Which gaming laptop is the best?

[ivikop]

Both are second hand and both have a similar price. EDIT: not worried about loading times, I prefer the better gaming performance
1. ASUS ROG CPU : Core i7-3630qm (2.4) GPU: Nvidia GTX 670MX 3gb DDR5 RAM: 8GB Corsair Vengeance HDD: 750gb + SSD 512gb http/www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Asus-G75VX-T4020H-Notebook.86730.0.html

2. MSI CPU: Core i7-4700mq (2.4) GPU: Nvidia GTX 765m 2gb DDR5 RAM: 8GB standard HDD: 750gb http/www.ldlc.com/fiche/PB00151296.html

3.MSI CPU: core i5-4200h dual core, nvidia gtx 850m ddr3 2gb, 8gb ram, 750hdd

Thank you in advance

 

[Bolin]

670mx seems to have better perfomance than both other cards, and the i7 shouldn't make any difference on most games, it also has more vram, same ram, bigger disk and an SSD

 

[ivikop]

670mx seems to have better perfomance than both other cards, and the i7 shouldn't make any difference on most games, it also has more vram, same ram, bigger disk and an SSD

The only thing confusing me is these 2 sites saying the 765m performs better than the 670mx http/gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-765M-vs-GeForce-GTX-670MX
http/www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1762&gid2=1212&compare=geforce-gtx-765m-vs-geforce-gtx-670mx
Meanwhile the benchmarks on this site prove the opposite
http/www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

 

[Bolin]

670mx seems to have better perfomance than both other cards, and the i7 shouldn't make any difference on most games, it also has more vram, same ram, bigger disk and an SSD

The only thing confusing me is these 2 sites saying the 765m performs better than the 670mx http/gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-765M-vs-GeForce-GTX-670MX
http/www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1762&gid2=1212&compare=geforce-gtx-765m-vs-geforce-gtx-670mx
Meanwhile the benchmarks on this site prove the opposite
http/www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Those are benchmarks and they are not real life situations, also, the 765m will sometimes beat the 670MX, and sometimes the opposite case will happen

I may say that I was mistaken, I just ctrl-f'd and didn't see 670MX SLI,
the 765 seems to perform better in games

The best way to look for what GPU performs better is by visiting http/www.notebookcheck.net/Computer-games-on-laptop-graphic-cards.13849.0.html and comparing real life situations with fps marks

the 850m should perform slightly better than the 765m too

 

[Cons29]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

 

[Bolin]

The third and second options shouldn't really have that much of a difference, judging by 850m > 765m ; i7 4710mq > i5 4200H

The first option should display a few fps less but should beat 2nd and 3rd if you're planning on using a 2nd monitor when plugged in, it also has an SSD

 

[Bolin]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

You're comparing 2 year mobile GPUs and recently released desktop GPUs, that's apples and oranges.
The 980m which is around the price of an 980 is only ~20% slower, and there shouldn't really be a difference after 60fps, would you care about seeing 100fps and 8Xsomething fps? I doubt so

what's your budget though? and where are you from?

 

[Cons29]

well, there is a difference if you have 120/144 hz. if you have 60hz, then the advantage of having >60 fps will show in future games as it will help to keep you with the 60fps range

 

[ivikop]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

You're comparing 2 year mobile GPUs and recently released desktop GPUs, that's apples and oranges.
The 980m which is around the price of an 980 is only ~20% slower, and there shouldn't really be a difference after 60fps, would you care about seeing 100fps and 8Xsomething fps? I doubt so

what's your budget though? and where are you from?

Hi thanks for answering. I'm a student living abroad and I found these laptops on a second hand selling site. The asus goes for 470euros and the msi goes for 500 asi it's a newer model. So gaming performance wise which would be a stronger combo, as I don't plan on plugging in another screen (both are 17.3), and I don't mind startup and turnoff time.

Also the sellers provided me the information that the asus goes 4 hours with battery whereas the msi goes 1h30-2h

 

[Bolin]

well, there is a difference if you have 120/144 hz. if you have 60hz, then the advantage of having >60 fps will show in future games as it will help to keep you with the 60fps range

well, that's true

 

[Bolin]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

You're comparing 2 year mobile GPUs and recently released desktop GPUs, that's apples and oranges.
The 980m which is around the price of an 980 is only ~20% slower, and there shouldn't really be a difference after 60fps, would you care about seeing 100fps and 8Xsomething fps? I doubt so

what's your budget though? and where are you from?

Hi thanks for answering. I'm a student living abroad and I found these laptops on a second hand selling site. The asus goes for 470euros and the msi goes for 500 asi it's a newer model. So gaming performance wise which would be a stronger combo, as I don't plan on plugging in another screen (both are 17.3), and I don't mind startup and turnoff time.

Also the sellers provided me the information that the asus goes 4 hours with battery whereas the msi goes 1h30-2h

The battery life is always important when it comes to laptops.

I'd say the difference between the 765m and 850m is very little, and the difference between i7 4700mq and i5 4200h isn't really a lot in most games but should still make a difference when compared to 765m vs 850m. Now, the asus has a better battery life, but if that's a killer factor or not depends on your needs.
I would also take into account the fact of "how old they are", the newer system is the third listed system as the 800m series was released this march and so it means it's only 7 months old at most (or 1 day as minimum). The other MSI is from april 2013 at most, which means it's 1 year and 6 months old at most (or 7 months the minimum). The Asus is 2 years and a half old (at most) and 1 year and 6 months old the youngest.

 

[ivikop]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

You're comparing 2 year mobile GPUs and recently released desktop GPUs, that's apples and oranges.
The 980m which is around the price of an 980 is only ~20% slower, and there shouldn't really be a difference after 60fps, would you care about seeing 100fps and 8Xsomething fps? I doubt so

what's your budget though? and where are you from?

Hi thanks for answering. I'm a student living abroad and I found these laptops on a second hand selling site. The asus goes for 470euros and the msi goes for 500 asi it's a newer model. So gaming performance wise which would be a stronger combo, as I don't plan on plugging in another screen (both are 17.3), and I don't mind startup and turnoff time.

Also the sellers provided me the information that the asus goes 4 hours with battery whereas the msi goes 1h30-2h

The battery life is always important when it comes to laptops.

I'd say the difference between the 765m and 850m is very little, and the difference between i7 4700mq and i5 4200h isn't really a lot in most games but should still make a difference when compared to 765m vs 850m. Now, the asus has a better battery life, but if that's a killer factor or not depends on your needs.
I would also take into account the fact of "how old they are", the newer system is the third listed system as the 800m series was released this march and so it means it's only 7 months old at most (or 1 day as minimum). The other MSI is from april 2013 at most, which means it's 1 year and 6 months old at most (or 7 months the minimum). The Asus is 2 years and a half old (at most) and 1 year and 6 months old the youngest.

The msi is 1 year old and the Asus is 10 months old. The msi's model is from 2013 whereas the Asus is from 2012


What about this model for the same price as the other 2?

AMD Quad-Core A10-5750M (2,50 GHz) 8GB RAM
15,6"
AMD Radeon XT R9-M290X 2GO
1TB

 

[ivikop]

bump

 

[Bolin]

the last link, yes it appears that the 765 is slower, but look at the score, it is so close it is not even a factor.

i just realize that... mobile gpu's are far from desktop counterparts, even a 7770 is a bit faster... well a 7770 is not that bad anyway. but i think an i7 is too much for the gpu.

You're comparing 2 year mobile GPUs and recently released desktop GPUs, that's apples and oranges.
The 980m which is around the price of an 980 is only ~20% slower, and there shouldn't really be a difference after 60fps, would you care about seeing 100fps and 8Xsomething fps? I doubt so

what's your budget though? and where are you from?

Hi thanks for answering. I'm a student living abroad and I found these laptops on a second hand selling site. The asus goes for 470euros and the msi goes for 500 asi it's a newer model. So gaming performance wise which would be a stronger combo, as I don't plan on plugging in another screen (both are 17.3), and I don't mind startup and turnoff time.

Also the sellers provided me the information that the asus goes 4 hours with battery whereas the msi goes 1h30-2h

The battery life is always important when it comes to laptops.

I'd say the difference between the 765m and 850m is very little, and the difference between i7 4700mq and i5 4200h isn't really a lot in most games but should still make a difference when compared to 765m vs 850m. Now, the asus has a better battery life, but if that's a killer factor or not depends on your needs.
I would also take into account the fact of "how old they are", the newer system is the third listed system as the 800m series was released this march and so it means it's only 7 months old at most (or 1 day as minimum). The other MSI is from april 2013 at most, which means it's 1 year and 6 months old at most (or 7 months the minimum). The Asus is 2 years and a half old (at most) and 1 year and 6 months old the youngest.

The msi is 1 year old and the Asus is 10 months old. The msi's model is from 2013 whereas the Asus is from 2012


What about this model for the same price as the other 2?

AMD Quad-Core A10-5750M (2,50 GHz) 8GB RAM
15,6"
AMD Radeon XT R9-M290X 2GO
1TB

About the first three models and their CPU+GPU combination I'd lean towards either 2nd or 3rd option as both should perform pretty good and their differences are negligible when gaming. The 2nd option would be better for CPU intensive tasks, so I'd choose that. The first option will have less loading times and should do better when plugged in to a 2nd monitor but these tasks aren't in your list.

tldr; 2nd will do equally as good as the 3rd system and it'll do better in CPU intensive tasks, therefore it's overally better and as you said, both are 10 or 12 months old.

"What about this model for the same price as the other 2?

AMD Quad-Core A10-5750M (2,50 GHz) 8GB RAM
15,6"
AMD Radeon XT R9-M290X 2GO
1TB"

250GB bigger disk. Is it 7200rpm or 5400rpm? just wondering
AMD Radeon XT R9-M290X 2GB? "XT" confuses me, I am not a fan of AMD's model numbering, but the r9 m290x should perform better than an 860m and slightly worse than an 870m, therefore it's obviously better than all of the named cards in option 1, 2 and 3.

Its CPU A10-5750M is a limiting factor though, just look at this:. http/www.anandtech.com/show/7111/amds-a105750m-review-part-2-the-msi-gx60-gaming-notebook/4
They benchmarked 7970m GPU + A10 5750M and 7970m vs i7 3720mq, and the poor CPU is clearly the limiting factor

 

[ivikop]

Wow yeah... The cpu is indeed a limiting factor, that's why I'm trying to avoid a full amd combo, just imagine that card paired with an i7-4700... Shame they made that model full MSi because apparently it's one of the best cards out there. So I guess it would be more worth it to get an i7 and a less powerful Nvidia gpu because altogether it would perform better. I think I will put the i5 GTX 850m out of the consideration as the HDD is 5400rp/min. The weak battery on the msi doesn't really concern me as I'm planning to use it as a desktop replacement, but I've heard that their cooling is not the best, having only one exhaust on the left side, compared to the asus which has on both sides. As far as overclocking is concerned, I've heard that 670MX is overclockable which makes it perform as a 770M. What do you think about that?

I think that the choice is narrowing between the Asus and the msi, as I'm not really a fan of AMD, as there is no point of having a top of the line graphics card if the processor can't support it by providing good performance. And again, I'm planning on using it as a desktop replacement, only moving it once in two months.
PS: Thanks for replying and guiding me through this difficult choice

 

[Ujjwal Krishna]

Razer Blade

 

[ivikop]

Razer Blade

Oh wow such a solution, you contributed so much in helping me. Please try not posting useless comments if you have nothing constructive to say.

 

[ivikop]

bump

 

[Saphorian]

Go with #2. Great CPU and GPU.

 

[Bolin]

Wow yeah... The cpu is indeed a limiting factor, that's why I'm trying to avoid a full amd combo, just imagine that card paired with an i7-4700... Shame they made that model full MSi because apparently it's one of the best cards out there. So I guess it would be more worth it to get an i7 and a less powerful Nvidia gpu because altogether it would perform better. I think I will put the i5 GTX 850m out of the consideration as the HDD is 5400rp/min. The weak battery on the msi doesn't really concern me as I'm planning to use it as a desktop replacement, but I've heard that their cooling is not the best, having only one exhaust on the left side, compared to the asus which has on both sides. As far as overclocking is concerned, I've heard that 670MX is overclockable which makes it perform as a 770M. What do you think about that?

I think that the choice is narrowing between the Asus and the msi, as I'm not really a fan of AMD, as there is no point of having a top of the line graphics card if the processor can't support it by providing good performance. And again, I'm planning on using it as a desktop replacement, only moving it once in two months.
PS: Thanks for replying and guiding me through this difficult choice

Razer Blade

Oh wow such a solution, you contributed so much in helping me. Please try not posting useless comments if you have nothing constructive to say.

" I think I will put the i5 GTX 850m out of the consideration as the HDD is 5400rp/min"
The frequency of the disk is not really that important when gaming, levels will load quicker but it won't (or it will rarely) help in getting more fps

"but I've heard that their cooling is not the best, having only one exhaust on the left side, compared to the asus which has on both sides."
That's true though

"As far as overclocking is concerned, I've heard that 670MX is overclockable which makes it perform as a 770M. What do you think about that?"
I haven't had any experiences with overclocking, therefore I would be useless to tell

"I think that the choice is narrowing between the Asus and the msi, as I'm not really a fan of AMD, as there is no point of having a top of the line graphics card if the processor can't support it by providing good performance. And again, I'm planning on using it as a desktop replacement, only moving it once in two months."

Okay, so... from the information we've gathered, it's narrowed down to i7 4700mq + 765m vs i7 3630mq + 670mx

i7 4700mq beats i7 3630mq. However, neither of them shouldn't be a botttleneck at all
765m vs 670mx
765 would clearly win by ~15% (stock). I don't know about overclocked values
The MSI wins specs-wise
The asus has an SSD and 1 more vRAM GB which are bonuses but they aren't deciding factors

Now if someone with more overclocking experience could help you I think you would be ready to select.
There's also the cooling, have you found any reviews specifying any of these systems heating to death/bluescreens/performing worse because of the heat limit?

I would personally take the 765 + i7 combination because it beats the 1st system by its stock values. The 850m + i5 4200h should also be pretty powerful as the GPU is even better and the CPU is quite powerful but it's dual core and even though not every game supports more than 2 cores it would certainly help IMO. The tough decision is 2nd vs 3rd if we ignore SSDs/disk speed (as we don't care about loading times), extra vRAM (as most games won't need more than 2GB and only 1 display is used), overclocking (this is subjective and hard to tell without some past experiences) and cooling (you can actually look at some reviews and I may not be of much use as I haven't owned any of these systems)