I'm currently looking for a new laptop, because my old one is already tired when I install Windows 10, and so it's about time.
Basically, the laptop should be used for everyday life and, as indicated in the question title, also a little to play with.
Since there will be only a handful of games in the next 10 years that will be interesting for me on the PC when it comes up, it makes no sense to put a lot of money into a mobile gaming machine now, not to mention the design the one because they are supposed to be used elsewhere.
First and foremost, the games should be titles a la AoE, Civ or Anno. And the most current part of the latter seems to be quite hungry.
Since I have no plans to invest a lot (reluctant to go beyond a frame of 700-800), there's of course no need to have detail levels on Ultra to 4K. Somewhere between medium and high on FHD would still be the goal.
And with the type of game, the need for massive FPS should not be so high, if I judge it correctly.
In preparation, of course, I also looked at a few benchmarks (notebookcheck) to get an approximate overview of which GPUs would come into question at all; and I would also have a model in mind:
Lenovo L340-15 Gaming
Intel i5-9300H
GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR5 4GB
8 RAM DDR4
for less than 700 euro
Now you read something else about Anno 1800 everywhere. One says that the processor is very stressed, the other the opposite. 8GB are sufficient here, as is also the case in the system requirements, the others advise against 32 under 16 or even better.
There's even a test (also notebookcheck) for the model in these specifications, which, if I interpret it correctly, says that everything is okay.
53.85 FPS at minimal and 1280x720
43.3 FPS at medium and 1920x1080
33.98 FPS at high and 1920x1080
And you don't have to look at ultra
The question is, how do I rank this result compared to a more advanced game?
Theoretically, it should work the way I imagine it, right?
And if not, can you maybe give me tips on what to look for or even give suggestions?
In my opinion, a tower PC would be better for pure gaming. You can always add better graphics parts / chipsets / whatever later. The problem with the notebook is that most of them are useless for gaming unless you buy a gamer device. Which unfortunately only starts from the low three-digit range. In principle it's your thing anyway, but ask yourself one thing: do you want to risk 6-700 euro for a portable pc or 8-900 for a powerful tower?
And yes I know what I'm talking about because I recently wanted to get a reasonably strong computer. For what I imagine, I still have to save but who cares.
It will not be the main platform for gaming, since there's still a console anyway, and because I like to have a mobile device anyway, also due to space reasons, a tower PC simply makes little sense.
If it were different, I would totally agree with you.
Hmm, you're the same as me. Got my console anyway so luckily the pc is not that important.
In fact, you have already thoroughly archived and answered your question yourself.
The direction of your notebook selection is also right, and even comes close to the recommended system requirements for Anno 1800, except for slight restrictions in CPU performance.
With a very advanced game state (very big city) in Anno the CPU performance becomes the increasing measure of the basic performance.
With later best possible optimization of the graphic quality, it shouldn't be magic even in larger cities, on a Core i5-9300H (4 cores / 8 threads @ 2.5 Ghz) + GTX 1650 still around 30+ FPS @ 1080p / in low To be able to achieve details.
In your target price range, however, you will hardly be able to find anything with a stronger CPU and comparable graphics card.
Hmm. Too bad, it sounds like there are a few more drawbacks to be made in the game when the details have to be set low.
Is there any way to relieve such a CPU, i.e. Maybe not making up for such a deficit - that would be too much of a good thing - but maybe reducing it?
Unfortunately I'm not quite there.
Oh and one more thing: Would it make a noticeable difference to increase the RAM to 16GB?
With Anno, options that are not graphically visible during scrolling can also be adjusted so that the CPU can be relieved.
It's all about surface rolling with overviews zoomed out of the details.
The notebook you have selected should work noticeably smoother in this game than if you had a PS4 or XBOX One in its original version, with 8 AMD "Jaguar cores + a derivative of a slightly modified Radeon HD 7870) including the matching console version from Anno 1800 would use.
Since you want to be able to use other (less demanding games) and also office, web and video in addition to Anno (very demanding Simu with high game progress), I see your background idea as anything but "disappointing".
1080p / 30 (+) @ FHD would still be noticeable to significantly better at low to minimal details than ANNO 1800 on a 1st. Gene. PS4 / XBox One, which would have to fight in this game in 720p with 25 to 30 FPS with greatly reduced to even minimal details.
Here is the rough technical comparison between the CPU technology of a PS4 / XBox-One and a modern Intel Core i5 - notebook CPU like the Core i5-6300HQ.
(Here both processors compared with 4 cores / 4 threads at a similar clock rate)
Even 2 pieces of the Athlon 5350 (thus 8 cores as with the consoles mentioned) do not really see performance in a duet against a single Intel Core i5-6300HQ.
https://www.cpu-monkey.com/de/compare_cpu-intel_core_i5_6300hq-577-vs-amd_athlon_5350-381
In contrast to the Core i5-6300HQ, the Core i5-9300H also masters SMT and can therefore serve up to 8 logical threads in parallel via 4 cores.
So much for a simple CPU performance comparison between two completely different processor systems and technology generations. The outdated AMD technology of the consoles mentioned is therefore already very lame in comparison.
With the modern Nvidia Geforce GTX 1650 vs. The old Radeon HD 7870 Ghz / R9-270 (X) can also (clearly) noticeably score the notebook compared to the consoles mentioned.
The performance of the GTX 1650-4GB is roughly comparable to that of a Geforce GTX 970 or Radeon HD 7970 (Ghz-Ed) / R9-290x / RX 570- 4GB OC.
Please read the following article about Anno 1800:
https://www.pcgames.de/Anno-1800-Spiel-61247/News/Systemanforderungen-bestaetigt-mit-Laptop-Spezifikationen-1279012/
Therefore my cautious assessment that with the chosen book you can experience frame rates of 30+ on such a book, even if the game progresses in adapted settings @ 1080p, where the consoles mentioned (Rev. 1 in each case) could not keep up technically at all.
(My prognosis "30+ @ 1080p" holds especially for your question "What is a book like you found with well-advanced game progress in Anno 1800)
Okay, that sounds different again. And thanks for the effort.
"Low details" sounds a bit unsexy at first. But there will be something in comparison to the consoles, if one should certainly not ignore the optimizations that can be made in this way. And if you consider that it never bothered me much, I maybe just over-interpreted that "low detail".
It probably doesn't need it; not even for Anno.
In this type of games, certain FPS limits and smaller reload stutters can still be handled quite well.
Otherwise it would probably have called "optimal"> 8 GB RAM for Anno 1800.
In the other answers, you said clearly by the way that you were looking for a portable replacement for your old book instead of a stationary desktop.
In the notebook sector, the configuration of your choice mentioned is already very marginally cool in the 15 "form area. At 17" we go there again at least about 200 to 300 euro higher without really big increases in performance.
The cooling then works much better for something like that.
In 15 "format, the performance mentioned is quite a challenge with this hardware for cooling notebooks.
(Can still be functionally adjusted in individual adaptation via the Windows energy saving plans)
That means that the processor in particular is likely to throttle itself so as not to overheat, right? Means I shouldn't nail you to the forecast.
I rather think that you should limit the CPU and GPU of such a notebook in their clock rates as far as possible via the energy saving plan for Anno 1800 to the respective base clock rates, or even slightly less. (So at least avoid the turbo values completely in this game using the energy saving plan)
I drive my Intel Core i5-4xxxM and "only" Intel HD 4600-iGPU in such a self-created limit - energy saving profile at almost 2.0 Ghz maximum and can still use my Hayday on Windows to Android virtualization on this book play. (well, because of the load-intensive Android Emu only on 720p)
But under 70 degrees for CPU & GPU and almost inaudibly quiet even in summer at almost 30 degrees in the room.
This well used notebook comes from around Late 2014 and has only 2 cores / 4 threads @ 2.4 Ghz base clock nominal.
(HP Probook 640 G1-Series)
The Windows energy saving plans are more or less free of warranty questions if you know what you are configuring individually.
You can also use the preconfigured "balanced" mode and assign "Anno" to The Geforce if necessary. (if the book does not do this automatically depending on the energy saving plan for this game.)
After all, you mentioned Anno 1800 in the special game. (I know the most modern and demanding part of the Anno-Series despite the "1800"!)
Okay… I have to sort that out first. At least I have deliberately never worked with energy saving plans or only ever used the preset ones. Didn't know that you can do it depending on programs or in this case a game.
I will definitely remember it, or better save the page so that I don't forget it. Although I guess from the outset there will be a balanced plan anyway.
Does this actually change anything in your assessment, or did you have previously included this?
With my estimates for both the CPU (I5-9300h) + GTX 1650, I assume the guaranteed base clock rates without turbo… So even there with a little leeway downwards.
In the case of notebooks, you can only count on the guaranteed and specified minimum clock rates.
But it all sounds very positive and I don't think it is as complicated as I imagined it to be.
