Need advice on a new computer...

[tsf4]

I currently own an HP Envy with core i7, and would like to upgrade to a better computer more designed with gaming in mind - but all I really play is Civ5 and Paradox grand strategy games, and I feel like when most people on the Internet say something is good for gaming they just mean games like the COD, GTA and Halo series-type games.

What would be the best for me to get that is around $1000-2000 dollars? I really am in need of something that runs these games faster than my HP envy does.

Some (or lots of) advice would be appreciated greatly!

I have already tried looking through lots of models and products but I am not very literate on "under the hood" computer specs.

 

[balmung60]

Depends. Does it have to be a laptop, or can it be a desktop? Because for far less than $1000, you can make or buy a desktop that will easily far exceed the recommended specifications for Civ 5 or any Paradox game. Getting those same specs in a laptop will cost a good bit more (a laptop with similar specs to a $750 gaming desktop can easily run you $1500).

 

[tsf4]

I need a laptop since I travel a lot.

 

[balmung60]

In that case, just go to you computer-buying website of choice (eg. Newegg, OutletPC, Tiger Direct, or whatever) and look up gaming laptops under $2000.

The requirements for what you play are low enough that pretty much anything anyone is still selling in that price range will be easily able to handle them. Ideally, you probably want a sixth-generation i5 or i7 processor and at least 8GB of RAM, and pretty much any AMD or nVidia GPU included ought to be plenty.

 

[tsf4]

I did that, but I just do not know which one to get since most people dont play strategy games. I have already looked at lots of different models and products and was just hoping I could get further advice...

Sorry if I sound angry - I am fine but am just stating that I need more advice than just " look up computers under $2000"

 

[balmung60]

It doesn't actually make that much difference what kind of games are being played in this case. It takes a lot of the same stuff to run an FPS fast and to run a strategy game fast - a good amount of fast RAM, a decent modern GPU, and a fast CPU. An SSD can help, but I've never had any real speed problems with just doing all HDD.

However, I too, don't have terribly much information to go on here. For example, at about $850, this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834890015 will probably do everything you need, though I don't know if a 15.6" screen is enough or if you want to do 17.3", and it does lack a separate numpad, which for all I know could be fine or could be a deal breaker, or maybe 4K is mandatory for you (though I don't think I'd recommend it for Paradox games on either a 15.6" or 17.3" screen, since without UI scaling mods, the UI would likely be tiny), while that laptop only does 1080p.

My biggest concern for the games you play would be CPU clock speed. All the GPUs in the laptops I'm seeing are more than enough for Civ 5 and all current and announced Paradox games and 8 or 16 GB of RAM if you do things like play games and leave 500 tabs open at the same time is far more than the O/S and game combined will use (even with 8GB, the game and O/S shouldn't use up more than about 4GB).

Based on what I'd get based on my own criteria if I was getting a new gaming laptop (17.3" and numpad + arrow keys, highest available clock speed on a sixth-gen mobile i5/7 without a major price increase, dedicated modern GPU, 16GB of RAM, no need for 4K, plus it doesn't exactly max the budget, which I normally consider a plus) this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834232765 or something similar would likely be what I'd recommend.

If I were looking to run the given budget to the edge, I'd move up to something like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152937, which has a faster processor and a slightly more powerful GPU (the 6920 HQ is slightly faster still, but the cheapest laptop I'm seeing with that CPU costs $3100), but I don't think that it'd really be that much faster than the $1370 option for the games you play (or really much else - it's a large price increase for a pretty small increase in actual processing power).

 

[starwarsfan541]

Not specific advice, but I am pretty sure CPU is more important than the GPU in most strategy games.

 

[tsf4]

@balmung60 - Thanks for the details! They did help a lot. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like an SSD is only different than a HDD because it can load things faster, but really will only slightly improve actual game speed/performance. It saves a lot of money, and $1300ish sounds a lot better to my wallet than $2000ish. I was originally looking closely at the Asus 752 VW model, but I think the only difference from the VW to the VL is the SSD (?) so that seems like a better model for me if the SSD doesn't impact actual performance greatly.

@starwarsfan541 - thanks for the CPU vs GPU advice

I think I am leaning towards the $999 GL752VW-DH71 17.3-inch Gaming Laptop (Intel i7 2.6GHz, 16GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB HDD, GTX960M 2GB Graphic Card, Windows 10)

What do you think of this one?

 

[balmung60]

Some people swear SSDs make a major difference when saving and loading, but I've never considered saves to be inordinately long with an HDD, though I've never had an SSD to compare to.

As for CPUs, I'm pretty well convinced that the 2.6 GHz i7 will be plenty, given that my 6 year old laptop with a first-generation i5 running at 2.27 GHz can run CK2 and EU4 pretty well.

However, if you're interested in really pursuing the clock speed angle (okay, so I was mostly just poking around on Newegg to see how low the prices on laptops with 6820HK processors went), there's a $1600 version of that $1830 laptop that omits the SSD here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152938 and if you're willing to take on slightly more risk (no guarantee that you'll get all accessories included in the retail version), an open box version of the same laptop for $1350 here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152938R. To me, it sounds like the biggest risk with open box is that it might not include the charger and you'd have to get one elsewhere.

EDIT: However, that $999 laptop sounds like a pretty good choice.

 

[Rokh]

CK2 in particular is all about CPU speed. The problem with that i7 is that each core runs at 2.6 GHz only, which is actually not a lot for this game. I have an i5-4690 (3.5 GHz per core) and apparently it's not enough to play the game comfortably after a few hundred years.

 

[Sergeant Flutter]

I use a macbook air that works very well. The new macbook pro looks pretty good. That maybe? I think it's in your price range. Macs can runs Paradox games quite well, I've found.

 

[balmung60]

CK2 in particular is all about CPU speed. The problem with that i7 is that each core runs at 2.6 GHz only, which is actually not a lot for this game. I have an i5-4690 (3.5 GHz per core) and apparently it's not enough to play the game comfortably after a few hundred years.

Here's the thing - that 4690 (and the 6600 (3.3 GHz/core on 4 physical cores) that's going into my new computer) is a desktop processor. The laptop versions of the i5 and i7 run substantially slower than their desktop counterparts - the very fastest laptop i7 (6920HQ) runs at 2.9 GHz (and is MUCH pricier than the 2.6 GHz 6700HQ), while the fastest desktop i7 (6700K) runs at 4 GHz per core. As at least some consolation the laptop processors can turbo boost to a much greater degree than their desktop counterparts - that 6700HQ can turbo from 2.6 GHz to 3.5 GHz, while the desktop 6700 can turbo from 3.4 GHz to 4.0 GHz.

Since tsf4 requires a laptop, the desktop processors are not an option.

 

[Kumicho]

To the OP - Maybe keep your laptop for traveling, and get a desktop for playing at home? CKII is heavily (solely?) single-core dependent, which is why my cheap ~$400 desktop with a 3.3ghz dual core (i3-2120) does decently well. However, laptop CPUs are seriously gimped compared to their desktop versions, and are always going to run CKII slower. Otherwise you will be spending ~$1000-1500+ on something that could still be maddeningly frustrating.

 

[Philadelphus]

Some people swear SSDs make a major difference when saving and loading, but I've never considered saves to be inordinately long with an HDD, though I've never had an SSD to compare to.

A little anecdote: I first got into a Paradox game (EU IV) just after I'd moved from my aging laptop that got me through college to a custom built gaming desktop with an SSD. I loved EU IV, so when I went home for Christmas I decided to show it to my little brothers on my laptop…and discovered that the monthly auto-saves (back before they switched to tri-monthly) took about ten times longer. After a year in-game I had to quit, I just couldn't take it anymore. Haven't tried a Paradox game on that laptop since (note that it actually ran the game perfectly fine when it wasn't autosaving, performance otherwise wasn't an issue).

If you're used to an HDD, or have never tried an SSD and it works for you, great! But there's definitely a difference if you play Ironman (though if you don't, then it's mostly just a longer loading time at the start of the game).

 

[Wagonlitz]

You might want to ask in OT too; there are some quite knowledgeable people there.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?forums/ot-forum.12/

Ideally, you probably want a sixth-generation i5 or i7 processor

I believe @blue emu stated in a previous recommendation thread that it didn't matter particularly much what generation you had as long as it was one of the newest.

and at least 8GB of RAM, and pretty much any AMD or nVidia GPU included ought to be plenty.

I agree that 8 GB should be enough; he probably wants nVidia, since there have been some strange bugs with AMD. Quite rare sure, but there.

CK2 in particular is all about CPU speed. The problem with that i7 is that each core runs at 2.6 GHz only, which is actually not a lot for this game. I have an i5-4690 (3.5 GHz per core) and apparently it's not enough to play the game comfortably after a few hundred years.

My laptop has an i7 4710HQ which can turbo up to 3.5 GHz and that is struggling too after a couple hundred years (though to be fair I guess all processors would when you are running a 1500+ holdings empire with something like 4000 living dynasty members).
The problem with PDS games is that they are all single core, so you don't really gain anything by having multiple cores. They are also only 32 bit although I have seen some people claim that for grand strategy moving to 64 bit wouldn't necessarily increase speed. Using multithreading would help really much as far as I am aware.

 

[Stablebrew]

A little anecdote: I first got into a Paradox game (EU IV) just after I'd moved from my aging laptop that got me through college to a custom built gaming desktop with an SSD. I loved EU IV, so when I went home for Christmas I decided to show it to my little brothers on my laptop…and discovered that the monthly auto-saves (back before they switched to tri-monthly) took about ten times longer. After a year in-game I had to quit, I just couldn't take it anymore. Haven't tried a Paradox game on that laptop since (note that it actually ran the game perfectly fine when it wasn't autosaving, performance otherwise wasn't an issue).

If you're used to an HDD, or have never tried an SSD and it works for you, great! But there's definitely a difference if you play Ironman (though if you don't, then it's mostly just a longer loading time at the start of the game).

EU4 ironman saves a lot faster than CK2 ironman. Never felt bothered by EU4 ironsave but CK2... phew... getting worse the more I progress in timeline.
Sometimes, ofc it´s a personal feeling, CK2 pop up events on 4th of January/July and in those moments I feel mocked by good old Navi from Zelda.

Navi: "LISTEN!"
me: "Sup?"
Navi: "SAVING FIRST!"
me: "geez..."

Navi: "WATCH OUT!"
me: "yeah?!?!"
Navi: "SAVING! "
me: "Ohh, for fu... sake!"

I don´t know how, bcs I´m not a programmer, I wish Paradox would improve CK2 engine.

 

[schondetta]

Might be easier if you find a system you like and link the details. I think most people here can use there knowledge and reason to help you make a decision. Running these paradox games smoothly isn't really a major feat of strength . Ck2 in particular is archaiac regardless of your hardware

 

[Wagonlitz]

Ck2 in particular is archaiac regardless of your hardware

Doesn't mean you won't get considerable slowdown when you blob too much/your dynasty gets too large.

 

[schondetta]

Doesn't mean you won't get considerable slowdown when you blob too much/your dynasty gets too large.

Ummmmm yeah man that was kinda my point

 

[Wagonlitz]

Ummmmm yeah man that was kinda my point

Then I misunderstood you; I thought you meant "runs like a charm" with archaic.