That doesn't sound too bad, especially for the price. I have a 9400m and it runs every game I throw at it, runs Fallout 3 in med-high settings. So a 9300 would likely be med. I'd go for it But what are the stats of the display? LED, refresh rate etc? That'd be the only thing to ruin that laptop.
Ya hours of searching through new egg might actually be worth it
I wanted a computer that do light gaming with graphics on medium (i already have a kick-A Desktop so i didnt need the 3,000$ dollar gaming laptops.) that i could take with me, and this one has a dedicated graphics card , which was a must
Unfortunately i won be able to buy it unless someone buys my old computer off of ebay i need the money ;____________;
Edited by falkon
Originally Posted by RickyG
Sure just like you can steal tic tacs from a 7-11. No one will catch you, except for God.
Originally Posted by falkon AMD's are good for their price, and the high quality AMD's are just as good as the high quality Intel.
Thats it to a T. Intel don't do budget lines, and they have recently been done for price fixing or something naughty I'm sure the impending storm will present the details.
oh heeeeere we go, knew this would come up sooner or later. AMD were on top through generally being brilliant and innovative for a while but got complaisant not to mention their production wasnt up to speed partly due to certain alleged illegal activity on the part of intel. its a shame they arent competing properly anymore because they're ideas department is better. they were the first to have an intergrated memory controller, simultaneous 32 and 64- bit processing, level 3 cache. they were also the first come up with the concept of a low power chip and to break 1Ghz.
oh also they did dual core first!
yes.. i know... i live in the past! i'm a bit of an AMD fanboy i'll be honest, for budget i'd go with them, but since i havnt bought a new PC since 2003 i dont have to face reality
Originally Posted by OldManClayton I was under the impression everyone thought AMD processors were bad compared to Intel processors. My apologies.
It depends. For a while AMD was way better than Intel (The AMD64 FX was beating the last version of the Pentium 4 in both performance and heat). AMD held it's lead for a while, got cocky and bought ATI. Then Intel regained their lead and hasn't lost it since the Core and Core2 processors.
But yeah, AMD has and is a good choice if you want to get a cheap processor comparable to Intel.
In all my computing tinkerage hobby history,(Ignoring theory here, I'm talking usage of the hardware.) AMD processors have stunk and Intel processors have been quite good. (And only once have I owned a new computer, this laptop. I'm talking older generation hardware here too.) I don't even think these lower prices are worth the AMD processors. It's not a good tradeoff. That's not to say AMD-equipped computers are bad though! They are good for Intel stand-ins. I just don't think the price point is really worth all that much when comparing them directly without a computer that comes with it.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by falkon
My apologies.
