integrated graphics stuff or the high end GeForce 7800 Go stuff with little in-between. One exception is a Compaq I saw with Radeon X700 graphics for around $880.

Any help would be appreciated. This issue has been torturing me for the past month or more. I simply can't decide if a low end will be enough for the occasional game.

To play civ4, you def need a dedicated Video card. A 7200RPM HD would not hurt either, and 1gig of ram is a must. 1.5 gigs is better. Civ4 is not your average game. It requires ALOT of resources, since it was coded so poorly.

uhhhhh my brother plays civ4 perfectly fine on his dell 700m, and it has built in gfx. He does however have 1.25gigs of ram.

My recomendation, try to get a hold of a dell inspiron 9300. with coupons, they can come out pretty cheap. Another good choice will always be the ibm T series. I have a T series and i have had no problems running civ4. The dell700m has no problems running civ4 as well.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: PepperBreath
I recently purchased and later returned a Dell Inspiron B120. For me, the screen was too small for the size of the machine which bothered me. I really didn't like the screen quality either.. Just today, I bought a Compaq V2000 but again, I called up OD and decided to cancel that order.

I'm having a hell of a time deciding on a laptop. My main usage will be internet browsing and word processing. However, I would like the option of playing a few non-intensive games like Pirates!, Civilization 4, Age of Empires 3, etc. I definitely don't think I'll be playing more intensive games like F.E.A.R. because I have a decently spec'ed PC at home for that.

My question is this, to play games like Civ 4 and Pirates!, would an integrated chipset like the Intel Accelerator 900 be ok? I really don't think games are going to be a priority but I would like the option of playing those strategy/sim games on occasion when I'm not at home.

It seems like my laptop choices are firmly on the low end integrated graphics stuff or the high end GeForce 7800 Go stuff with little in-between. One exception is a Compaq I saw with Radeon X700 graphics for around $880.

Any help would be appreciated. This issue has been torturing me for the past month or more. I simply can't decide if a low end will be enough for the occasional game.

To play civ4, you def need a dedicated Video card. A 7200RPM HD would not hurt either, and 1gig of ram is a must. 1.5 gigs is better. Civ4 is not your average game. It requires ALOT of resources, since it was coded so poorly.

uhhhhh my brother plays civ4 perfectly fine on his dell 700m, and it has built in gfx. He does however have 1.25gigs of ram.

My recomendation, try to get a hold of a dell inspiron 9300. with coupons, they can come out pretty cheap. Another good choice will always be the ibm T series. I have a T series and i have had no problems running civ4. The dell700m has no problems running civ4 as well.

WTF? I don't even think you can play Civ4 with integrated video. I'm almost certain you can't, even with a huge hunk of ram. It might be VERY VERY choppy.

 

[PepperBreath]

Civ 4 was just an example of the kinds of games I might play. Generally, I'm not looking at intensive FPS games but slower strategy or sim games. I could easily not play Civ 4 on the laptop and opt for stuff like Age of Empires or even Civ 3 instead.

The point is, the games should run decently but framerate isn't a big deal since I won't be playing any FPS or Racing games online. Just slower paced stuff were the occational hickup isn't going to ruin the experience.

Btw, thanks for the responses.

 

[Trippytiger]

Originally posted by: PepperBreath
IBM EPP?

Is the Radeon 9600 better or worse than the X700?

EPP=Employee Purchase Program. If you know someone who works for IBM, you can get a discount through them. There are also Visa and Mastercard discounts available, but the deals aren't nearly as good.

The 9600 will most likely be worse than the X700, as its performance is only somewhat higher than an X300. It's still a very capable card, though, and if you don't mind spending a little extra over something with similar specifications, the T42 is fantastic, well designed, and sturdy laptop. Definitely recommended.

 

[Marmion]

If you want to play AoE3, I've heard that the x700 wasn't intirely compatable. I was hanging out on the forums at Age Community and it seamed that the x700 didn't work on some laptops. That might be fixed now though. However, I have played the demo and it works fine on an x600 64MB.
If I were you, I'd look for something with the x600 as opposed to the x700 if you are wanting to play AoE3. I'm guesssing Civ4 wouldn't matter though.
Definatley don't go for any bigger than 15.4" for Uni/College.
The Dells are a bit chunky and heavy. Look for laptops under 2.7kg/6lbs.
14.1" WXGA would be ultimate, if you can find one with decent graphics.
Unfortunately, I can't really recommend a laptop, as I live in NZ and the market is somewhat different. ie, the Toshiba Tecra A6 is a Core Duo 14.1" laptop with X1300 graphics at a relatively "cheap" NZ$2500 retail opposed to other Core Duo laptops (appox US$1500) with 512mb RAM, etc. but on the US website you can only spec it with nVidia Quadro (workstation) graphics (or integrated).

Just my NZ$0.02

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: PepperBreath

Originally posted by: AmigaMan
I don't know that the Intel GMA can do 3d, can it? If I were you, i'd choose something that has a dedicated GPU, perhaps an Inspiron 6000 or a lower-end thinkpad. You could probably pick up a decent Inspiron 9200 from Ebay (or I could sell you mine

what videocard does your laptop have? What are the specs and how much would you ask for it?

sent you a PM. It has an ati 9700 w/128MB. I play FEAR fine on it until I get scared and have to start surfing AT

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: PepperBreath
I recently purchased and later returned a Dell Inspiron B120. For me, the screen was too small for the size of the machine which bothered me. I really didn't like the screen quality either.. Just today, I bought a Compaq V2000 but again, I called up OD and decided to cancel that order.

I'm having a hell of a time deciding on a laptop. My main usage will be internet browsing and word processing. However, I would like the option of playing a few non-intensive games like Pirates!, Civilization 4, Age of Empires 3, etc. I definitely don't think I'll be playing more intensive games like F.E.A.R. because I have a decently spec'ed PC at home for that.

My question is this, to play games like Civ 4 and Pirates!, would an integrated chipset like the Intel Accelerator 900 be ok? I really don't think games are going to be a priority but I would like the option of playing those strategy/sim games on occasion when I'm not at home.

It seems like my laptop choices are firmly on the low end integrated graphics stuff or the high end GeForce 7800 Go stuff with little in-between. One exception is a Compaq I saw with Radeon X700 graphics for around $880.

Any help would be appreciated. This issue has been torturing me for the past month or more. I simply can't decide if a low end will be enough for the occasional game.

To play civ4, you def need a dedicated Video card. A 7200RPM HD would not hurt either, and 1gig of ram is a must. 1.5 gigs is better. Civ4 is not your average game. It requires ALOT of resources, since it was coded so poorly.

uhhhhh my brother plays civ4 perfectly fine on his dell 700m, and it has built in gfx. He does however have 1.25gigs of ram.

My recomendation, try to get a hold of a dell inspiron 9300. with coupons, they can come out pretty cheap. Another good choice will always be the ibm T series. I have a T series and i have had no problems running civ4. The dell700m has no problems running civ4 as well.

WTF? I don't even think you can play Civ4 with integrated video. I'm almost certain you can't, even with a huge hunk of ram. It might be VERY VERY choppy.

Trust me, after i redid my brothers os on his dell, because dell has a lot of crappy software he didnt need using extra memory, civ4 ran perfectly fine on medium settings, and it wasnt choppy at all.

 

[NewBlackDak]

I bought an Acer Travelmate TM4404WLMi. It's a wonderful machine!! It's basically a ferari with half the video ram. I took a chance, and ordered mine from ZZF for $80 less than Newegg has it for, and had no problems.
Only gripes are no bluetooth, and the size of it. I wanted a 14" with similar specs, but couldn't find one anywhere. I was worried about it only having 64MB vram, but I can play HL2 and UT2K4 with all the ingame settings cranked. AA and AF are useless on it though with that little vram. I can play FEAR, and Q4 with the settings reduced. Not as pretty as on my desktop, but perfectly playable.

I like it so much I ordered some CAS2 PC3200, and an MT40 to go in it. I'm hoping with the faster memory the hypermemory will allow some better settings in Q4.

 

[PepperBreath]

Thanks for the help guys. I've kind of narrowed my choices quite a bit.

Here's a quesiton though. Which is more future proof? An Intel Duel Core or a Mobile Athlon 64?

 

[Ionizer86]

Don't get a mobile 64. They run hotter than Turion and P-M so the laptops tend to have big, heavy chasses.

Core Duo is the nicest laptop chip out there, if you can afford them. Dual Turion won't be out for some months.

 

[PepperBreath]

Any other opinions? I'll probably finalize my decision this weekend.

 

[Ostack]

I can't help with a suggestion unless you can up your budget a little.

I'm currently running a Sony and love it. It is really a good compromise in size. I have used from 15" to 10" laptops, and I really like this size the best.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Ostack
I can't help with a suggestion unless you can up your budget a little.

I'm currently running a Sony and love it. It is really a good compromise in size. I have used from 15" to 10" laptops, and I really like this size the best.

uhhh... i have no comments for sony. You should read the many many flame threads about sony. Ive had 3.. they were all junk. U cant compare a sony to a thinkpad. Thats like comparing a hyundai soreno to a h1 hummer in build quality.. :X

 

[Ostack]

going to read...

OK, did some reading. Only negative things I read were that they aren't well built, get HOT, noisy fans, slow performance, and Sony sucks.

I dropped it and it broke, or my mom sat on it and it broke, hardly justifies calling it a poorly built laptop. I'm sure some of them do get hot, most laptops do. I've had 2 Dells an inspiron i5000 (P3) that you could NOT use on your lap, and a latitude d600 (Pentium M) that wasn't quite as hot, but would get still get HOT at times. My Averatec (Pentium M) does not get as hot as the dells did. This new Sony (Core Duo) I have barely gets warm under normal use. Running Doom3 at medium settings for 15 minutes still doesn't get it more than warm. It is actually the coolest laptop I have ever used. It is quieter than any of the previously mentioned laptops. As far as speed, well, what has been described in the hate threads, from what I can tell, is people don't know how to remove bloatware from a system. Yeah, Sony throws a bunch of crap on their systems that some of the other manufacturers don't, but its not that hard to strip it down, just takes some time.

I can fully understand hating Sony and their products because they are the big bad corporation, but that is something different than having a crappy product. Maybe I'll change my tune after a couple months or so, but my first impressions of this laptop are very good.