laptop per carcad

[Kain_89]

hi to all, I found a notebook on offer that would serve me mainly for autocad but I do not know if the features are suitable to be able to work in tranquility with this program, place the parameters below:

hp - g62-165si
intel core i3-330m 2,13 ghz
ram 4 gb ddr3
hdd 500 gb
video card ati mobility radeon hd5430 from 512 mb

cost 400 euro

say I would have problems with autocad in case of notebook purchase? I found another hp that, with 200 euros extra, has the video card from 1 gb . . . . . but 200 euros for one thing I don't need would be a useless expense.

 

[rpor66]

is not the amount of ram of the graphics card to make the difference but the pattern.
If you want to make 3d you would do well to look for one with the most powerful cpu and hd5650 graphics card, always to stay in the low price range.
If the 3d doesn't care what you posted is fine.

 

[gil]

What are you doing in autocad?
specific if 2d, 3d, simple redering, photorealistic redering

What are you working on?
small size files max 2mb, medium size files up to 5 mb, large file size 6 mb and beyond.

 

[PlannerRoad]

and also on which version of autocad works. the last are heavier to handle.

 

[enri]

for the 3d autocad wants a picture. desktops don't work well.

 

[Tristan]

for the 3d autocad wants a picture. desktops don't work well.

This is a dance

 

[rpor66]

for the 3d autocad wants a picture. desktops don't work well.

We do not exaggerate, even fiat takes you from to b, there is no need for ferrari.
you are talking about notebook from 400÷600 euros.

p.s.: <questa balla="" una="" è="">. quoti</questa>

 

[enri]

is not a ball, from win view onwards the cpu strongly limits the desktop card, it was also a gtx 480. try to manage a 3d model with a desktop in autocad and see the difference with a picture. same speech with 3d studio max. in xp there was no problem. gamers from base to top have very similar performance. I always talk about 3d of course. I forgot that firepros are good too. driver question.

 

[Tristan]

is not a ball, from win view onwards the cpu strongly limits the desktop card, it was also a gtx 480. try to manage a 3d model with a desktop in autocad and see the difference with a picture. same speech with 3d studio max. in xp there was no problem. gamers from base to top have very similar performance. I always talk about 3d of course. I forgot that firepros are good too. driver question.

show me a document or report related to a test that "certificates" how much you claim. just a couple of months ago I had the opportunity to confront myself on this same topic with a luminaire of the computer graphics that reiterated me that currently it is much better as value for money a media card from videogame (which brings you home with an expense of just over 200€) than a tab called "professional" (which comes to cost even 5-600€)... but if you show me data to the hand that is not so...

 

[enri]

only applies to the programs I mentioned, there is no verse, they are not well with the gamers. talk about it in many forums, people who switch to performant models double, and have almost identical performance. It seems that the cpu is limiting the gpu in the gamers, but I assure you that it is a very debated matter. both the painting and the firepro. There was a page on cgarchitect, but now I can't find, where a fx580 painting, was choking the latest gamers, does it look normal? in rhino or cinema 4d, but also many others, for example there is no such difference, so it is okay what you say, but it does not apply to all sw. without considering cad as cai, swx or pro-e, if you give him a gamer you answer it. :
for the two autodesk sw in xp there was no problem, but from view and seven yes.

found, the charts have been talking for themselves. gtx 480, which is a bomb is torn from all frames in autocad and 3d studio. not in all conditions, but most. of course the frames use the drivers specific to the two sw:http://www.cgarchitect.com/news/reviews/review076_1.aspOn the contrary, the frameworks resulting from the new fixed architectures, to which the 480 belongs are phenomenal.

 

[Kain_89]

Thanks for the answers, for now I would only need it for autocad, I still followed your advice by spending a little more to have a more efficient processor in case of specific 3d programs.

Thanks again to all for the help!

Bye!

 

[Messerschmitt]

found, the charts have been talking for themselves. gtx 480, which is a bomb is torn from all frames in autocad and 3d studio. not in all conditions, but most. of course the frames use the drivers specific to the two sw:http://www.cgarchitect.com/news/reviews/review076_1.asp

I'm sorry, but I think the charts don't say that the consumer cards are bad.
as first thing: only 3 tabs per cost less than those consumer, all others are much more expensive.

Chart 1: Average ranking on autocad 2010, the three consumer cards mark the best results.

chart 2: average chart on autocad 2011, the picture are the best, the worst firepros, the consumer a middle way.

graph 3: autocad 2010/2011 - wireframe (fps): Consumers are very well, they mark very high peaks.

graph 4: autocad 2010/2011 - hidden (fps): consume more or less like firepro, picture with very high peaks.

etc...

In a few words, it cannot be said that consumers go wrong, indeed: they certainly have the best price ratio performance, so that in the end the article says:as the results indicate, in many cases there is not a large difference between the consumer series cards and the professionals cards and at times the consumer cards even outperform. to ensure this is a balanced review and provides information required to make an informed decision, i've outlined some of the differences and benefits of the more expensive professional cards. i'll leave it up to you, the reader, to decide how important those items are for your pipeline.and the benefits indicated are mainly related to certification and optimization to work with professional programs.