hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 155

Thread: First laptop thread of the year?

  1. #121
    Movember '11 Ginger Excellence Movember 2011Movember 2012 sarabando's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Basingstoke England
    Posts
    2,603
    trying to find a smaller laptop for my sister to take traveling.
    She will be using it for photoshop and general computer tomfoolery but also wants to play WoW on it. Any ideas? rather nothing too expensive so its not too much of a ball ache if stolen/lost.

  2. #122

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    10,909
    Quote Originally Posted by sarabando View Post
    trying to find a smaller laptop for my sister to take traveling.
    She will be using it for photoshop and general computer tomfoolery but also wants to play WoW on it. Any ideas? rather nothing too expensive so its not too much of a ball ache if stolen/lost.
    With modern wow that might be dicey as you sort of need at least something basic to run it on.

    Maybe one of the integrated amd based chips?

  3. #123
    walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Fancomicidolkostümier- ungsspielgruppenzusammenkunft
    Posts
    6,222
    Maybe something like this?
    ww.lenovo.com/gb/en/laptops/thinkpad/edge-series/ThinkPad-E485/p/20KUCTO1WWENGB0
      Spoiler:
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    But islamism IS a product of class warfare. Rich white countries come into developing brown dictatorships, wreck the leadership, infrastructure and economy and then act all surprised that religious fanaticism is on the rise.
    Also:
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    walrus isnt a bad poster.
    Quote Originally Posted by cullnean View Post
    also i like walrus.
    Quote Originally Posted by AmaNutin View Post
    Yer a hoot

  4. #124
    Ruri's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Exclamation, USA
    Posts
    1,967
    Dell's G3 series with 1050's are pretty reasonable, they start at $730 if that's close enough to "cheap" for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot
    Do you even lift? Do you even post.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Ass ass ass.

  5. #125
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London (Silphe ingame)
    Posts
    3,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Anyone bought the 2018 mbp? Looking to upgrade my 2012 retina.
    I have the late 2013 retina pro and I'm not keen on upgrading to any of the recent piles of crap. I've used a new Pro and the keyboard is retarded to say the least, albeit it feels overall good af. However, technically, it's just a glorified text machine, because no, thermally is probably impossible to do anything since the CPU will 100% go into throttle or burst in a pile of ashes. It's just too thin to have any meaningful cooling, remember those 2x86 that could be cooled using a coin? Yeah, these are not 2x86 but they're trying to do the same.
    I don't do anything that requires power though, so i'll probably just buy it for the build quality now they've fixed the keyboard. 2012 Retina is the best computer i've ever owned.

  6. #126
    Straight Hustlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    10,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Anyone bought the 2018 mbp? Looking to upgrade my 2012 retina.
    I have the late 2013 retina pro and I'm not keen on upgrading to any of the recent piles of crap. I've used a new Pro and the keyboard is retarded to say the least, albeit it feels overall good af. However, technically, it's just a glorified text machine, because no, thermally is probably impossible to do anything since the CPU will 100% go into throttle or burst in a pile of ashes. It's just too thin to have any meaningful cooling, remember those 2x86 that could be cooled using a coin? Yeah, these are not 2x86 but they're trying to do the same.
    I don't do anything that requires power though, so i'll probably just buy it for the build quality now they've fixed the keyboard. 2012 Retina is the best computer i've ever owned.
    If you dont do anything that requires power there would be absolutely no reason to buy it with an i9 in the first place.

  7. #127
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London (Silphe ingame)
    Posts
    3,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Straight Hustlin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Anyone bought the 2018 mbp? Looking to upgrade my 2012 retina.
    I have the late 2013 retina pro and I'm not keen on upgrading to any of the recent piles of crap. I've used a new Pro and the keyboard is retarded to say the least, albeit it feels overall good af. However, technically, it's just a glorified text machine, because no, thermally is probably impossible to do anything since the CPU will 100% go into throttle or burst in a pile of ashes. It's just too thin to have any meaningful cooling, remember those 2x86 that could be cooled using a coin? Yeah, these are not 2x86 but they're trying to do the same.
    I don't do anything that requires power though, so i'll probably just buy it for the build quality now they've fixed the keyboard. 2012 Retina is the best computer i've ever owned.
    If you dont do anything that requires power there would be absolutely no reason to buy it with an i9 in the first place.
    For those very rare occasions when i do need power?

  8. #128

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    10,909
    Just... Don't buy the i9 one and go for the proven fine i7?

  9. #129
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,951
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Anyone bought the 2018 mbp? Looking to upgrade my 2012 retina.
    I have the late 2013 retina pro and I'm not keen on upgrading to any of the recent piles of crap. I've used a new Pro and the keyboard is retarded to say the least, albeit it feels overall good af. However, technically, it's just a glorified text machine, because no, thermally is probably impossible to do anything since the CPU will 100% go into throttle or burst in a pile of ashes. It's just too thin to have any meaningful cooling, remember those 2x86 that could be cooled using a coin? Yeah, these are not 2x86 but they're trying to do the same.
    I don't do anything that requires power though, so i'll probably just buy it for the build quality now they've fixed the keyboard. 2012 Retina is the best computer i've ever owned.
    Idk, mate, my 2013 Retina is enough for running Creative Cloud CC apps almost as fast as my desktop hexa core can. The new keyboard is p. weird tho, definitely acquired taste, I enjoy mine more tbh.

    Did some tests on my late 2013 retina 15, no throttle even if the CPU can run as hot as 95*C loaded with Prime 95. Happy with that. New i9 will still throttle under heavy load.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  10. #130
    Lana Torrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Location
    Bonding around
    Posts
    18,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Anyone bought the 2018 mbp? Looking to upgrade my 2012 retina.
    I have the late 2013 retina pro and I'm not keen on upgrading to any of the recent piles of crap. I've used a new Pro and the keyboard is retarded to say the least, albeit it feels overall good af. However, technically, it's just a glorified text machine, because no, thermally is probably impossible to do anything since the CPU will 100% go into throttle or burst in a pile of ashes. It's just too thin to have any meaningful cooling, remember those 2x86 that could be cooled using a coin? Yeah, these are not 2x86 but they're trying to do the same.
    I don't do anything that requires power though, so i'll probably just buy it for the build quality now they've fixed the keyboard. 2012 Retina is the best computer i've ever owned.
    Idk, mate, my 2013 Retina is enough for running Creative Cloud CC apps almost as fast as my desktop hexa core can. The new keyboard is p. weird tho, definitely acquired taste, I enjoy mine more tbh.

    Did some tests on my late 2013 retina 15, no throttle even if the CPU can run as hot as 95*C loaded with Prime 95. Happy with that. New i9 will still throttle under heavy load.
    But even throttled hard the i9 is going to shit all over your 5 year old machine. In SOME circumstances LAST YEARS mbp got slightly higher numbers (the i9 should be getting 20-25% better multi-core numbers than anything last year) which shows a huge amount of throttling in those cases, but it will still beat everything up to last years model without much issue.

    I'm not saying get one if your old model is working fine for you, im just saying that thermal throttling was never killing the i9's speed as much as some people think, it was just limiting its potential to be amazing (basically making paying more for it worthless). Also sticking an i9 in a super thin laptop is also dumb but 'for some reason' asus is now doing one as well.. Its having the same issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by lubica
    And her name was Limul Azgoden, a lowly peasant girl.

  11. #131
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,951
    Quote Originally Posted by Lana Torrin View Post
    But even throttled hard the i9 is going to shit all over your 5 year old machine. In SOME circumstances LAST YEARS mbp got slightly higher numbers (the i9 should be getting 20-25% better multi-core numbers than anything last year) which shows a huge amount of throttling in those cases, but it will still beat everything up to last years model without much issue.

    I'm not saying get one if your old model is working fine for you, im just saying that thermal throttling was never killing the i9's speed as much as some people think, it was just limiting its potential to be amazing (basically making paying more for it worthless). Also sticking an i9 in a super thin laptop is also dumb but 'for some reason' asus is now doing one as well.. Its having the same issue.
    You do realise that Intel drips performance with <5% per generation, right? Reading what you wrote one would imagine today's machines are blazing fast compared to 5 years ago. Well, news flash, they aren't. There are a lot more cores, sure, but the performance per clock has risen really slowly and so did the frequencies due to silicon limitations. You can't cheat physics. And applications are hardly multicore optimised these days (as they weren't 5 years ago).

    Oh, sure, if you run multicore renders on your MBP (lolwut) maybe it'd be as you say.

    And it's the reason why a throttled i9 is slower than the previous gen i5 (which was actually the problem to begin with). Throttled hard, I'd place my bets with my 5 year old machine


    In truth/real life applications, I don't notice any slow down even when the CPU is running at 1-1.5GHz because lol2D. But probably when you're hitting that CPU with a Lightroom task that is CPU and GPU intensive, due to the fact that the package TDP is CPU + GPU, both will likely throttle down to avoid explodificating your machine. And what was estimated to run for 1 hour is like 10% after that time (or insert reasonable percentage there that's lower than 50%).


    Having had contact with the recent MBPs, they're quick but I'm happy with mine (most of the things I do frequently in PS happen almost instantly, idk what's faster than that tbh) and for me an upgrade is not warranted.


    Bear with me that there aren't enough OS X benchmarks out there that test the real life speed of a machine (PC Mark is p. spot-on imho for PCs, for example), so all we're doing here is discussing theoretically.



    I'd really like some input in how heavy work on these machines is impacted by work tasks (read massive LR editing, video editing, other content creation). I feel that Premiere Pro CC for example is a bit slow on my desktop machine, for example, will try to test it out on the MBP and see the differences (if any) then compute if an upgrade is in order.

    I may have just gotten used to the speed of my machines and #bitter about progress lately in the field, but I've just installed stuff on a laptop that doesn't have a SSD and holy shit PS and LR are slow.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  12. #132

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    10,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lana Torrin View Post
    But even throttled hard the i9 is going to shit all over your 5 year old machine. In SOME circumstances LAST YEARS mbp got slightly higher numbers (the i9 should be getting 20-25% better multi-core numbers than anything last year) which shows a huge amount of throttling in those cases, but it will still beat everything up to last years model without much issue.

    I'm not saying get one if your old model is working fine for you, im just saying that thermal throttling was never killing the i9's speed as much as some people think, it was just limiting its potential to be amazing (basically making paying more for it worthless). Also sticking an i9 in a super thin laptop is also dumb but 'for some reason' asus is now doing one as well.. Its having the same issue.
    You do realise that Intel drips performance with <5% per generation, right? Reading what you wrote one would imagine today's machines are blazing fast compared to 5 years ago. Well, news flash, they aren't. There are a lot more cores, sure, but the performance per clock has risen really slowly and so did the frequencies due to silicon limitations. You can't cheat physics. And applications are hardly multicore optimised these days (as they weren't 5 years ago).

    Oh, sure, if you run multicore renders on your MBP (lolwut) maybe it'd be as you say.

    And it's the reason why a throttled i9 is slower than the previous gen i5 (which was actually the problem to begin with). Throttled hard, I'd place my bets with my 5 year old machine


    In truth/real life applications, I don't notice any slow down even when the CPU is running at 1-1.5GHz because lol2D. But probably when you're hitting that CPU with a Lightroom task that is CPU and GPU intensive, due to the fact that the package TDP is CPU + GPU, both will likely throttle down to avoid explodificating your machine. And what was estimated to run for 1 hour is like 10% after that time (or insert reasonable percentage there that's lower than 50%).


    Having had contact with the recent MBPs, they're quick but I'm happy with mine (most of the things I do frequently in PS happen almost instantly, idk what's faster than that tbh) and for me an upgrade is not warranted.


    Bear with me that there aren't enough OS X benchmarks out there that test the real life speed of a machine (PC Mark is p. spot-on imho for PCs, for example), so all we're doing here is discussing theoretically.



    I'd really like some input in how heavy work on these machines is impacted by work tasks (read massive LR editing, video editing, other content creation). I feel that Premiere Pro CC for example is a bit slow on my desktop machine, for example, will try to test it out on the MBP and see the differences (if any) then compute if an upgrade is in order.

    I may have just gotten used to the speed of my machines and #bitter about progress lately in the field, but I've just installed stuff on a laptop that doesn't have a SSD and holy shit PS and LR are slow.
    >hardly multicore today

    How many times must you be told you should probably stop giving computer advice by now because you're so outdated it's positively painful.

  13. #133

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    10,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lana Torrin View Post
    But even throttled hard the i9 is going to shit all over your 5 year old machine. In SOME circumstances LAST YEARS mbp got slightly higher numbers (the i9 should be getting 20-25% better multi-core numbers than anything last year) which shows a huge amount of throttling in those cases, but it will still beat everything up to last years model without much issue.

    I'm not saying get one if your old model is working fine for you, im just saying that thermal throttling was never killing the i9's speed as much as some people think, it was just limiting its potential to be amazing (basically making paying more for it worthless). Also sticking an i9 in a super thin laptop is also dumb but 'for some reason' asus is now doing one as well.. Its having the same issue.
    You do realise that Intel drips performance with <5% per generation, right? Reading what you wrote one would imagine today's machines are blazing fast compared to 5 years ago. Well, news flash, they aren't. There are a lot more cores, sure, but the performance per clock has risen really slowly and so did the frequencies due to silicon limitations. You can't cheat physics. And applications are hardly multicore optimised these days (as they weren't 5 years ago).

    Oh, sure, if you run multicore renders on your MBP (lolwut) maybe it'd be as you say.

    And it's the reason why a throttled i9 is slower than the previous gen i5 (which was actually the problem to begin with). Throttled hard, I'd place my bets with my 5 year old machine


    In truth/real life applications, I don't notice any slow down even when the CPU is running at 1-1.5GHz because lol2D. But probably when you're hitting that CPU with a Lightroom task that is CPU and GPU intensive, due to the fact that the package TDP is CPU + GPU, both will likely throttle down to avoid explodificating your machine. And what was estimated to run for 1 hour is like 10% after that time (or insert reasonable percentage there that's lower than 50%).


    Having had contact with the recent MBPs, they're quick but I'm happy with mine (most of the things I do frequently in PS happen almost instantly, idk what's faster than that tbh) and for me an upgrade is not warranted.


    Bear with me that there aren't enough OS X benchmarks out there that test the real life speed of a machine (PC Mark is p. spot-on imho for PCs, for example), so all we're doing here is discussing theoretically.



    I'd really like some input in how heavy work on these machines is impacted by work tasks (read massive LR editing, video editing, other content creation). I feel that Premiere Pro CC for example is a bit slow on my desktop machine, for example, will try to test it out on the MBP and see the differences (if any) then compute if an upgrade is in order.

    I may have just gotten used to the speed of my machines and #bitter about progress lately in the field, but I've just installed stuff on a laptop that doesn't have a SSD and holy shit PS and LR are slow.
    >hardly multicore today

    How many times must you be told you should probably stop giving computer advice by now because you're so outdated it's positively painful.

  14. #134

    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    6,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    And applications are hardly multicore optimised these days (as they weren't 5 years ago).
    I know Failheap has been having issues with posts arriving out of order, but I wasn't expecting posts from 2007 to suddenly reappear.

  15. #135
    XenosisMk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 13, 2017
    Location
    More turbo-lightspeed neoliberal platitudes/virtue signaling/misplaced priorities on full display.
    Posts
    4,240
    You do realise that Intel drips performance with <5% per generation, right? Reading what you wrote one would imagine today's machines are blazing fast compared to 5 years ago. Well, news flash, they aren't.
    Amazing, every word you wrote was wrong

  16. #136
    XenosisMk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 13, 2017
    Location
    More turbo-lightspeed neoliberal platitudes/virtue signaling/misplaced priorities on full display.
    Posts
    4,240
    You do realise that Intel drips performance with <5% per generation, right? Reading what you wrote one would imagine today's machines are blazing fast compared to 5 years ago. Well, news flash, they aren't.
    Amazing, every word you wrote was wrong

  17. #137

    Join Date
    November 5, 2011
    Posts
    10,909
    Like, I'm literally having performance issues with all 4 cores of my i5 slammed in plenty of high end games because the fucker doesn't turbo to max on all 4 cores and I still see people saying "oh more cores for games is useless, they don't multicore well. Only get them for productivity etc."

    As Elmicker implied, it's not 10 years ago anymore.

  18. #138
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London (Silphe ingame)
    Posts
    3,471
    I'm just going to buy it anyway, tbh i just wanted some external validation from you lot. god i feell fucked up right now

    with this bag: https://www.hardgraft.com/products/messenger-grey

  19. #139
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,951
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    >hardly multicore today

    How many times must you be told you should probably stop giving computer advice by now because you're so outdated it's positively painful.
    Look at Adobe Media Encoder CC 2018 for example, it encodes with a fucking 50% CPU load on 12 cores. It's updated to day, such multithreading, much wow. Used it yesterday. Doesn't use CUDA anymore either, because fuck you, customer, why should you go out in the sunshine earlier today instead of babysitting your computer to finish the render?

    Look at fucking Lightroom, a massive 20-30% load on 12 cores when exporting. Capture 1 Pro, 27%. Fucking lol.

    Over here there's a chart comparison between 4790k (Haswell) and 2700k (Sandy Bridge). Done by some "retards" called TechSpot. Shows a clear difference of ~12% between these two gens in clock-per-clock performance. How many physical generations between them? 2. How much extra clock per clock performance per generation? 6%. I know math is hard but actually think for yourself and stop believing hardware hype.

    I saw now you are having issues with games. Yeah, some games are slamming old CPUs hard, but those aren't the norm. It's quite the opposite. Remember consoles, they're shitty x86 boxes now? I know it's a stretch, but most of the slamming is from video stuff rather than CPU in most games.



    I apologise, like 95% of my wrath on this issue comes from dealing with Premiere and Media Encoder this week
    Last edited by Cosmin; August 10 2018 at 03:38:26 AM.
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  20. #140
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London (Silphe ingame)
    Posts
    3,471
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Isyel View Post
    >hardly multicore today

    How many times must you be told you should probably stop giving computer advice by now because you're so outdated it's positively painful.
    Look at Adobe Media Encoder CC 2018 for example, it encodes with a fucking 50% CPU load on 12 cores. It's updated to day, such multithreading, much wow. Used it yesterday. Doesn't use CUDA anymore either, because fuck you, customer, why should you go out in the sunshine earlier today instead of babysitting your computer to finish the render?

    Look at fucking Lightroom, a massive 20-30% load on 12 cores when exporting. Capture 1 Pro, 27%. Fucking lol.

    Over here there's a chart comparison between 4790k (Haswell) and 2700k (Sandy Bridge). Done by some "retards" called TechSpot. Shows a clear difference of ~12% between these two gens in clock-per-clock performance. How many physical generations between them? 2. How much extra clock per clock performance per generation? 6%. I know math is hard but actually think for yourself and stop believing hardware hype.

    I saw now you are having issues with games. Yeah, some games are slamming old CPUs hard, but those aren't the norm. It's quite the opposite. Remember consoles, they're shitty x86 boxes now? I know it's a stretch, but most of the slamming is from video stuff rather than CPU in most games.



    I apologise, like 95% of my wrath on this issue comes from dealing with Premiere and Media Encoder this week
    Do u like the bag tho

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •