[Brady12]

Hi all, looking for advice on which is more important for what I use a laptop for.

Mainly browsing.

Streaming TV and films (with HDMI cable to TV if that's relevant.)

Streaming live sports, once a week for 5 months of the year but important as it's a £100 subscription.

Music now and again.

Will not be used for any gaming or work other than the odd word document.

I have my eye on a laptop with 2nd gen Intel Core i5 and 4gb RAM but not sure if I need that fast a processor for what i'm doing, or if i'd be better off with a slower processor and more RAM.

[chrisjr]

If it comes with a 32 bit version of Windows then no point adding any more RAM as 32bit Windows won't see any more than about 3.2GB. If it has a 64bit version of Windows then more RAM won't do any harm.

With web streaming I suspect the broadband will be more of a limiting factor than the CPU and RAM. I've used an old Dell laptop with a much slower processor than the i5 and only 1GB of RAM to stream video from the internet successfully so I would be surprised if an i5 or even an i3 CPU would be a problem.

So I rather think your broadband connection will throw in the towel long before the laptop.

[BrokenArrow]

You don't need a fast processor or much RAM for that, i3 and 2GB of RAM would be fine.

[Brady12]

Thanks for your replies.

Could I get away with slower than i3?

Ideally want to buy in store rather than online and the cheapest i3 in PC world for example is £400 which is a little bit out of my price range.

[Brady12]

Looking at these 2 http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/compaq...93451-pdt.html


http://www.pcworld.co.uk/gbuk/toshib...56576-pdt.html

Other than HDD, which isn't an issue, is there much difference.

[chrisjr]

The CPU and graphics are the same it would appear. So not a lot of difference there. In fact they seem very similar apart from the hard drive capacity.

So it only comes down to things like the Toshiba having a full keyboard and the display quality. The Compaq is very similar to the HP I've got and the keyboard is a bit spongy in feel, certainly used better and sometimes I do miss the numeric keypad which you get on the Toshiba. The display on the HP hasn't got the best viewing angle either but is perfectly fine otherwise.

If they are both on display in PC World then worth having a look at them to see which you prefer the look and feel of. In terms of raw specs they are pretty evenly matched.

[Brady12]

Originally Posted by chrisjr

The CPU and graphics are the same it would appear. So not a lot of difference there. In fact they seem very similar apart from the hard drive capacity.

So it only comes down to things like the Toshiba having a full keyboard and the display quality. The Compaq is very similar to the HP I've got and the keyboard is a bit spongy in feel, certainly used better and sometimes I do miss the numeric keypad which you get on the Toshiba. The display on the HP hasn't got the best viewing angle either but is perfectly fine otherwise.

If they are both on display in PC World then worth having a look at them to see which you prefer the look and feel of. In terms of raw specs they are pretty evenly matched.

Thanks, went to have a look but the Compaq was missing.

Are they good enough for what I need?

[flagpole]

Originally Posted by BrokenArrow

You don't need a fast processor or much RAM for that, i3 and 2GB of RAM would be fine.

I'd disagree with the ram there.

my browser can use a gig of ram quite happily. with a modern OS you need at least 4.

wrt the cpu anything would do.

[c4rv]

4gb is plenty for what you want to do.

The only thing I might consider is getting one of the latested CPU with HD4000 video as apparently they have improved streaming video playback performance but as somebody else mentioned your broadband is most likely the limiting factor in all this.

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by Brady12

Thanks, went to have a look but the Compaq was missing.

Are they good enough for what I need?

If you are not into gaming or editing HD Video then they will more than likely be fine. For general web surfing and writing the odd letter or two they are more than adequate.

Those of us with more years on us than we care to admit to will remember using far less powerful systems than these for such tasks without problems.

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by flagpole

I'd disagree with the ram there.

my browser can use a gig of ram quite happily. with a modern OS you need at least 4.

wrt the cpu anything would do.

The question is not how much it uses but how much the RAM size affects what you are doing. For browsing the internet it is likely to not matter much as HD speeds are enough to handle that anyway, if you were gaming then it's a different matter.

[Dai13371]

I'd go with 4GB as bare minimum and a relatively decent 64 bit CPU. I have an Asus 1225B with only a 1Ghz dual core cpu with integrated graphics and it struggles with HD content like Silverlight on Netflix

[Loobster]

RAM is so cheap that to go for a machine with less than 4GB is pointless.

Almost any CPU will do what the OP wants, but there are plenty of dual-core budget processors now.

There's no point in paying £275 for the cheapest laptop possible when one at £350 is twice as fast. There becomes a point that the spec really takes a dive and saves you very little money.

This is the best one I can find for less than £350. CPU is very good for the money and otherwise good spec as well.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/CQ58-253SA-1...668398&sr=1-19

[flagpole]

Originally Posted by bobcar

The question is not how much it uses but how much the RAM size affects what you are doing. For browsing the internet it is likely to not matter much as HD speeds are enough to handle that anyway, if you were gaming then it's a different matter.

HD speeds are fast enough? Come off it.

Have you used win 7 or 8 worth two gig? It's horrific. As you say it is a question of what affects performance. And having two gig of ram is one of those things.

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by flagpole

HD speeds are fast enough? Come off it.

Have you used win 7 or 8 worth two gig? It's horrific. As you say it is a question of what affects performance. And having two gig of ram is one of those things.

They are fast enough for general browsing and playing of videos as long as you have enough RAM, obviously there is a minimum amount needed. One of my PCs has only 1GB (XP) and I can still view 1080p videos with no problem, my main PC only has 2GB (W7) and that does just about anything I can throw at it okay though I don't do gaming, if I did I'd want more RAM.

It's worth pointing out that the Sky+HD box has 128MB RAM and can handle recording 2 channels and playing another all of which is using the HDD. Yes Windows requires more memory but 2GB is okay for an awful lot of people including those running W7.

Doubling the RAM on my W7 PC to 4GB would not improve its performance at all for what I use it for, for others it could make a big difference which is why I said it depends on what you are doing. The limit on internet access doesn't come from the HDD but from broadband speeds.

[flagpole]

Originally Posted by bobcar

They are fast enough for general browsing and playing of videos as long as you have enough RAM, obviously there is a minimum amount needed. One of my PCs has only 1GB (XP) and I can still view 1080p videos with no problem, my main PC only has 2GB (W7) and that does just about anything I can throw at it okay though I don't do gaming, if I did I'd want more RAM.

It's worth pointing out that the Sky+HD box has 128MB RAM and can handle recording 2 channels and playing another all of which is using the HDD. Yes Windows requires more memory but 2GB is okay for an awful lot of people including those running W7.

Doubling the RAM on my W7 PC to 4GB would not improve its performance at all for what I use it for, for others it could make a big difference which is why I said it depends on what you are doing. The limit on internet access doesn't come from the HDD but from broadband speeds.

It's not worth pointing out how much ram a sky+ box has at all.

Buying a modern pc with an i5 processor and 2gb of ram is ridiculous. It's beyond ridiculous. And other than yourself you will not find anyone else to recommend this.

Adding more ram would certainly improve performance of your PC. Windows is clever like that.

Thanks for the info about broadband speed.

[2000motels]

Originally Posted by flagpole

HD speeds are fast enough? Come off it.

Have you used win 7 or 8 worth two gig? It's horrific. As you say it is a question of what affects performance. And having two gig of ram is one of those things.

On one of my PC'S I have, it has 2 gig of ram with an intel pentium 4 single core processor running Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit and it's a flyer for basic stuff, it's a 9 year old machine which had XP on it originally and Vista is probably the most underrated O/S ever, I think it's better than 7 actually it's much better than 7 because really 7 is Vista with a name change.

[flagpole]

Originally Posted by 2000motels

On one of my PC'S I have, it has 2 gig of ram with an intel pentium 4 single core processor running Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit and it's a flyer for basic stuff, it's a 9 year old machine which had XP on it originally and Vista is probably the most underrated O/S ever, I think it's better than 7 actually it's much better than 7 because really 7 is Vista with a name change.

Fine

vista is better than 7
An i5 with 2gb of ram is a good buy
Kirk is better than picard
And the moon is made of cheese

[2000motels]

Originally Posted by flagpole

Fine

vista is better than 7
An i5 with 2gb of ram is a good buy
Kirk is better than picard
And the moon is made of cheese

http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/w...ista-best.html

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by flagpole

It's not worth pointing out how much ram a sky+ box has at all.

Buying a modern pc with an i5 processor and 2gb of ram is ridiculous. It's beyond ridiculous. And other than yourself you will not find anyone else to recommend this.

Adding more ram would certainly improve performance of your PC. Windows is clever like that.

Thanks for the info about broadband speed.

Way to miss the point. The point is whether the particular system is suitable for the use it is being put to. Well for a user like the OP (it was his question) 2G of RAM would work fine.

The video will play just as well with this system as it would with a more powerful one. The internet will respond just as fast, therefore for this use the performance would not be improved however depending on what the speed is faster broadband may well improve these activities hence the broadband reference.

If you can get a more powerful system for the same price and build quality then by all means get the more powerful system but if it costs more or is less reliable then you are pissing money away because you get nothing for it.