I wanted to get a laptop (budget 700 euro) and found 2 attractive offers. One is the HP Pavilion (gaming laptop) and the Acer aspire. HP data. Intel i5 10300 H with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti, 512gb ssd and 8gb ddr4 RAM. Acer data. Intel i7 1165g7 with the Intel Iris xe graphics gpu (integrated in cpu), 512 GB ssd and 8gb ddr4 RAM. So big games like Witcher, GTA etc. I will definitely not play on it, but maybe emulators (Wii, GameCube, Nintendo Switch) and they should run smoothly. So generally for office work, but I would still like to have power reserves for emulators, maybe Mal world of Warcraft and video editing, etc. The laptop should be versatile (but no crass games) and surf the web quickly. I don't own a normal computer.
Doesn't a gaming laptop generally have better fans and more power reserves and could this make the theoretically somewhat worse i5 10300h look better than the i7 1165g7? I just want performance and security for the future.
Which of the two is better in itself or better for me? (Acer 687 euro, HP Pavilion 699 euro).
Switch emulators need a lot of power, you shouldn't downplay that.
Yeah definitely. Is an integrated GPU like the Intel Iris xe enough?
Clearly the laptop with the dedicated graphics unit.
The CPU may be a little worse, but the GPU is better.
Certainly not for that, for more undemanding PC games or for gta v it would be just enough or for some emulators but not for the switch
And can one generally say which of the two laptops is "better"?
The one with 1650ti is better, but I can't say whether it's really good
Thank you for your help! And have one more question. If, according to benchmarks, an i5 is stronger than an i7 processor, for example. I5 10th Gen better than i7 8-9th Gen, is it still the case that the i7 won't get "old" and "slow" as quickly as an i5 in the long term?
Thanks!
Do not pay attention to the i number, it is irrelevant!
I would not have thought that the i5 can be just as future-proof or even more future-proof than an i7 because a friend of mine said that the i5 processors are artificially throttled or made worse after a while so that the i7 processors are seen as better.
I'm reading this for the first time. I don't know how intel should do something like that or why they should do it
Yes agree with you.
I found another offer. Hp Pavilion with AMD ryzen 5 4600h (hexa core) with the GeForce GTX 1650 (without ti), 16gb RAM, 144hz for 799 euro or the above-mentioned Pavilion. The i5 10300h is certainly better for gaming because of the better single core clock and the GTX 1650ti. But as I said, gaming is not my focus, I'm more looking for a very good all-rounder (office, video and image processing, from and to gaming but nothing crass rather Wii or GameCube emulators). The AMD Ryzen 5 4600h is actually better than the Intel i5 10300h apart from gaming. What would you advise me?
In addition, the Pavilion with the Intel processor costs 699 euro and has only 8 GB of RAM and I wanted to upgrade that to 16 GB for 40 euro anyway, it would not be worth paying an additional 60 euro extra for 144hz, AMD ryzen 5 4600U and 16 GB RAM?
Always depends on the individual laptop, do you have a link?
Just found it at OTTO. Check out this article: https://www.otto.de/...1119889258
Just found it at OTTO. Check out this article: https://www.otto.de/...1295442675
'looks good at first
Get another 5% discount on the respective laptop haha
I see
But which is the best one to buy now?
Rather the https://www.otto.de/...1119889258 but I can't decide that yet
Yes No problem. Take your time, I don't want to put you under pressure either haha. Just write in when you know more.
Nothing more meaningful found can take that
Sry if I'm annoying can you briefly explain why the HP for 799 euro is better than the 699 euro apart from 144 Hz?
