Why not the i5 M14x?

All other things equal, a M14x with 8 GB of ram costs $180 less with the i5-2410 than it does with the i7-2630 ($100 for the processor itself, $80 because the i7 requires 1600MHz RAM on Alienware's configurator). I've picked up that nobody on these forums has the i5. However, I'm wondering if the 2630 is really worth it for me if I get an M14x, given this article I recently ran into, comparing frame rates for a few modern games between i3, i5, and i7 Sandy Bridge processors.

Review Intel Sandy Bridge Processors Gaming Performance - Notebookcheck.net Reviews

Aside from gaming, I use my computer for my work (which is not CPU-intensive...just lots of Microsoft Word, email, and internet usage). So if the i5 to i7 doesn't matter for gaming, it doesn't matter for me at all. And if I wouldn't notice the difference between the i5 and i7, I'd rather save the $180. But it seems odd to me that there would be no benefit at all to getting a quad-core i7 over a dual-core i5, and I'm wondering if the story is accurate.

By the way, 90% of my gaming time is spent on either the Mass Effect series or Starcraft II, if the type of game matters.

If I go for the M14x, what should I do about the CPU, and why?

 

Well if you do get a gaming pc, which the m14x is, you really don't want to compromise on it. The fact that you can get a quad core i7 was a legit reason for me to opt for it. It wont be a horrible machine with the core i5, but if 2 extra cores and hyper-threading, which the i7 has, isn't worth the 100 to you, or if you wont be gaming or computing intensely, then its your call. I can say safely that I never see my 2630qm bottle neck anything, it rarely goes over 50 percent usage.

 

If I didn't want to compromise, I'd buy a $5000 gaming rig, not a $1500ish gaming rig I want to keep the price low as possible, spending money where it matters but not spending money where I'll see very little in return. For example, I've heard that the upgrade for the 555M's memory from 1.5 GB to 3.0GB is pretty useless. On the other hand, I have a lot of stuff I store on my computer, so the upgrade from 500 GB to 750 GB is worth its weight in gold to me.

I'm just trying to figure out whether I'm going to regularly notice the performance difference between the i5 and i7 (in which case I'd get the i7), or if it's just a matter of not wanting to compromise on the principle of it (in which case I'd save the $180 and get the i5).

 

is this going to be your main or only computer? if yes, then i would highlyy suggest going for the i7. Having 4 cores on the m14x is like getting a stick shift in a porsche....it's kind of a must. I say this strictly in the gaming sense. It seems to me that you will be using this computer for both gaming and lots of work although it may not be extremely cpu intensive work, I say you will still feel a performance difference when multi tasking with gaming and other work applications....if you want to save money, stick with the 1.5 gb nvidia gc and the standard screen is also sufficient if you dont plan on doing an heavy graphix work. Also subtract the bluetooth option unless that is something you use alot.

 

It will be my only machine. I need the 900p screen for work (I work a lot with two Word documents open next to each other), but I'll definitely avoid the Bluetooth (don't need it).

How about RAM? Am I really going to feel a benefit with the 8, or should I stick with 6 or 4? I had assumed I'd need 8, but I don't have a sense of what really needs extra RAM and what doesn't. When I'm gaming, it's just the game open (Starcraft 2 or Mass Effect 2). When I'm working, I typically have about 6-12 windows open simultaneously with various Word documents, PDF files, browser Windows, and iTunes/Pandora/something for music.

 

If you check the outlet store the majority of refurbs are i7's. If I were to make an educated guess I'd say the i7 is almost too hot a CPU to run in such an itty bitty machine at full speed and something gets cooked. i5 is more than enough for pretty much everything on your list. If it were me I'd get the 1099 model and spend what I saved on a VERY nice monitor this way you can run a dual screen setup or you can game on something you can actually see.

Only reason I didn't get the M14 (which is what I really wanted) was finding a M15 with better specs for a ton less plus 15% off coupon for Outlet computers..and the fact my desktop was flaking out and I'm not sure what the cause is to it's needing to be replaced.

 

When I order mine it will be with the I5. I don't run CRYSIS but i will be running FSX on the M14x, the rest of the games that I play are older games that will not need a I7 CPU.

I also hope to get better battery life not to mention saveing the hundred dollars and going instead for the screen upgrade.

 

I am going to order the base model with the screen as the only upgrade. For everything else i cannot justify the cost for the upgrade.

MITLOV Just read the notecheck review that you linked to. Save your money , go for the I5 just be sure to upgrade the screen only.

 

Don't buy the dell RAM, instead upgrade it yourself, it's much cheaper.

And you can use the money you save for an i7!

 

Please escalate this article to the experts. I think you will find they respond with the reason you don't see a difference between the I3, I5 or I7. The reason is because all of the games are going to be GPU limited due to the 540 nvidia. Its a very low end card. You could put a 2920XM processor and it would make no difference. Very bad article and bad write up.

Review Intel Sandy Bridge Processors Gaming Performance - Notebookcheck.net Reviews

If you want an appropriate article, find one that uses a high end video card 480+, 580+, 6850+, 6950+ and then compares the cpu performance with each.

 

Yeah, it does conclude with:

My understanding was that the M14x's 555M is closer to the 540M than it is the 460M...is that correct?

 

Look at this and compare to ours. if we overclock the 555 to 720/900 we are exactly the same as this desktop card.

Desktop 545GT DDR3
GeForce GT 545 DDR3 - Specifications - GeForce

Nvidia 555mGT
GeForce GT 555M - Specifications - GeForce

Again horrible article.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-Sandy-Bridge-Processors-Gaming-Performance.49600.0.html

 

If you wanna save money, dont buy RAM through Dell lol. Its like 80$ for ram on newegg, and like 150$ for the i5 ram on Dell?

 

MITLOV; Go to the notebookcheck review of the XMG A501, at the 3Dmark06 and 3Dmark11 sections, click on the plus box to expand the comparison chart. Please note that the GT 555m used in the XMG A501 is the 128bit version the one in the M14x is the 192 bit version.

3dmark 06 checks CPU and GPU componets which it uses to get the result. 3Dmark11 checks the ability of the GPU.

The diffrence between the I5 2410 and the I7 2630 is very small, I own a M11x that I bought with the su4100 CPU instead of su7300 that sold for 100.00 more. As most of us found out the hundred dollars was not worth it for the more expensive chip.

Either way, with the I5 or I7 you can't go wrong it's just wether you want to save some money. If you need more ram there are many places to buy cheap ram. (ALIENWARE IS NOT THAT PLACE!)

 

The core of the gt 555m is closer to the gt 445m but with higher clocks. Overclocked it will out perform the GTX 260 in my ASUS.

The M14x is going to be my replacement for my ASUS G71

 

I personally use the i5 in the M14x and the performance is great. The i7 is great don't get me wrong, but in gaming the 555m doesn't really need a top end CPU. It will help a little, but not significantly enough for me to justify the difference with RAM and CPU price increase.

In multi-threading applications the i7 will make a big difference, but I have a couple quad core desktops for that. The i5 M14 is perfect because I get slightly better battery life without a massive sacrifice in performance for the stuff I use it for. I upgraded my screen res and a couple small things that were more beneficial for me.

If any one has more questions about performance let me know but I've been very satisfied.

 

If you could would you run 3dmark06 and 3dmark11, stock and overclocked?
Thank you.

 

"The diffrence between the I5 2410 and the I7 2630 is very small, I own a M11x that I bought with the su4100 CPU instead of su7300 that sold for 100.00 more. As most of us found out the hundred dollars was not worth it for the more expensive chip.?

What? 4 cores/8 threads is little difference than 2 cores/4 threads?

 

yea idk why this guy is bent on convincing people that there is no major difference between 2 and 4!! i mean its only DOUBLE right???

 

Of course it's a more powerful CPU. The question is whether you can feel any of that benefit before the GPU bottlenecks you. And if you're not going to overclock the 555M (I'm personally not going to, but I know a lot of people do), it sounds like the GPU is going to be the limiting factor in gaming, not the CPU, so it doesn't matter if you have two cores or four or thirty-two in your CPU...it's not going to improve your framerates.

 

Also depends on whether or not the game supports 4 cores ;P

 

OH! Forgot, GIJoeMyGoodness welcome to the forums! looking forward to any information on the M14x that you care to share.

 

agreed. that is true, in the pure gaming sense. I still say go for the i7 as I have noticed a clear difference in performance while multitasking (multiple windows open, several diff programs running in the background, music videos playing, more functionality while ALT-Tabbed to desktop in between games..etc)

 

CPU scaling. Just ask one of the folks on here with the I7 2630qm that plays BFBC2 to run fraps, and start at max speed, then lower it and see if the frames is impacted. Or. Have them start with 8 threads and then change it to run with 4.

 

Out of curiosity are you one of those guys that buys a BMW but has the crapiest engine and no options with roll up windows just to say you have a BMW?

 

Can i use this as my signature please? I laughed hard. Some days you need that.

 

Wow. Way to bring the attitude for no reason whatsoever. I'm not interested in the M14x because of the badge, but instead because it offers the best combination of gaming ability, battery life, cooling, and build quality of any machine in the low-to-mid teens ($1200-$1600), and has the added benefit of no bloatware right out of the box.

You're calling me a badge , but you're the one advocating that I buy something more expensive on principle (i.e., a quad-core CPU) instead of explaining whether it would meaningfully improve my day-to-day performance over the i5. For someone who runs no other programs while running a game, and for someone whose multitasking involves Word and internet browsers instead of CPU-intensive programs, the CPU upgrade doesn't appear do anything at all--certainly nothing to justify the $180 price increase. Why throw money into a particular upgrade that's not going to benefit me?

Do you also take this condescending tone to people who refused to pay the $80 for the extra 1.5 GB of GPU memory that doesn't actually do anything? The way I was going to use the machine, the CPU upgrade doesn't do anything. Why pay more on principle alone?

 

dont use that comment as an excuse to not get the i7 lol....im serious you will regret not getting the i7 it wont get "outdated" anytime soon either...the i5 is nothing special anymore...the i7 will surely cover all your needs and give you the best bang for your buck

 

It's not attitude bro, you just seem totally hell bent on getting an i5 with your m14x so go get one instead of arguing with everyone about why you want an i5. An i5 or an i7 probably wont honestly make a huge (if any) difference in gaming but I think in day to day things you will notice less hanging and overall smoother and faster response. You just seem to be looking for ANY reason not to buy an i7. I personally think it is the best bang for the buck performance increase you can get on the m14x.

As far as the 1.5 gig vs 3 gig video card it is a waste because it is proven to have the same performance, the i5 vs i7 show's a ton more performance. If you showed me a bench or something that showed the i5 having close to the same performance as a i7 I'd have your back bro.

You're just coming across as you don't want so spend any money on the m14x and that's cool I know where you're coming from. The only thing is there's a point between price and performance ratio and between the $100 for the i7 $75 for a 900p screen and an upgraded wifi (The intel 1000 is horrible) that I think you'd have a lot better laptop for minimal money spent.

Honestly spending $175 over the base model gives you a heck of a lot more computer, it's totally worth it.

 

That was awesome +rep

 

That's the only "high-performance" thing I really do with this, though. I spend many many hours doing word-processing with multiple Word windows open, but is a dual-core i5 really going to feel sluggish for such purposes? Most machines sold for such things don't come with quad-core processors.

But you just said that it won't make a huge (if any) difference in gaming.

Did you look at the article in the original post? For Bad Company 2 and Dirt 2, they got the same FPS with a quad-core i7, a dual-core i5, and even an i3. GPU was all that mattered. For Black Ops, stepping up to a quad-core processor from a dual-core processor only boosted FPS about 5%.

See, I'm being stubborn about the i5 versus i7 thing because I'm trying to get you to justify where the benefit would be. Don't tell me "it's not that special"--I don't care about my machine being special. I've got two kids, so I can't afford to throw money away for something that won't benefit me substantially but helps my street cred and bragging rights. It sounds like the i7 won't affect gaming at all. And while it'll result in marginally-faster performance when I'm using Word, internet explorer, and iTunes, are those things really going to be noticeably slow with an i5? If not, I'm not sure that an extra tenth of a second here or there while doing those things is going to bother me. Certainly not bother me to the tune of $180.

I really appreciate knowing that the stock wifi card is poop. I'm willing to pay for the upgrade if I think it'll be a noticeable improvement in my day-to-day ownership experience. It's just that that argument hasn't really been made for the quad-core CPU, at least not so far in this thread. There have been a lot of emotional arguments, like the Porsche analogy on page 1 and your BMW analogy, but they really don't tell me anything about why I would benefit from an i7. And as for the word processing thing, if I wasn't a gamer, and was just shopping for a machine with a good keyboard that I could use for word-processing and having a half-dozen windows open at once, how many people would tell me to go quad-core instead of dual-core?

 

Chances are if most of your work is going to be with MS WORD and EXCEL with the occasional game thrown into the mix then you will be happy with the I5.

I have found that the screen is the most important thing on a laptop to have to your satisfaction no matter what your CPU choice is you will always be looking at the screen.

Ram , harddrive, can always be updated the life cycle of computers is such that within two to three years you will buy a new one.

 

The i5 really will not affect game performance. I had an i5 in my old DV6 with a 6770m (slight better than the 555m) and it the GPU was always the bottleneck.

If you play a game like Shogun 2 with thousands of units, the i5 will probably not be able to handle it well. But if you get an i7, your computer still will not be able to handle it well because the GPU will also be bottlenecking the system.

 

No man I'm agreeing with you, the i5 vs i7 or 1.5gig vs 3gig vram in gaming will have little to no impact I totally agree with you. I'm saying I think in daily activities you do you would notice a difference if you have multiple word, excel, access, browser tabs open. I'm a small business owner and I do often have all those things open along with Photoshop and AI and it really does help. My busness partner has an i5 in his vaio and it takes noticibly longer to do things on it. I'm not sure if that's all CPU or maybe he likes a lota but I can easily tell it's slower.

 

Would i5 versus i7 make any difference with Starcraft II (not thousands of units, but hundreds)? I don't mind knocking graphics down a notch or two, so long as it still plays smoothly when a half-dozen carriers unleash their interceptors.

Thanks man, this is very helpful. Is that solely related to CPU, or is RAM a big factor too? I had thought that managing lots of unintensive programs was more of a RAM thing, and that keeping up with fewer, more-resource-intensive programs was more the CPU. But I could be wrong.

If I'm wrong about that, let me know. Because if I don't actually need 8 GB of RAM--if for both gaming and productivity I wouldn't notice a difference between 4, 6, or 8--let me know and I'll save some money there.

Thanks again for the input. I'm not as computer-literate as a lot of folks here, but I'm trying to play catchup and learn what I can ASAP.

 

It will take me a little time to get some things together but yeah I don't mind. I'm a programmer and am getting ready for my trip to Defcon this week so I'm pretty busy with work and prep. I was planning on benching it and comparing to my 6870s, and also out of pure curiosity on how it compared to the i7. Ideally I would like to test battery life as well but that may take me a bit.

Thanks for the kind welcome. I consider myself a pretty technical guy so I hope to contribute a bit from time to time.

 

Whatever you do, really really don't order an M14x with more RAM. Buy it yourself later on if (and only if) you need it.

Similarly, actually, the processor is upgradable, so why not get an i5 version and later on if you feel it's too slow, upgrade to an i7 or just a better i5. You could even sell the old proc and recoup some losses.

 

For the uses I do (Starcraft 2, Mass Effect 2, word-processing with multiple windows), would I need more than 4 GB ram? Would it benefit me at all?

As for doing it myself, I'm feeling rather "empowered" after successfully replacing the hard drive in my MBP. After seeing Alienware's own how-to-replace-the-RAM video on Youtube, I said to myself, "yeah, I can do that."

But I don't see how I save a lot of money doing it myself. The upgrade from 4 GB of 1333 MHz ram (AW makes you get the 1333 ram with the i5 and the 1600 MHz with the i7) costs $120 on Alienware's configure-your-own. The 8 GB of ram setup from NewEgg that was recommended in the M14x memory thread a few posts down costs...$109. Admittedly it's 1600 MHz instead of 1333 MHz, but NewEgg didn't sell an 8 GB of memory setup with the 133 MHz.

Newegg.com - Kingston HyperX 8GB (2 x 4GB) 204-Pin DDR3 SO-DIMM DDR3 1600 HyperX Plug n Play Laptop Memory Model KHX1600C9S3P1K2/8G

So...I'm clearly missing something, because it doesn't seem like I save much money by putting the memory in myself. But everyone says that that's one area where Alienware really violates buyers is with the cost of the memory. What am I missing?

 

Much better article here. Read the last page.

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings GPU & CPU Performance > CPU Scaling and Performance - TechSpot Reviews

Yes the GPU is probably not the best match for the I7-2630 but its much better to have the extra cores and not always need them vs needing them and not having them. More cores, More mhz, More better.

Games so far that benefit from more cores
crysis 2
bfbc2
starcraft 2
withcer 2
cod black ops

just to name a few

 

This is for you to find out. Maybe you're happy with the performance with 4GB, or if not, you can compromise on some options to make it run faster. My point is it is best to do the upgrade yourself, if you find it necessary.

Yeah...you're not seeing it because you're trying to compare 1600 ram from Newegg with 1333 RAM from AW. To upgrade 1600 RAM to 8GB through alienware is $200, while the Kingston is $109. That difference is ridiculous, especially when I'm not even sure what brand of RAM AW uses...

Oh yeah...starcraft 2 is a game I'd bet would see a benefit with an i7 since it's got a lot of AI processing to do, being an RTS.

 

if your running starcraft 2, again i would suggest the i7 over i5, you will see $180 worth of difference

 

Wait, wait, where is this figure of $180 for an i7 coming from? To upgrade from the i5 to i7 is only $100.

 

Take a look at this thread......
http://forum.notebookreview.com/what-notebook-should-i-buy/599426-i5-2410m-vs-2630qm-gaming.html

 

If I may interrupt real fast.....

Although I may be missing the point here completely, I choose my i7 after researching the difference in duo/quad cores. And, the best expression I found between the two is (without factoring in the effects of any other parts, or the specifics of each processor) is that a duo is like a two lane, while a quad is like a four lane. The size of the road doesn't affect the individual car, unless its in a traffic jam. The car represents a thread of data, while the traffic jam represents multiple threads of data. Obviously, the four lane will allow more "cars" to go through without causing a traffic jam. Thus (and I say this with absolutely no clue as the nature of your games, although I'm assuming they're multi-threaded to a point) the quad core would be the better option. I choose my computer setup around the fact my laptop is also a computer for college, and I plan to be running many different programs at once on it. Thus, the quad core was an obvious choice for me, as well as the fact that I really didn't want to change the processor out at a later date because of necessity, because that would be an annoying, expensive project.

That and the fact if you're going to get an alienware, I'd sudgest going all out (within reason/your price range).

Oh, and agreed on doing the RAM upgrade yourself. Thats what I plan on doing lol. Just hoping Newegg does another shell shocker sell of 1600 soon. Need to go check that actually........

 

The $180 difference comparing machines with 8 GB from the factory (the 8 GB memory upgrade costs $120 with an i5 and $200 with an i7, thanks to the difference between 1333 MHz memory for the i5 and 1600 MHz memory for the i7). It's a $100 difference only if I stick with 4 GB of memory. If I upgrade myself, it's about a $140-150 difference (there's a big difference in price between 8 GB of 1600 MHz memory for the i5 and 8 GB of 1333 MHz memory for the i7).

 

I did some digging, and at least according to this benchmarking test (admittedly with the beta version of SC2), it was the difference between an i5 and an i7 was about 1 FPS...a 3% difference. Do you know of contrary results about SC2 from other tests?

Starcraft 2 Beta: CPU benchmarks ? Core i5/i7 leading - Starcraft 2 Beta, Test, CPU, Processor, Benchmark, Performance - PC Games Hardware

 

That's why I think it would be best to get the i7 and leave the RAM at 4GB unless you find later that it's not enough. You can even sell off the old DIMMs and recoup some of the price.

 

After reading this article and looking at the benchmarks, I'm definitely sticking with 4 GB of memory. Although the article is two years old, it does suggest with stuff in the near future, I won't benefit from more than 4 GB of ram. And further down the line, memory is unbelievably easy to upgrade.

The 8GB/64-bit advantage - More RAM doesn't always mean better performance | ZDNet

Edit: different test, same results: http://hardwarelogic.com/articles.php?id=5619&titleid=4&_anchor_=article4#article4

So with the screen upgraded to 900p, the hard drive upgraded to 750 GB (I need the space), the wi-fi upgraded to the Intel 6250, it comes to $1304 with the i5 and $1404 with the i7-2630. I'll mull over the i5 versus i7 thing some more, but that issue aside, do people think that's a good bang-for-the-buck build? Are there any other options that I really would regret not getting?

For everyone saying "more is better"--I've got two kids, one of whom has special needs. I want to get a machine that will make me happy for at least three years, but I want to spend as little as possible, because I've got my kid's therapy to pay, college for them to save up for, etc.

 

Then I would recommend moving away from Alienware all together and going with the HP dv6t Quad. It might be a 15-inch system, but it's thinner and lighter. It's also available with a 1080p screen, a more powerful GPU (the 1 GB Radeon 6770M in the HP is faster than the M14x's GeForce 555M), and costs less when you factor in the coupons that are floating around. The only major issue with the dv6t was related to its switchable graphics, but HP has since addressed it with a BIOS update.

 

I hate the feel and keyboard of each and every Pavilion I've ever looked at in person, and that's something I'd notice every time I used it. I like the AW's build quality and materials, the fact that it's bloatware-free from the factory, its 3.0 megapixel webcam (for video chats with my kids' grandparents), and its effective cooling (if noisy under load).