Dolphin, the GameCube and Wii emulator - Forums

But that's not the top of the line desktop CPU.

And the original argument was everyone who would buy a desktop now laptops exist is a fool.

---

Damnit, type-posted again.

(06-08-2012, 09:01 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]But now you're changing the question again. What exactly is the question we're supposed to be debating here? What premises are you using or what arguments are you making?

That with the right laptop (no matter the cost over a desktop) it can play games as well (generally) with a top tier desktop CPU.

......but CPUs rarely significantly game performance as long as they're not horribly out of date.

As NaturalViolence said, a top tier desktop is ridiculously powerful, so you can't keep up. A laptop will only go as far as a desktop with equivalent parts.

---

People
(pic of Y U NO guy)
Y U NO stop posting while I type?

(06-08-2012, 09:06 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]......but CPUs rarely significantly game performance as long as they're not horribly out of date.

or if your using an emulator

Before I piss anybody off for being off-topic, I've read 4-5 pages of this rant to somewhat understand what this is about. I believe it is about that no matter the cost a GAMING laptop can play heavy duty games just as well a desktop. If I am wrong please correct me.


Starscreen, you are right in that laptops can perform almost just as well as top-tier in computing tasks and games. But I also see NaturalViolence and AnyOldName3's points. If we were talking about cost they would be right about this. But the most highpowered laptop can compete with desktops. Now for the common sense part. A laptop of that power 1. Would cost alot more than my salary offers me, or the common person, to spend right now. 2. would probably have low to decent battery life at best. And 3. Even if the battery was good what I've learned from my laptop experiences is no matter how good of care you take of your laptop, the battery will get worse overtime, and it only takes one drop to end it.

But I will say that gaming laptops can only compete with desktops right now because there is no game with any higher requirements or more beautiful graphics made yet for the top-tier desktops to show off their superiority. An ati radeon 7970m is about equal to a 7870(note these numbers may be wrong but you can probably guess which 2 I'm referring too.) but since desktops can crossfire and have multi-gpu support there is honestly no way a laptop will ever be able to compete with the graphics of a desktop. Cpu wise, it is the same battle, but it is a lot closer than the gpu war. I'm still not saying that laptops can't compete with desktops.... Just that it is highly unconventional and only someone who had enough money and was on the go alot should by a laptop of that category because it is better in that situation. But since we aren't talking about money or the common sense factor, Starscreen you are right. If I'm about to get flamed go easy.

I think I've finally stopped caring. Everything I've been saying over the last 8 or so pages has been me repeating the things I said in the first few pages.

You'll find a semi-detailed list of the pros and cons of laptops vs. desktops somewhere in the first few pages as well as the potential hardware advantages, basic cost analysis, and a list of things that a desktop can do better and why. The list of disadvantages for gaming laptops in particular is much longer than just bad battery life and high cost. I'm not going to bother repeating myself anymore at this point.

One thing I forgot to mention is a $3,000 will be a lot more future proof than a $3,000 laptop. A multi-GPU setup ensures that the system is ready for future titles not just current titles. It's also possible to put multiple xeon cpus in a desktop which is something I forgot to mention.

Starscreams argument is only true if the following four additional conditions are made:
1. Only gaming is to be considered, no other specialized software
2. Cost is not factored in at all
3. Only "reasonable/practical" tasks count (in other words common), things like running at 1440p, using SSAA, etc. don't count
4. Only current titles count

If and only if you take those four conditions into account the statement becomes true (that high end laptops can play games just as well as desktops). But I personally think those conditions are a bit unfair for various reasons listed throughout this thread that I won't bother repeating.

This thread is one giant mess.

Yes it is. That's what happens when the subject of an argument is changed when someone has already lost it, just so they can hang on to a thread of hope and pride, when it would be more sensible to admit mistakes (in this case mainly on the laptop fans' side) so that people can buy the best computer for their situation that they can afford.

Shonumi Wrote:... can of worms ...

Called it, on the first page. And it turned out to be just as interesting as I thought.