|
| Thread: Technical Questions about Processor Comparisons |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted February 27, 2010 03:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
For QUAD cores you have the problem that you need the software to be able to "play along", which means, it must be written with multi core architectures in mind. Moreover, Shades is right - you do NOT, under NO circumstances - want to have a notebook with TURBO booster, for reasons of longevity.
You forgot that the OS does "play along" so with a quad core you could run two dual-threaded applications at the same time, even if the apps don't use more than two threads.
Quote:
The Quad Core problem is here as well. You do NOT have 8.0 Ghz, and ESPECIALLY if you want to play HoMM 5, you MUST have an eye on the performance of the single processor. Moreover, I always miss the BRAND name of the Book which is important as well: quality, warranty, motherboard, updates, service....
I think you are going at this the wrong way. I had basically the same problem last year (I wanted to have a notebook that will allow me to play HoMM 5, but newer games as well). Moreover, you CAN use older software without problems on Win7/64, most of them anyway, and while the newer versions are updated to run well under multi-core processors, the older ones are not.
Lastly, nothing has changed in terms of RAM - the more RAM you have, the better it is, especially if you consider the border there is: THREE (3) GB for 32bit, and 64bit for everything else.
The border for 32-bit Windows XP is 4GB, minus the video RAM size. Windows Server 2003 has PAE (page-address extension) which allows up to 64GB on 32-bit, but an application can only use 3GB maximum. I suppose Vista and 7 have PAE as well, though I'm not sure. (Linux has it too)
However that does mean you can use multiple applications with 3GB each (up to 64GB), but only if it supports PAE, XP does not, unfortunately.
Quad core runs multiple stuff at the same time, not one stuff faster. It can run 4 threads at the same time, but if an application uses only 1 thread, it's not going to run faster if you have a quad, octa, or million core machine. 
However it does mean you can run 4 such applications at the same time... normal "multitasking" simply switches from app to app every 10ms or so, it's not exactly "at the same time", only multiple cores do that.
Quote:
2) RAM. It makes no sense to go for the 64bit OS (some programs do not run on 64 bit or have difficulties) (the mail program I prefer, for example, isn't (yet) available for 64bit OS); however, this is a TEMPORARY problem only, because, inevitably, with RAM ever increasing, the 64bit OS will be standard within the next 2 years or so), just for ONE additional Gigabite of RAM. Note further that DDR3 RAM is faster (especially for graphics) than DDR2 RAM, and if you want to use the additional graphics memory it makes sense to get DDR3 RAM, and more than 4 as well. 6 would be better.
RAM for graphics??? Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
Video RAM is on the video card, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the main memory RAM. Video RAM can come up to DDR5 or more (I'm not sure on laptops though).
DDR3 is pretty pointless for games, given today's processors with huge caches... and the fact that games are much more graphics (i.e video card) intensive than RAM intensive.
Quote:
5) Blue Ray; Blue Ray means DVD RW/ Blue Ray read only (Blue Ray RW will be a bit expensive, yet, I'd think). This really depends on whether you want to watch Blue Ray discs on your Notebook, but in that case you need a high quality DISPLAY as well, otherwise blue ray makes no sense (your first rig had blue ray). KEEP THAT IN MIND, when going for blue ray or not.
You know that you can hook up the laptop to a monitor or TV probably.
Quote:
6) Brand; this is important: there are cheaper manufacturers out there (I suppose you are from the US). For example, I would NOT recommend an ACER notebook; they come pretty cheap, at least where I live, so you'll get good performance offers, but the quality is bad. If you plan on using the book a lot, don't buy an ACER, because chances are you will curse the thing.
I had the opposite experience: Acer being reliable, Toshiba having poor quality so take that with a grain of salt.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 03:41 PM |
|
|
I've seen some ACERs down in the "graveyard", but not that many. However, there seems to be tonnes of HPs! Most of them quite new actually (as in 3 years and younger).
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 04:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quad core runs multiple stuff at the same time, not one stuff faster. It can run 4 threads at the same time, but if an application uses only 1 thread, it's not going to run faster if you have a quad, octa, or million core machine.
Which is the only pertinent information - the one I brought across as well, mind you: Jinxer wants to play HoMM5, which wasn't optimzed for Dual Core, not to mention quad core, so the SINGLE processor has to be able to run the game. A 1.6 will have a problem with that, no matter how many there are.
Quote:
(I'm not sure on laptops though).
Well, that's unfortunate, because JInxer wants to buy one. Which means, before you start giving advice you may want to inform yourself about the actual issue someone wants advice for. You may learn something about RAM and video cards as well, for example, what this here means:
Quote:
ATI Radeon 4650, up to 2815 MB memory, 1024 MB dedicated
Or why I talk about DDR3 RAM.
Quote:
You know that you can hook up the laptop to a monitor or TV probably.
True. You might just buy a Blue-Ray player in that case. Because usually a Notebook is supposed to work with the screen it comes with. So if you have to link it to a TV, because the display isn't ok for BR, you may save the money for the Book, buy it without BR and buy an external player for your TV.
Quote:
I had the opposite experience: Acer being reliable, Toshiba having poor quality so take that with a grain of salt.
You can buy a low-spec notebook from acer, but not a high-spec one. High-spec machines develop more heat and so on and the stress on parts is higher. Never go for a high-end ACER.
For HP, things are a bit different. They had a couple of series that were shoddy - same bad quality than ACER, actually. I think, HP has overcome that problem.
Toshiba went that same way when they started the "cheap" AMD lines.
However, everyone must made their own choice here. If you want to get the picture about how the public rates stuff, go to Ebay and look at the going rates for USED notebooks (which tells a lot about the trust people have into reliability of products).
____________
"Nobody dies a virgin ... Life f*cks us all." - Kurt Cobain
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 05:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Which is the only pertinent information - the one I brought across as well, mind you: Jinxer wants to play HoMM5, which wasn't optimzed for Dual Core, not to mention quad core, so the SINGLE processor has to be able to run the game. A 1.6 will have a problem with that, no matter how many there are.
Probably only with the AI, I don't see much CPU-intensive stuff in HOMM otherwise... or maybe I simply didn't play it for too long 
Quote:
Well, that's unfortunate, because JInxer wants to buy one. Which means, before you start giving advice you may want to inform yourself about the actual issue someone wants advice for. You may learn something about RAM and video cards as well, for example, what this here means:
Quote:
ATI Radeon 4650, up to 2815 MB memory, 1024 MB dedicated
Or why I talk about DDR3 RAM.
That's VRAM you're talking about, I thought you were talking about DDR3 main memory RAM, not video card's RAM.
And I only said "not sure about laptops" in the sense, I don't know if laptops can have DDR5 on their graphics cards.
Quote:
True. You might just buy a Blue-Ray player in that case. Because usually a Notebook is supposed to work with the screen it comes with. So if you have to link it to a TV, because the display isn't ok for BR, you may save the money for the Book, buy it without BR and buy an external player for your TV.
Well the thing is, and of course it's my opinion, watching movies on the laptop is a frustrating experience.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 05:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't see much CPU-intensive stuff in HOMM otherwise... or maybe I simply didn't play it for too long
Well, Death, fortunately this is no guessing game, because the game tells of minimum and advisable config. That's 1.5 Ghz minimum for TotE, and a DualCore E6400 as advisable. A dualcore E6400 has 2x2,13 Ghz (iT's a desktop processor as well.
Add to that the XXL and XXXL formats TotE allows and you'll note that a 4x1.6 simply doesn't cut it.
Quote:
Quote:
Well, that's unfortunate, because JInxer wants to buy one. Which means, before you start giving advice you may want to inform yourself about the actual issue someone wants advice for. You may learn something about RAM and video cards as well, for example, what this here means:
Quote:
ATI Radeon 4650, up to 2815 MB memory, 1024 MB dedicated
Or why I talk about DDR3 RAM.
That's VRAM you're talking about, I thought you were talking about DDR3 main memory RAM, not video card's RAM.
And I only said "not sure about laptops" in the sense, I don't know if laptops can have DDR5 on their graphics cards.
Umm, Death, in all friendship, you should maybe have a deeper look into notebook technology before you start anything here.
Quote:
Quote:
True. You might just buy a Blue-Ray player in that case. Because usually a Notebook is supposed to work with the screen it comes with. So if you have to link it to a TV, because the display isn't ok for BR, you may save the money for the Book, buy it without BR and buy an external player for your TV.
Well the thing is, and of course it's my opinion, watching movies on the laptop is a frustrating experience.
Depends. If you've ever watched a movie in a plane these days (and I don't mean a Jumbo), that's what's frustrating defines, especially since the movie may just suck. Watching the same or another movie on a good book is infintely better. As are other situations where you want one.
So it depends on whether you travel a lot. If you don't travel, we agree here.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 06:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Umm, Death, in all friendship, you should maybe have a deeper look into notebook technology before you start anything here.
That's not an answer. I asked simply, were you talking about main memory RAM or video RAM...
really not that hard to answer. I don't know what "notebook technology" has to do with it really.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 08:20 PM |
|
|
|
Christ, Death, why don't you, for a change, stop talking about stuff you've absolutely no idea about? Come back as soon as you know why an ATI Radeon 4650 Radeon Mobility graphics adapter has 1024 MB dedicated memrory and can have up to 2815 MB memory - or, in other words, what the difference between dedicated and shared memory is.
|
|
Jinxer
Legendary Hero
*****
|
|
posted February 27, 2010 08:30 PM |
|
Edited by Jinxer at 22:45, 27 Feb 2010.
|
Jolly... you are making ALOT of sense.. and I think you have convinced me to stick with Duo Core and forget the Quad Core.
HOWEVER... the configuration I recently found and mentioned above.. was Quad Core 2.0 Ghz ... so even if I dont use all 4 processors.. I would still be running at 2.0Ghz and most of the other configurations I have found range from 2.2 Ghz.. so still a bit confused on weather it would be better to just get the Quadcore or Try to find a higher Duo Core.. seems all the Laptops I find that have 2.5 Ghz or higher either have the AMD processor OR they have an Nvidia card.
Also... The Brand is HP
I tried a Dell on my last one and not a fan.
OK.. this is starting to P*ss me off.. all these numbers and comparisons are driving me bonkers... and these benchmark graphs dont make sense.
For example.. the AMD Turion II Ultra Dual-Core Mobile 620 (2.4 Ghz) is ranked as 8th on this chart.. and has an average CPU speed of 2393 mhz where as another one I have been looking at is Intel Duo 2 Core P7550 (2.26 Ghz) which is ranked Higher on the list at 4th... with an average CPU speed of 1873 Mhz...
Now how can it have lower Ghz and lower in mhz clock speed but be ranked higher on over all performace?
Can someone dumb this down for me. Thanks.
____________
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 03:57 AM |
|
Edited by william at 03:59, 28 Feb 2010.
|
Quote:
in other words, what the difference between dedicated and shared memory is.
Isn't dedicated like if you have 1 GB of Video RAM then it will use that all, but if it's shared, then it will depend on the amount of RAM you have? So if you have 4 GB of RAM, then it might use some of that for the Video Card?
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 09:52 AM |
|
|
Well, benchmarks rate the overall performance of the CPU, not only the clock rate - if clock rate was the only decisive thing, you wouldn't need any benchmarks at all.
Of course there are different benchmark "models", which is, but in general benchmarks try to measure how a given CPU is actually performing in combination with a given hardware for given softwares. More complesx benchmark models combine different hardware and software configurations to reach the final benchmark.
Passmark has a pretty complete list of all processors, and with them the two processors you named have both the same benchmark value of 1643, ranking #228 and 227 respectively.
The P 8700 had 1800 and rank 194 on that list.
MANY benchmark tests see the AMD processors way behind, though.
In general, how well a notebook performs depends not only on the parts, but on how well the components fit with each other. That's why it makes not much sense, for example, to have an average or mid-price machine and pump it up with a big cpu (only); the cpu will underperform.
The real benchmarks are those of the whole machines. There are notebook tests as well, so you should have a look THERE, and look at how machines with specifications work you would go for. That may probably give you a better impression.
Oh, and for the video cards, yes, william. Dedicated Ram is the Video Ram the card comes equipped with (and there are cards that have NONE), while shared is, what the card (or accelerator) can use from the general RAM. With Notebooks we are currently at DDR3 Ram, which is 20% faster than DDR2 RAM when it comes to graphic adapters to access them - which means, that machines with little dedicated memory and high shared memory will profit a lot from the current DDR3 RAM.
|
|
Jinxer
Legendary Hero
*****
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 06:35 PM |
|
Edited by Jinxer at 19:01, 28 Feb 2010.
|
So if I was to provide you with an example of one of my front line contenders.. could you do the complete notebook check comparison and tell me how it would perform. The annoying part is that there always seems to be some sacrifice of something if it has most of what I want..
For example during all my investigation there are some key points that many claim are important features..
Memory should be 6GB or higher and at DDR3
HardDrive should be 7200rpm Speed
Dual Core Processor 2.4 Ghz or Higher
Now with this in mind, the below example proves how difficult of time I am having finding exactly what I want. It has my 6GB memory, but it is only DDR2... should that be a deal breaker?
And at the same time the Harddrive is only 5400rpm... should that be a deal breaker?
It has 2.53 Ghz processor which is great, but its AMD, and I still havent heard if Intel is better or if I would never notice the difference?
So I guess part of what I am wanting to hear is.. which of these components are none negotiable.. since its likely I wont get ALL of what I want.. which would be better to sacrifice...
another example there is one I am looking at that has 8GB Ram and 1 TB Hardrive.. but the Processor is only 2.2Ghz P7550 Intel processor... which is lower then the P8700 recommended. And lower in GHZ then recommended... sigh
----------------------------------------------------------------
#1
VISION Technology Ultimate from AMD and AMD Turion II Ultra Dual Core Mobile processor M620
2.50 GHz, Up to 3.6 GT/s, 2 MB L2 Cache
6 GB MB DDR2 System Memory
Enough memory to handle today's most memory-hungry applications
640 GB 5400RPM hard drive
Store your music, videos, photos and documents with plenty of space to spare
DVD LightScribe drive with SuperMulti DVD+R/RW And BlueRay drive with double layer support
Play and create CDs and DVDs with this DVD/CD burner drive
Wired Ethernet; Wireless WiFi
Connect to a broadband modem with 10/100/1000 Gigabit Ethernet; connect wirelessly to a WiFi network or hotspot with built-in 802.11a/b/g/n WLAN; High speed 56k modem
17.3 Diagonal HD+ LED HP BrightView Widescreen display
1600x900 resolution; ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650 Graphics with 2815 MB Display Cache Memory
--------------------------------------------------------------------
#2
Intel Core 2 Duo processor P7550 (2.26GHz/3MB L2 Cache/1066MHz FSB)
8GB DDR2 SDRAM
1TB (1000GB) 5400rpm SATA Dual Hard Drive (2x500GB)
Lightscribe Super Multi 8X DVD+-RW w/Double Layer
17.3" WXGA BrightView Wide-Screen Infinity LCD- (1600x900)
1GB Dedicated ATI Radeon HD4650 Video Graphic
802.11AGN WLAN
Built-in Camera/Microphone
Vista Home Premium (64 bit)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
#3
HP Pavilion DV7T 17.3" NOTEBOOK PC (INTEL CORE 2 DUO P8700 2.53GHz/4GB RAM/500GB 7200rpm DUAL HDD/17.3" WXGA HIGH-DEFINITION 1600x900 LCD/Lightscribe SuperMulti DVD+/-R/RW DL/WIRELESS AGN/BLUETOOTH/BUILT-IN CAMERA-MIC/1GB ATI Radeon HD4650/HDMI & e-SATA PORTs/VISTA HOME PREMIUM 64bit)
This one has the better P8700 processor and the 7200Rpm Hardrive but only 4gig memory... And since it has 64bit OS I have been told I would need 6 or more????
------------------------------------------------------------------
ALSO thought I would add what my CURRENT laptop configuration is..
Intel Core 2 T7200 2.0 Ghz
2 GB Ram
Nvidia Geforce Go 7900 ( 256 Dedicated video mem)
160 Gig HD
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 07:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Christ, Death, why don't you, for a change, stop talking about stuff you've absolutely no idea about? Come back as soon as you know why an ATI Radeon 4650 Radeon Mobility graphics adapter has 1024 MB dedicated memrory and can have up to 2815 MB memory - or, in other words, what the difference between dedicated and shared memory is.
Of course of course, now you switch arguments...
yeah I suppose Heroes 5 doesn't use a quad core at all but uses more than 1GB of video memory ROFLMAO. So yeah, better get the fastest main RAM possible, after all, for a Dual Core laptop you'll surely use more than 1GB of video RAM. Great advice.
Get a grip on your consistency dude.
Shared memory is slow btw.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Towerlord
Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 07:21 PM |
|
|
It's better to get a desktop, instead of a laptop that is to heavy and not going to move probably... but about the laptop processors I believe this is how it stands (roughly) :
An AMD Processor @ 2.4-2.53 Ghz is almost as good as an Intel Core 2 @ 1.8-2 Ghz depending on application
Buy whichever suits you best, you won't feel the processor difference 99% of the times. Basically buy the AMD as long as it is significantly cheaper than the other ones(or has much better configuration), otherwise go with Intel.
Hope this helps and concludes your saga of laptop search
LE: if you have the opportunity of getting a quad @ 2 Ghz instead of a dual core @ 2.5 , do it without thinking again...
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 07:28 PM |
|
|
I'm not sure if AMD is better than Intel at all. 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 08:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
ALSO thought I would add what my CURRENT laptop configuration is..
Intel Core 2 T7200 2.0 Ghz
2 GB Ram
Nvidia Geforce Go 7900 ( 256 Dedicated video mem)
160 Gig HD
To tell the truth, if that's your current machine, I wouldn't go for any of the candidates - the difference is too small.
A small correction - you can have as much memory as you want: 4 GB is okay; I just meant, if you go for more than 3GB you need the 64bigt OS - just for 1 GB more isn't worth the while.
|
|
Jinxer
Legendary Hero
*****
|
|
posted February 28, 2010 10:08 PM |
|
Edited by Jinxer at 03:01, 01 Mar 2010.
|
Quote:
Quote:
ALSO thought I would add what my CURRENT laptop configuration is..
Intel Core 2 T7200 2.0 Ghz
2 GB Ram
Nvidia Geforce Go 7900 ( 256 Dedicated video mem)
160 Gig HD
To tell the truth, if that's your current machine, I wouldn't go for any of the candidates - the difference is too small.
A small correction - you can have as much memory as you want: 4 GB is okay; I just meant, if you go for more than 3GB you need the 64bigt OS - just for 1 GB more isn't worth the while.
Hmm How is that to small? I would increase the Processor by 125 Ranking places... My Ram would atleast double... My Video dedicated Memory would QUADRUPLE with a better card also.. and my harddrive would QUADRUPLE atleast.
To be honest I am really stuck on the Processor at this point... If what TowerLord says is true that AMD 2.5 Ghz is comparible to Intel 2.0 Ghz ( and hopefully he has some basis for that opinion, and not just his personal taste) then seems like I would be better to go with the Intel 2.26 processor. And from what I haven been told during these debates, that 2 of my 4 Quad Core processors would rarely kick in anyways. BUT if we are only talking about 2.0Ghz vs. 2.26 Ghz anyways.. maybe would be wise to just have the Quads incase they ever did kick in?
I wish there was someone that specialized in this that I could call and get all the answers I wanted lol..
Just when I think I have my mind made up.. another angle of opinions emerge that cast doubt. Sure 2.53 Ghz sounds better then 2.26Ghz for sure.. but they are side by side on the ranking bar. But if they are side by side then that would suggest they are Equal.. so if the other specs of the AMD machine are favorible and the AMD processor is equal to the other Intel processor.. then why not?
Please feel free to keep the debate going here.. more fact less opinion if you can provide it.
OKAY I THINK I HAVE NARROWED IT TO THESE 2 Laptop options...
----------------------------------------------------------------
#1
AMD Turion II Ultra Dual Core Mobile processor M620
2.50 GHz, Up to 3.6 GT/s, 2 MB L2 Cache
6 GB MB DDR2 System Memory
640 GB 5400RPM hard drive
DVD LightScribe drive with SuperMulti DVD+R/RW And BlueRay drive with double layer support
Wired Ethernet; Wireless WiFi
Connect to a broadband modem with 10/100/1000 Gigabit Ethernet; connect wirelessly to a WiFi network or hotspot with built-in 802.11a/b/g/n WLAN; High speed 56k modem
17.3 Diagonal HD+ LED HP BrightView Widescreen display
1600x900 resolution; ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4650 Graphics with 2815 MB Display Cache Memory
--------------------------------------------------------------------
#2
Intel Core 2 Duo processor P7550 (2.26GHz/3MB L2 Cache/1066MHz FSB)
8GB DDR2 SDRAM
1TB (1000GB) 5400rpm SATA Dual Hard Drive (2x500GB)
Lightscribe Super Multi 8X DVD+-RW w/Double Layer
17.3" WXGA BrightView Wide-Screen Infinity LCD- (1600x900)
1GB Dedicated ATI Radeon HD4650 Video Graphic
802.11AGN WLAN
Built-in Camera/Microphone
Vista Home Premium (64 bit)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I highlighted the 2 Processors.. they are both rated 227 and 228 respectivly side by side on the benchmark scale.. But taking into account all the other specs of the laptops.. can I get votes on which one would be better to take all things considered! Thanks again for all everyones effort.
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 01, 2010 12:26 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Never go for a high-end ACER.
I have a high-end ACER. Should I be worried?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
natalka
Supreme Hero
Bad-mannered
|
|
posted March 01, 2010 12:31 AM |
|
|
|
Jinxer
Legendary Hero
*****
|
|
posted March 01, 2010 01:05 AM |
|
|
Quote:
get the Intel !
Was hoping for a little bit more detail on your stated opinion.. as in why?
I just talked to an agent at Best Buys GeekSquad just to get his opinion... and he tells me that AMD chips out perform intel over all in gaming.. but that they do run a bit hotter as a result.
Maybe it would be safer to just go with Intel.. but seeing 2.53 Ghz vs. 2.26 Ghz makes it seem like I would be buying a lessor laptop lol.. just find it hard for my brain to accept that both them chips will perform the same... but at the same time the Geek Squad guy said that the Ghz numbers really mean nothing that shouldnt worry about those numbers.
Anyways.. I guess maybe I will maybe just take the one that has More Hardrive and more Memory. That one doesnt have Blueray player.. But I dont own any bluerays so guess wont miss much.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 01, 2010 07:53 AM |
|
|
I wouldn't buy any of them.
With the AMD I miss the OS. The other has Vista, which sucks - you need a Win7 upgrade which will cost extra money. They both have DDR2 RAM, and the hard discs are 5400s only.
How much money are you prepared to invest?
|
| |
|
|
