Laptop for gaming

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
Im looking at a HP laptop (dual core 2ghz - 4 gig ram - Nvidia GeForce 130m GT 1 gig dedicated) and wondered if i could get PS3 level graphics and FPS with these specs...consider Uncharted 2, God of war 3 and even Killzone 3.

Thanks G
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
Anything made in the past 3 years beats a ps3 pretty much as long as you aren't on integrated graphics, if you want a real gaming laptop on a small budget check out the ASUS G73JH-RBBX05
 
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
mnewsham said:
Anything made in the past 3 years beats a ps3 pretty much as long as you aren't on integrated graphics, if you want a real gaming laptop on a small budget check out the ASUS G73JH-RBBX05
Click to expand...

The the specs i mentioned above are enough to better the PS3 graphics wise?

I'll look at the ASUS - thanks for the tip :awe:

"Chipset Type Mobile Intel HM55 Express"...is this right? (i got this when googleing the ASUS)
 
Last edited:
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
mnewsham said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834220821


It is back in stock on the 22, and again most can, look at the new psp2 it plays uncharted drakes fortune reasonably well and its a mobile device, that used to be a ps3 gem. With new games that laptop will be slow though, but technically still probably about as good as a ps3
Click to expand...

Killzone 3 looks very impressive - its also a massive 43gig...You must say for the age of the PS3 and relatively weak GPU its still a very good console right?

I like the look of the PSP2...:)
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
gobshite said:
Killzone 3 looks very impressive - its also a massive 43gig...You must say for the age of the PS3 and relatively weak GPU its still a very good console right?

I like the look of the PSP2...:)
Click to expand...

The reason it looks good is because the games are custom tailored to the console, if you were a game company do you want to devote 2 years developing a game for one specific set of hardware, or a pc with almost unlimited combinations? That's what's holding back graphics in todays games, game developers want money, all the money is in console, so even if your computer can technologically smash a ps3 it might not look better in game because of poor coding or less optimization
 
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
mnewsham said:
The reason it looks good is because the games are custom tailored to the console, if you were a game company do you want to devote 2 years developing a game for one specific set of hardware, or a pc with almost unlimited combinations? That's what's holding back graphics in todays games, game developers want money, all the money is in console, so even if your computer can technologically smash a ps3 it might not look better in game because of poor coding or less optimization
Click to expand...

yes - i fully agree, the devs can't really alienate all the PC gamers that don't have top spec rigs. All PS3s carry the same hardware so the games can be easily optimized. I also think piracy is having a detrimental effect on the PC gaming industry...I believe Crysis 1 only shifted 88,000 copies in the USA....Can't really blame the devs for going console.

I also think that xbox360 is holding PC and PS3 back for multiplat titles as devs have to consider disk space (xbox and its DVD9) and hardware, the devs must feel that if the game runs on the lowest common denominator (xbox360) it'll run just fine on the rest....its all about the $$$$$ as you rightly pointed out.
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
Wouldn't quite say 360 was the LCD call of duty black ops WAS on the wii after all. And the 360 actually had a stronger gpu then the ps3 (the ps3 wins in pure cpu power), so they both have ups and downs.
 
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
mnewsham said:
Wouldn't quite say 360 was the LCD call of duty black ops WAS on the wii after all. And the 360 actually had a stronger gpu then the ps3 (the ps3 wins in pure cpu power), so they both have ups and downs.
Click to expand...

though a fully optimized PS3 exclusive will always look better than a XBOX360 exclusive right? (GT5, Uncharted2, Killzone 3 and the like)
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
gobshite said:
though a fully optimized PS3 exclusive will always look better than a XBOX360 exclusive right? (GT5, Uncharted2, Killzone 3 and the like)
Click to expand...

Not really, it depends what you mean by look better, all xbox and ps3 games look like
shit
to me because of lack of aa, choppy frame rates, poor draw distance, nasty looking shadows, etc. I can already see there is no point with this conversation, your obvious bias towards ps3 won't allow you to see anything but your exclusives.
 
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
mnewsham said:
Not really, it depends what you mean by look better, all xbox and ps3 games look like
shit
to me because of lack of aa, choppy frame rates, poor draw distance, nasty looking shadows, etc. I can already see there is no point with this conversation, your obvious bias towards ps3 won't allow you to see anything but your exclusives.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all biased. IMO its High spec gaming rigs followed by PS3 - then Xbox 360 and wii last.....I think thats just fair argument not being biased.
 
Dkcode

Dkcode

Senior member
May 1, 2005
995
0
0
Consoles have always had a 'dirty' picture.

You have interpolation when your games are rendered below the native resolution on your telly, you have a lack of texture filtering and AA and your also using a TV (in most cases) over a computer monitor - which will always be better at displaying computer graphics. Unless you have a seriously high end TV.

The early 360's did not even have a digital output to display.

I do agree with the opinion that PS3's graphics are better. I have always found the PS3 to be better at filtering. Compared to the Xbox everything looks cleaner.

I hate playing games on consoles so I have a preference for neither.
 
G

gobshite

Junior Member
Feb 15, 2011
8
0
0
I only asked if the above mentioned specs could perform as well as a PS3 - i honestly believe they can't because of the weak CPU...frame rates will always take a hit on that.

As for PS3 Vs Xbox 360 only an idiot would claim the xbox to have the better hardware...often better optimized games (most multi-plats are made for the xbox and ported to PC/PS3) but not better hardware on the whole.
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
rUmX said:
How is the 5870M actually? Is it that good? I heard it's slightly better than a desktop 5770. If true, that's helluva sweet chip!
Click to expand...

I own a 5770 in one of my desktops and it can push slightly more fps but I have found almost any game can play on the 5770 is playable at the same settings on the 5870m, it is very impressive, it runs VERY hot however, about 90c in game sometimes.
 
C

Campy

Senior member
Jun 25, 2010
785
171
116
It completely depends on what resolution you're going to play at on the laptop.
The PS3 outputs 576p resolution for games (720x576 i think). You can imagine how horrible that would look on a PC monitor but between the upscaling and the fact that it's on a TV screen they manage to make it look pretty good. Consoles aren't anywhere near PCs in terms of power, think of how old the PS3 actually is, and compared to PC hardware it wasnt even good when it came out
 
mnewsham

mnewsham

Lifer
Oct 2, 2010
14,539
428
136
Campy said:
It completely depends on what resolution you're going to play at on the laptop.
The PS3 outputs 576p resolution for games (720x576 i think). You can imagine how horrible that would look on a PC monitor but between the upscaling and the fact that it's on a TV screen they manage to make it look pretty good. Consoles aren't anywhere near PCs in terms of power, think of how old the PS3 actually is, and compared to PC hardware it wasnt even good when it came out
Click to expand...

Considering the ps3 was $800 when it first came out, $200 of that went to the bd player alone, a $1000 computer at the time would have been sufficient to destroy a ps3.
 
P

palladium

Senior member
Dec 24, 2007
539
2
81
Campy said:
It completely depends on what resolution you're going to play at on the laptop.
The PS3 outputs 576p resolution for games (720x576 i think). You can imagine how horrible that would look on a PC monitor but between the upscaling and the fact that it's on a TV screen they manage to make it look pretty good. Consoles aren't anywhere near PCs in terms of power, think of how old the PS3 actually is, and compared to PC hardware it wasnt even good when it came out
Click to expand...

Have to say the consoles have a pretty good upscaler.

This page here explains quite well how the 360 hardware compares to a modern PC (well the whole article is quite a good read IMO). I would imagine the PS3's Cell would be more powerful, not sure about the GPU but I think the lack of the 10MB eDRAM on the PS3 would make AA more costly.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-interview-metro-2033?page=4
 
veri745

veri745

Golden Member
Oct 11, 2007
1,163
4
81
mnewsham said:
I own a 5770 in one of my desktops and it can push slightly more fps but I have found almost any game can play on the 5770 is playable at the same settings on the 5870m, it is very impressive, it runs VERY hot however, about 90c in game sometimes.
Click to expand...

90c is really not that hot for a mobile graphics chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom