Question about Quad cores.

[Gamemaster77]

The Ghz really isn't the whole story. I have a 2.0Ghz quad core process's but it's an i7 and it serves me just fine. Although I've never seen any reason why, I've always heard that AMD processors suck compared to their Intel counterparts.

Disc are obsolete anyway, none of my computers have optical drives. Microsoft offers ISO downloads for free, you can stick them on a USB key and boot using your legit key.

I disagree. It's nice to have a cheap, expendable storage device as I often lose my flash drives, which are much more expensive then disks. Their also great for bootable things as their so cheap.

 

[Quintillus]

For gaming (and in many cases, in general) I'd recommend faster per-core dual cores over slower per-core quad cores. As has been said, a lot of programs including nearly all games can't take advantage of quad cores. That said, AMD/ATI integrated graphics are generally superior to Intel integrated graphics in the same price range. The laptop linked in the OP is not a bad option, especially for the price. The CPU is going to be somewhat weak, particularly per-core (where it matters, if it does, for most specific games), but the graphics will be better than Intel ones, and other specs like hard drive space, memory, and USB 3.0 are pretty good for $498+tax. HP's quality is so-so, but you can't expect the best at that price, and they usually last well enough if treated properly.

Valka - for Civ2 and Civ3, the CPU is going to be the most important factor, so I'd look mostly at Intel dual-cores, which should offer the best performance for Civ. This and this appear to be the most likely candidates listed on London Drug's online site. The first is a little bit faster; the second has a bigger screen with higher resolution, which might or might not be preferable. Both appear to have a numpad (I agree that it's nice to have for Civ, though I adjusted to life without one). The graphics won't matter at all for Civ2 and Civ3. I'm not sure about Second Life, but its purported minimum requirements are low enough that anything will meet them today.

For "most likely to last", my preference at $750 CAD or below would be a base-model ThinkPad T series ($662 at the lowest, probably before tax), but they don't have NumPads at affordable prices, and aren't quite as fast/spacious. So, it depends on priorities and risk tolerance.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Hopefully under $600 Canadian. However, I'm willing to go higher (maybe up to $750) for something that will last a good long while.

So you don't have tabletop space, but do you have floor space for a PC?

The reason I ask is that you'll be paying a premium for the mobility of the laptop and you could get a much more capable desktop at the same price point. You couldn't easily take it places, but if your laptop sits in the same spot 95% of the time, this really isn't much of an issue. Plus, you could cheaply upgrade it as needed, which you can't do with a $600 laptop usually.

But others have suggested good laptops and I don't mean to take away from their suggestions. Just a thought.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

For gaming (and in many cases, in general) I'd recommend faster per-core dual cores over slower per-core quad cores. As has been said, a lot of programs including nearly all games can't take advantage of quad cores. That said, AMD/ATI integrated graphics are generally superior to Intel integrated graphics in the same price range. The laptop linked in the OP is not a bad option, especially for the price. The CPU is going to be somewhat weak, particularly per-core (where it matters, if it does, for most specific games), but the graphics will be better than Intel ones, and other specs like hard drive space, memory, and USB 3.0 are pretty good for $498+tax. HP's quality is so-so, but you can't expect the best at that price, and they usually last well enough if treated properly.

Valka - for Civ2 and Civ3, the CPU is going to be the most important factor, so I'd look mostly at Intel dual-cores, which should offer the best performance for Civ. This and this appear to be the most likely candidates listed on London Drug's online site. The first is a little bit faster; the second has a bigger screen with higher resolution, which might or might not be preferable. Both appear to have a numpad (I agree that it's nice to have for Civ, though I adjusted to life without one). The graphics won't matter at all for Civ2 and Civ3. I'm not sure about Second Life, but its purported minimum requirements are low enough that anything will meet them today.

For "most likely to last", my preference at $750 CAD or below would be a base-model ThinkPad T series ($662 at the lowest, probably before tax), but they don't have NumPads at affordable prices, and aren't quite as fast/spacious. So, it depends on priorities and risk tolerance.

Thank you. I'll definitely see if the local store has these, and ask to play around on them if they do. Obviously the final deal-breaker is if my hands fit (don't laugh - I tried to buy a laptop last year but had to return it because my fingers just couldn't reach everything comfortably - I kept making mistakes, and building up considerable pain, which is Not Good, given how many hours a day I spend online/typing).

Only question: I see OS is Windows 7, and most others I've seen advertised are Windows 8. Is there an advantage to one of these over the other? I'm still using Win XP.

So you don't have tabletop space, but do you have floor space for a PC?

The reason I ask is that you'll be paying a premium for the mobility of the laptop and you could get a much more capable desktop at the same price point. You couldn't easily take it places, but if your laptop sits in the same spot 95% of the time, this really isn't much of an issue. Plus, you could cheaply upgrade it as needed, which you can't do with a $600 laptop usually.

But others have suggested good laptops and I don't mean to take away from their suggestions. Just a thought.

The thing is, I prefer to have two working computers at once, since Murphy tends to smile on me more often than I like (or Loki, if you're of Norse ancestry, which I am). Also, my current computer occupies a modified coffee table and end table set up in my bedroom - which doesn't help at all when I enjoy online activities while watching/listening to the TV. So I'd love a laptop to be able to have it in the living room, where the TV is.

Also, the rent setup here is that wireless internet is included in the rent. My desktop is not wireless, so I'm paying for something I haven't been able to use. I don't get a break in the rent for not using these "extras" (wireless internet, parking - I don't drive and never have company, etc.).

And I suspect I'd have gotten somewhere in NaNoWriMo this year if I could have just packed up and gone to the public library, where they finally made provisions for laptop users. It's much quieter there, better light, no distractions other than looking out the window at City Hall Park...

Finally, I'd have a computer I could put out of my cat's reach! Maddy loves computers, and thinks it's totally unreasonable of me to yell at her for sitting or walking all over the keyboard and changing my browser settings. She's done some lulus at times, including features I never even knew existed!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Oh ok, well if you don't have the space or need the portability, then go with the laptop.

I'd still consider a possible rearrangement to allow for another desktop, but that's just me.

On your PC not having wireless: There are dongles you can buy that connect to USB ports and allow you to recieve wifi.

 

[Quintillus]

Thank you. I'll definitely see if the local store has these, and ask to play around on them if they do. Obviously the final deal-breaker is if my hands fit (don't laugh - I tried to buy a laptop last year but had to return it because my fingers just couldn't reach everything comfortably - I kept making mistakes, and building up considerable pain, which is Not Good, given how many hours a day I spend online/typing).

Only question: I see OS is Windows 7, and most others I've seen advertised are Windows 8. Is there an advantage to one of these over the other? I'm still using Win XP.

...

Finally, I'd have a computer I could put out of my cat's reach! Maddy loves computers, and thinks it's totally unreasonable of me to yell at her for sitting or walking all over the keyboard and changing my browser settings. She's done some lulus at times, including features I never even knew existed!

You're right... they do still say Windows 7 - that's a bit surprising. That didn't catch my attention last night. Windows 7 is more similar to XP (I also use XP, but have used 7 a lot at work - the transition isn't too bad), whereas Windows 8 is a fair bit different, which some people will like, and others won't. Probably the best way to figure out which you prefer is to go to a store and play around with both - particularly 8 (but make sure to try it on a non-touch screen if that's what you are going to buy).

But Windows 7 is going to be supported until at least the beginning of 2020, so I wouldn't let that dissuade you unless you try out 8 and decide you really like it and want to go with it.

I agree with the niceness of of having a laptop as well as a desktop. My new computer is a desktop, but I still use my laptop on occasion. It just works better on the sofa. Though, cats can still cause quite the ruckus with laptops. My parents' oldest cat once deleted a good chunk of the data on my dad's laptop's hard drive - a whole partition. We still aren't sure how she did it.

 

[timtofly]

Also, the rent setup here is that wireless internet is included in the rent. My desktop is not wireless, so I'm paying for something I haven't been able to use. I don't get a break in the rent for not using these "extras" (wireless internet, parking - I don't drive and never have company, etc.).

You can always get a wireless USB port that is about the size of a thumb drive and make your desktop wireless.