Laptop question

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:37 am

What sort of minimal specs would a laptop need to have in order for it to flawlessly play DVDs and DivX/Xvid files? Would it be possible to buy one for less than $400US used? Or should I rather get this baby: http://www.radioshack.ca/estore/Product ... ct=1611503

Post by **YourGrandpa** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 3:37 am

I wouldn't buy any electronics from radio shack, it's all mostly crap. Besides, you can get a lot more for your money elsewhere. I've seen portable DVD players with 10 inch LCD screens for that price.

Post by **AmIdYfReAk** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 3:55 am

thats canadian.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 4:15 am

Do they play DivX though? If yes, then link me cause I looked at futureshit and radioshit and thats the only one I found.

Post by **Tormentius** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 7:21 pm

1ghz+ with 512MB RAM and a half decent mobile graphics card should be sufficient.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:51 am

Half decent like an Intel Extreme graphics, or do I need a Radeon 9000 64mb as minimum?

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:56 am

divx decoding is more cpu dependent, unless u got a graph card that supports some hardware accelerated shit?!?

for minimum specs i'd say 600mhz+ 128mb and a geforce2mx or higher (comparing with my old pc which runs divx perfectly -- amd550, 128mb pc133. gf2mx)

Post by **Kills On Site** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:15 am

Well I would say at least 256 MB of RAM. XP hates anything less, the extra RAM is worth it.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:18 am

Kills On Site wrote:Well I would say at least 256 MB of RAM. XP hates anything less, the extra RAM is worth it.

well i got win2k running on it with 128mb ram. I used to run it with 64mb and it still ran fine, so i think you can do fine with 128

Post by **Scourge** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:21 am

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:
Kills On Site wrote:Well I would say at least 256 MB of RAM. XP hates anything less, the extra RAM is worth it.
well i got win2k running on it with 128mb ram. I used to run it with 64mb and it still ran fine, so i think you can do fine with 128

Win2k and XP are not the same.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:22 am

scourge34 wrote:
bikkeldesnikkel wrote:
Kills On Site wrote:Well I would say at least 256 MB of RAM. XP hates anything less, the extra RAM is worth it.
well i got win2k running on it with 128mb ram. I used to run it with 64mb and it still ran fine, so i think you can do fine with 128
Win2k and XP are not the same.

oh really?

Post by **Scourge** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:24 am

Really.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:26 am

scourge34 wrote:Really.

ok how about this: use 2k instead of XP?!?!?!
do we have a winner?

Post by **Scourge** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:37 am

That would be up to him. That was never the question. I was just pointing out that 128 mb on Win2k is not the same as 128 on XP. XP will eat pretty much most of that just booting.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:38 am

thats right, your post was pointless.

Post by **Scourge** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:43 am

I think most would disagree. I'm not going to argue about it in here.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:44 am

uhmmm, nah

lol

Post by **Tormentius** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:01 am

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:thats right, your post was pointless.

Bad start for a new forum...

Scourge is right 2K and XP are quite different when it comes to resource needs so the post wasn't pointless.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:20 am

Tormentius wrote:
bikkeldesnikkel wrote:thats right, your post was pointless.
Bad start for a new forum...

Scourge is right 2K and XP are quite different when it comes to resource needs so the post wasn't pointless.

i know but the TS doesn't need XP for divx vieiwing, so why use it if it's just a resource hog.

btw. this is neither a start nor a new forum for me.

Post by **Kills On Site** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:50 am

Well since I have used XP and it runs movies very well, given enough RAM, I would suggest he get Windows XP, also XP is the most common and up-to-date Windows OS.

Also I have a computer, 550MHz PIII with 512MB of memory and running Win98 the video was choppy, put XP on there and it ran smooth as buttur. Granted 2000 and 98 are different, but it goes to show that XP has the best coding, or whatever you perfer to say, for video.

Also one can get Windows XP Pro with SP2 cheaper then Windows 2000

I would take XP with 256MB over 2000 with 128MB anyday

Post by **Tormentius** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:47 am

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:i know but the TS doesn't need XP for divx vieiwing, so why use it if it's just a resource hog.

btw. this is neither a start nor a new forum for me.

Well support is running out on 2K and patches are getting less frequent. IMO its better to stay up to date but thats a different topic. RAM is also (relatively) inexpensive.

If you're not new why the alt? Or is it just a new account altogether?

Post by **+JuggerNaut+** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:52 am

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:well i got win2k running on it with 128mb ram. I used to run it with 64mb and it still ran fine, so i think you can do fine with 128

sorry, no.

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:thats right, your post was pointless.

so was the time you spent registering here.

Post by **SOAPboy** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:58 am

bikkeldesnikkel wrote:
Tormentius wrote:
bikkeldesnikkel wrote:thats right, your post was pointless.
Bad start for a new forum...

Scourge is right 2K and XP are quite different when it comes to resource needs so the post wasn't pointless.

i know but the TS doesn't need XP for divx vieiwing, so why use it if it's just a resource hog.

btw. this is neither a start nor a new forum for me.

ok, in that case, he could run Win98..

Ram is cheap.. and any laptop is gonna come with 256 now a days..

As far as somethign for ONLY movies and shit, a 500+mhz is fine for a cpu.. 128-256 ram is more than enough depending on os..

dont need anything special.. its just video.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:05 am

Kills On Site wrote:Well since I have used XP and it runs movies very well, given enough RAM, I would suggest he get Windows XP, also XP is the most common and up-to-date Windows OS.

Also I have a computer, 550MHz PIII with 512MB of memory and running Win98 the video was choppy, put XP on there and it ran smooth as buttur. Granted 2000 and 98 are different, but it goes to show that XP has the best coding, or whatever you perfer to say, for video.

Also one can get Windows XP Pro with SP2 cheaper then Windows 2000

I would take XP with 256MB over 2000 with 128MB anyday

uhmmm i see totally no reason to prefer XP above 2k if you just wnt to watch videos. 2k does better decoding because of the simple fact that it consumes less resources.

Post by **bikkeldesnikkel** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:06 am

Tormentius wrote:
bikkeldesnikkel wrote:i know but the TS doesn't need XP for divx vieiwing, so why use it if it's just a resource hog.

btw. this is neither a start nor a new forum for me.
Well support is running out on 2K and patches are getting less frequent. IMO its better to stay up to date but thats a different topic. RAM is also (relatively) inexpensive.

If you're not new why the alt? Or is it just a new account altogether?

its a new acct alltogether, but i wanna get it back on my old mail.

the point is, hes just gonna use it for divx watching, why all this needless stuff? you gotta go as low as you can.