Good laptop processor for FS2004?

[Luis Hernandez 564]

Last year I purchased an AMD Athlon 64X2 4000+ processor in order to replace my stone age Pentium 4 1.6. That's the best thing I did with my computer, and I ended up liking the results (previously I increased RAM from 512MB to 1GB and changed the old 32MB ATI Radeon 7500 for a 256MB eVGA GeForce 5500, without having outstanding results). Anyway, now that I left home (without the PC, unluckily), I'm thinking about buying a laptop. I know I may be comparing apples to oranges, but I'd like to know some things before purchasing:1) Which laptop processor can be comparable (in performance, obviously) to the one I had at home (Athlon 64X2 4000+) for FS2004?2) A little bit off-topic: I know that if I use a dedicated GPU, I'll get the best results, but my budget won't allow that. How is your experience with laptops with integrated graphics? Which one is better?Best regards from ColombiaLuis Miguel

[ryanbatc 12,770]

Stay away from onboard graphics if at all possible! I don't know much about mobile chips at the moment, but pretty much anything like a Centrino core 2 duo, etc, or a high end Turion by AMD should work. If it comes with vista (I'd stick with XP) make sure AT A MINIMUM, it has 1GB of RAM, 2Gb is preferable, especially if you fly with addons.Speaking from experience, integrated chipsets, like the Intel 810 or newer 9xx series just plain blow. Actually, I don't even know what they have nowadays. Try to get like a geforce go or ATI something or other.

[Guest ugotkevin]

I've bought 4 cheap laptops in the past the couple of years. The acer one with intel graphics did not work with fs9. Work meaning would not even load the thing. I had an older Dell Inspiron with a much less intel graphic chipset and it worked.I also had a eMachines (Gateway) w/a 1.8GHz Sempron and nVidia chipset and a Toshiba 1.6 GHz Pentium D with a ATI chipset and they both worked fine at medium or med high settings. If you are looking at charts or using vasFMC, or running something that you want to switch back and forth while flying defiantly go for a dual core.

[Luis Hernandez 564]

I want to add my own experiences with laptops and FS2004:1) Dell Inspiron 1420 with 1.5GB RAM, Intel C2D T5250@1.5 GHz, Intel X3100 graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium:I made some time ago a post about the bad performance of this combination. I can't install any add-on scenery without having to land at 4 FPS. Don't even think about complex aircraft! I uninstalled every add-on, so my girlfriend would end up with only the "vainilla" FS9. The stone age P4 1.6 was a lot better!2) Dell Inspiron 700m with 1 GB RAM, Intel Pentium M 1.7GHz, Intel 82852/855 GM/GME GC graphics, Windows XP Professional:Some blurries here, some blurries there (only had 64MB shared video memory), but the smoothness was a lot more than expected (it was a lot better than my old P4 and my girlfriend's Inspiron...I mean, I got some decent performance). However, I tried only with "vainilla" FS9 with default settings, plus Colombia Virtual 2007 XE and PSS 777. Had to uninstall quickly... I didn't want my dad to see that stuff in his laptop.3) Dell Optiplex GX280 with 1.25 GB RAM, Intel Pentium 4 2.8 HT, Intel 82915G/GV/910GL GC graphics, Windows XP Professional:Not a laptop, but due to its integrated graphics, I included it in the comparison. Again: some blurries here, some blurries there, had to reduce clouds' file size, but now I can get some decent framerates with addon scenery, complex aircraft, some AI traffic and detailed clouds (I mean, Colombia Virtual 2007XE with PSS757 or Maddog 2006). Unluckily, it was borrowed.About the dual-core thing, I use Radar Contact, so I know DC is a must (maybe the only thing I know about how my future laptop's CPU should be). Even more, that's why I bought a dual-core and not a single-core CPU for my desktop. Now I want to get close to the performance of the Athlon I bought.Best regards from ColombiaLuis Miguel

[Luis Hernandez 564]

Well, I'll have to ask a more specific question. I have this following 3 laptop CPUs. Being all other things as equal as possible, which one is the best of the 3 for FS2004?- Intel Core2Duo T5750 (2.0 GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 667 MHz FSB)- Intel Core2Duo T7250 (2.0 GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 800 MHz FSB)- AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-60 (2.0 GHz, 2 x 512 MB L2 Cache, 800 MHz HyperTransport).As you may see, I chose this ones because of the same clock speed.Best regards from ColombiaLuis Miguel

[byork 2,258]

I recommend an Asus G1S.It's what I've got and it works very well.Cheers,Bryan

[Guest ugotkevin]

Between the three I'd go for the T7250. Core2s are a little faster than the Turions generally, but they cost more.

[ryanbatc 12,770]

yeah I'd also go for the 7250, fastest of the 3,the faster the better, FSX will eat all the cpu cycles it can get.Over on some other forums I peruse, there is a link to another laptop I'd recommend. Not sure what your budget it though:http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?sk...d=1195599780039