Low/Mid End Laptop Comparison

Akarjumuru

Hey everyone and thank you for taking your time to read this.
(Also, sorry for the upcoming text wall)

I'm relatively new to the world of CG and am still trying to get my feet wet in a as many directions as I can.
Currently, my primary focus lies on Game Development and 3D Modeling, for which I would like to purchase a solid "low-to-mid-end" laptop that will keep me covered for the next few years.
Being a student starting out, I have a rather limited budget, which is why I would like to stay clear of anything over 1.000 Euro.

Here is some quick information:
1.) Main applications: PS, ZBrush, Maya, Modo, Mari, UnrealEngine
2.) Budget: approximately 800 Euro
3.) Location: Germany
4.) Specific requirements: Stable work environment for a wide variety of 3D Packages

To elaborate, Mari and the UnrealEngine aren't actually part of my current workflow due to my highly out-dated computer, but I would definitely love to explore them in the future. This is why, according to their corresponding website's system recommendations, I need to limit my search to quad core processors.
In addition, I've read to avoid AMD Graphics Cards because of their lack of OpenGL support and the consequential issues with Modo.

With all that in mind, I made my own research and set up the following spreadsheet to help me make my decision:


Favourites:
1.) Lenovo IdeaPad G700 - Spending an extra ~140 Euro, I could upgrade the RAM to 16GB and still come out with only 740 Euro spent for a decent overall package.
2.) Lenovo IdeaPad Z710 - Seems really solid for the price. An upgrade to 16GB is worth a thought, although it will raise the price to roughly 940 Euro.
3.) MSI Leopard Pro GP60 - Small powerhouse that can be upgraded to 16GB of RAM a lot cheaper since it requires only one more 8GB module, leading to a price of ~910 Euro. Downside is the smaller screen.

Since this is my first laptop purchase for CG work, I could really use some opinions on making my final decision.
Maybe someone knows of a laptop that suits my needs better than any of those listed? Or perhaps some of my requirements seem unnecessary to you and you know what I should look for instead?
I am open to suggestions and really appreciate every sort of input and help.

Thank you so much for reading!

EarthQuake

Looks like you've done some very good research so far, but I would add something else to your list: Screen quality/panel type.

Many laptops have poor quality TN panels which means poor color accuracy and viewing angles, a big drawback if art will be the laptop's main purpose.

Generally you want to find a laptop with an IPS (usually cheaper e-IPS panels in laptops but still better than tn). To find the panel type generally you can goolge the model number + "panel type" "tn panel" or "ips panel" to find more info.

Also, this always needs to be said, especially if you're looking at laptops in the 17 inch range: You can get a better performing desktop for less money than a beefcake laptop. If you're going with something as big as a 17", it's going to be a pain to lug around, so is it really that portable anyway? Just something else to think about. I would add weight to the list as well, again some of these larger machines are quite heavy.

I would try to find one with a SSD, around 250GB for OS etc if you can, it makes a big difference.

Also, note that all of the GPUs in these machines are underpowered mobile GPUs. I wouldn't want to run content creation apps, UE4 or recent games on any of them. To get even a remotely good laptop GPU you have to get a 770M (about as good as a GTX 560) or better. 650m, 720m, 740m, etc these are really crappy video cards (about as fast as a GTX 9800, in other words a gpu circa 2008 ), decent for a laptop if you only need to do light 3d work or play old games, but not good enough for a dedicated workstation doing high end 3d. A 760m is borderline (about half as fast as 770m).

Snader

Do those programs actually ask for quad core GPUs? Because a lot of phones are quadcore, my old 2008 PC is quadcore, and yet my €55 Budget CPU from 2014 is faster in actually doing things.

And yes. Definitely reconsider laptop vs desktop. If you need to take it to school on a daily basis (i.e. commute instead of campus apartment), sure get a laptop. If you're getting it because it's easier for lans, or you want to take it on holiday, don't.

Thane-

In this same quandary myself. Interesting to note that my new LG G3 2560x1440 screen'd phone is a much smoother experience than my laptop for almost everything...ugh.

Akarjumuru

First off, thanks a lot for the advice, it helped a lot!


I've prioritized the display quality a little more, and the result was more than disillusioning:
None of the displays of the laptops below 1.000 Euro was truly qualified for professional CG work.
This is scary though, because now I might have to consider increasing my budget drastically if I want to make it a worthwhile purchase.


As for whether or not it needs to be a laptop: yes, it does. I need to bring it to university or home a lot, or for longer train trips.
I will reconsider getting a bulky 17 inch though. xD

Also, this is what the program's websites state as the system recommendations:

UE4:

• Desktop PC or Mac
• Windows 7 64-bit or Mac OS X 10.9.2 or later
• Quad-core Intel or AMD processor, 2.5 GHz or faster
• NVIDIA GeForce 470 GTX or AMD Radeon 6870 HD series card or higher
• 8 GB RAM

Mari:

• Quad-core processor
• 250GB disk space available for caching and temporary files (or a minimum of 50GB if you're working on a small project)
• At least 4GB RAM
• Display with 1680 x 1050 pixel resolution
• An NVIDIA or AMD graphics card with at least 1GB of RAM and OpenGL 3.2 Support (see ‘Tested graphics cards’ below) Please note that you need Mac OSX 10.9 or higher to run Mari on Mac with AMD cards.

The Acer Aspire V3-772G seems like a valid option now because it offers extra slots for an upgrade to up to 32GB of RAM and a SSD hard drive. Despite the TN panel, it scored decently in display tests, too. However, with a weight of 3,2kg and a size of 17inch, it is one of the bulkiest laptops listed.

The two Asus models on the list both have a good IPS display and seem like solid packages, but I couldn't find any info on the number of hard drive slots for an extra SSD.


Do you guys think anything in the 1.500 Euro price range would truly make big enough of a difference to justify the higher price?

kaptainkernals

Regarding the Asus models you have listed there, they're both exactly the same, the only difference is the hard drive size, I'm running the CN390H, though it's called something else here, and performance wise it's great, but the hard drive situation is limiting.

It comes with a single hard drive slot, which is occupied by a single standard disk drive (not an SSD), and a DVD drive, you can however, take the DVD drive out, and replace it with a drive caddy.

http://hddcaddy.com/en/asus-hdd-caddy/845-asus-n550jk-hdd-caddy.html

It's an upgrade I'm planning on doing my laptop, I'll be putting an SSD where my main drive is now, and moving the 1tb to where the DVD drive is, and use that as a storage drive.

Akarjumuru

That's a pretty interesting solution, thank you kaptainkernals!

I'll probably have another look around at laptops in the 1.000 Euro and above price range, but I am actually pretty fond of the Asus + drive caddy option so far.

Snader

Yeah I'm thinking the 'quad core' is hyperbolic. The 470GTX and 6870 HD both are 4 years old and that's about the time when the Core 2 Duo slowly became because of the i5 series. And quads from that era get beat by duals from this year quite easily. I generally look at http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php for performance indication.

Have you had a look at Dells as well? This one seems nice:
http://www.dell.com/de/p/inspiron-15-7537/pd?oc=cn75324&model_id=inspiron-15-7537
http://www.notebookreview.com/notebookreview/dell-inspiron-15-7000-series-review/
15 inch, 2.6kg, €950
i7 4510U, 16gb ram, GT 750M, 1tb SSD hybrid
The CPU isn't as good as the 4700 series, because it has half the cores, but it still whoops the butt of both the AMDs.

You mention the Acer because of upgrade options. In that case you'd be better off putting that money towards an overall budget increase, as all offers tend to be optimized a certain way. And I'd argue that upgrading a laptop down the line is not very much use because you're still going to be limited to the same CPU/GPU.

EarthQuake

For reference, benchmark scores:

880M: 4787
775M: 4530
780M: 4331
GTX 470: 3563 (UE4 min spec card)
870M: 3519
770M: 2918
860M: 2732
760M: 1703
750M: 1527
650M: 1295
740M: 900
720M: 570

Again for UE4 and other high end 3d work, I wouldn't go with a mobile card slower than a 770M. A 750M is less than half the speed of the min recommended card. You can't swap a GPU on a laptop, so if you intend to use this for the next few years, definately get something with a good enough card even if you have to pay more. You will regret it if you don't.

Source: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

I agree generally the higher end dual core I5 and I7 CPUs are very good. Quad cores are better, but the situations where you will see the difference depends on how well your software supports threading. Rendering in modo or baking in xnormal will see a big boost from a quad core CPU, most other tasks you won't really notice it. If most of your software is poorly threaded, a faster clocked dual core can outperform a slower clocked quad core.

Ace-Angel

For GPU comparison, I suggest this site: http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/index.php?list=gfxLaptop

If you want to know what the performance difference is (in terms of numbers on the hardware themselves) between 2 specific cards, this is the place to go, if you know extra stuff about architecture of the card and so on (especially important if you want your hardware to be certain software specific compatible to the fullest) then it also helps.

I haven't taken a look at the CPU section, but it may also be valid.