He is lost again
New member
My son is going to get him a new laptop to play 7 days to die with me any suggestions?
Greetings,My son is going to get him a new laptop to play 7 days to die with me any suggestions?
i7-9900? I'd like to see one of those. But even a 10th gen i7-10700 is only 12% faster than its mobile counterpart the i7-10750H.An i7-9900 in a desktop is 63% faster than an i7-9900 in a laptop.
Partially agree on that statement as laptops with hot stones tend to throttle alot. That is where you can get up to 60%+ losses in the long run. Just make your laptop work under heavy load for like 15 minutes, then when temps go to 100C it will start dropping frequency and viola, you can only use like 30-40% of the perfect i9-9900... Situation should be a bit better with gaming oriented 17" laptops like the mentioned above Predator Helios, or if it bares one of recent AMD stones which tend to be cooler due to their design, also have to admit that you do not need that 32-core monster to play games as most of them do not use more than 4 cores of yours and single threaded performance is way more valuable. I would stick to something more "moderate" like and i5-10XXX or a Ryzen 5 5XXX with something like 4 physical cores, that would also lower down the average TDP of the stone. For GPU could just recommend grab something with 2070-2080 non MAXQ variations as there are no 30XX series for the laptops so far. And in general - yes would prefer a desktop over a laptop for gamin, just put it in a convenient small factor case with enough fans or a watterblock and let it heat the room on cold winter nights)))i7-9900? I'd like to see one of those. But even a 10th gen i7-10700 is only 12% faster than its mobile counterpart the i7-10750H.
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-10700-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10750H/4077vsm1053158
It's a hit, but "huge"? 63% faster? Citation needed.
hehee I always forget it's i9's for their top tier now. They were real-world tests, and not the raw benchmarks. Usually the difference is only 20-30%, and if you count raw numbers, the i9-9000 series only has a deviation of about 16%. Once you take it out of the lab though, things are a lot different. I'll have to find the site that ran the tests again. Notebook Reviews, or something like that.i7-9900? I'd like to see one of those. But even a 10th gen i7-10700 is only 12% faster than its mobile counterpart the i7-10750H.
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-10700-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10750H/4077vsm1053158
It's a hit, but "huge"? 63% faster? Citation needed.
It's always based on core clock speed. For a laptop I wouldn't recommend anything below 3.4GHz for the base core speed because once it heats up, that speed multiplier will be reduced. Turbo clock speeds are only going to be active for a few seconds when the system is under a heavy load. Then they will drop down to normal. Most of Intel's lineup with laptop chips are limited to only achieving full turbo on a single core, while the rest of the cores are throttled down. 3rd Gen AMD is going a lot better in the laptop playfield, but you don't find a lot of them with good GPU matchups for gaming.I have an Alienware 17 R4 and I haven't found a game yet that I can't play. I was looking at one machine that has a base CPU speed at about 2.+ GHZ but a Turbo speed of about 5.+ GHZ. I don't remember the exact numbers. When you look at the CPU requirement for a game are they talking about the base CPU speed or the Turbo speed?
I think you and @Vampirenostra have made a great point about heat-related throttling. I think that is a system concern, not so much a CPU concern, but it is a fair point since the mobile CPUs are, by definition, going to be in laptops which are less efficient at heat dissipation. I retract my [citation needed]. I guess I would say, though, that with reasonable consideration of the OPs requirements and expectations, a laptop doesn't need to equate to a "huge" hit on performance. There is a premium to pay, of course, for the portability. Dollar-for-dollar, a custom-built will always outperform a laptop, unless like AlphaOmega up there you find some amazing deal that will make all of us envious.It's always based on core clock speed. For a laptop I wouldn't recommend anything below 3.4GHz for the base core speed because once it heats up, that speed multiplier will be reduced.
unless like AlphaOmega up there you find some amazing deal that will make all of us envious.
Can confirm. Having a Lenovo T490 (i7-8565U) for business and if i start compiling something, it starts with 4,2Ghz on all cores but drops to ~2,4Ghz within 3 minutes, remainig at barely 50% of the initial performance. And while it does that, i wouldn't call it "silent"...Just make your laptop work under heavy load for like 15 minutes, then when temps go to 100C it will start dropping frequency and viola, you can only use like 30-40% of the perfect i9-9900...
Same for me with my MacBook Pro, instant boost to 4,xxx Ghz, but when I building my projects it starts to thowup and throttle to 2,4-2,8 Ghz with temps at 100-101C... What a shame for i7-8xxx... I even thought of disassembling my Mac and replacing cooling with an external watterblock)))Can confirm. Having a Lenovo T490 (i7-8565U) for business and if i start compiling something, it starts with 4,2Ghz on all cores but drops to ~2,4Ghz within 3 minutes, remainig at barely 50% of the initial performance. And while it does that, i wouldn't call it "silent"...
A dedicated powerfull gpu as another heatsource nearby, will not make it better.
And even if userbenchmark says my desktop ryzen 2700x is only 27% faster, in practice, my 2700x is at least tripple as fast as the mobile cpu.
Agreed. Alienware is just an overpriced HP laptop. You can often find an HP direct equivalent for about a third of the price, and any other brand equivalent for almost half. Since HP purchased Alienware, it has been absolute trash. Even their full desktop builds have extraordinarily underwhelming internals. Like PSU's that barely put out enough juice to start up the machine, much less support actual gaming.I would stay away from Alienware and tbh you'll do a lot better with a laptop that has a Ryzen in it; they run stronger while using less electric (i.e. less heat) than Intel and cost less.
Yeah, Alienware is literally a brand name + cool cases. I built a computer for a friend a few years ago because he was about to buy an Alienware, I built it for 700~ when the Alienware was like 1600~ and I put an actual PSU in there that wasn't created on the side of a road in a sweatshop or something that had a brand name "power supply" lol.Agreed. Alienware is just an overpriced HP laptop. You can often find an HP direct equivalent for about a third of the price, and any other brand equivalent for almost half. Since HP purchased Alienware, it has been absolute trash. Even their full desktop builds have extraordinarily underwhelming internals. Like PSU's that barely put out enough juice to start up the machine, much less support actual gaming.
I've had good luck with Acer systems, though I'll mostly likely be sticking to Asus in the future.