Never liked Toshibas which gives a "comforting" feel that you also pay Toshiba tax.

And no mobile CPU is match for desktop one, I'd rather go with a desktop and a cheap Win 8 tablet for presentation purposes ( Asus T200 perhaps )

Amen to that. While I wouldn't say the TO NEEDS a particularly powerful CPU with his modest use case, mobile CPUs are at least 50% slower than mainstream desktop CPUs, at least in multithreaded workloads. Intel Mobile CPUs are still dualcores at max, which makes them comparable to the i3 desktop CPUs... with frequency differences and different Cache sizes, a mobile i7 might be a little bit faster than the fastest desktop i3 (IDK, I didn't really compare them that much).... but it will be at least 50% slower than a desktop (mainstream) i7.

On the flip side, the desktop i7 uses 2-6x as much power while running at full speed. That is a biggy when working on the road, but of course is not of much help if you are working thetered to a power cable. You might still save some electricity, but thats about it.

And price wise, the mobile i7 will be in the same territory as the desktop i7.... the desktop i3 which is comparable speedwise, but still uses more power, is much cheaper (which might make a difference in the total price if you buy a pre-assembled machine).

To cut it short -> TL; DR:

I second Unduli in going for specialized machines over one-does-it-all. Usually, you get more power for a better price.

A laptop is a good (or the only) choice if you need to work on the road. If you want to be able to work anywhere in your house, also.

If you have your office and will work with the machine thetered to the wall 100% (or more than 95%) of the time, i'd first go with a good desktop.... then look into what I need for the other 0-5% afterwards. Do you really need the same amount of power on the road? Or will a cheap laptop / tablet do for simple word processing or only some e-mail checking?

At least 8 MB RAM

Personally, I like a bit more RAM than that!

I don't know, man. 64KB should be enough for anyone.

That's what Big Billy G. used to say. :P

Every time I buy cheep, I regret it early.

Every time I buy cheep, I regret it early.

I have to concur with that. People look at you funny when they hear you dropped $3,000 on a state-of-the-art laptop, but they have repeatedly served me well.

I have to concur with that. People look at you funny when they hear you dropped $3,000 on a state-of-the-art laptop, but they have repeatedly served me well.

Now that I can agree with! I also did my few tries to get away cheap, always ended up with a sour expierience.

I went through 3 laptops during university... you know, I studied IT, it was used a lot for school, but I was also doing some gaming on it, and I lugged it to school and back every day. That tends to end up in a few drops from shoulder height, and other not so advisable events over the lifetime of a laptop.

My first, cheap cheap Acer started to go bad after less than a year. It was heavy, loud and not very powerful from the start, keys started to go dead (yes, emulator gaming does that to a cheap keyboard) and finally the GPU and Disk crapped out. Must have been damaged in one of the "oops, dropped my backpack" events.

Second one, more expensive Toshiba, was good for over a year with the same treatement. Would have soldiered on, if it wasn't for 1 or 2 broken keys... at that time, I bought a VERY expensive Sony Vaio, which lasted me through the rest of university (another 3 years), and then was used as my main computer at home for another year.

Amen to that. While I wouldn't say the TO NEEDS a particularly powerful CPU with his modest use case, mobile CPUs are at least 50% slower than mainstream desktop CPUs, at least in multithreaded workloads. Intel Mobile CPUs are still dualcores at max, which makes them comparable to the i3 desktop CPUs... with frequency differences and different Cache sizes, a mobile i7 might be a little bit faster than the fastest desktop i3 (IDK, I didn't really compare them that much).... but it will be at least 50% slower than a desktop (mainstream) i7.

Not true. I've got a quad-core with hyperthreading in my laptop, and its the same 4th generation i7 architecture as in my Desktop. It doesn't spin up quite as fast in turbo, has a slower base clock rate, and it spends more of its time at slower speeds to keep the power consumption and heat generation down, but its basically identical otherwise ( I think the desktop version has twice the cache, too). A laptop CPU isn't going to beat the best desktop CPU in sustained performance, no, but its a closer fight than you might expect. My laptop keeps pretty close pace with the top-end quad-core i5, in multithreaded workloads, as hyperthreading in my laptop makes up for the clockspeed advantage on the desktop, and cache numbers are pretty comparable. Its maybe 20%-25% slower than my 4770k desktop CPU, which is nearly as good as you can get without going to Socket 2011.

And my laptop CPU is two notches down from the best you can buy. If I were willing to drop another $500 or so I could have had 400Mhz better base/turbo, and doubled my cache. That would very nearly close the gap with my Desktop CPU.

Amen to that. While I wouldn't say the TO NEEDS a particularly powerful CPU with his modest use case, mobile CPUs are at least 50% slower than mainstream desktop CPUs, at least in multithreaded workloads. Intel Mobile CPUs are still dualcores at max, which makes them comparable to the i3 desktop CPUs... with frequency differences and different Cache sizes, a mobile i7 might be a little bit faster than the fastest desktop i3 (IDK, I didn't really compare them that much).... but it will be at least 50% slower than a desktop (mainstream) i7.

Not true. I've got a quad-core with hyperthreading in my laptop, and its the same 4th generation i7 architecture as in my Desktop. It doesn't spin up quite as fast in turbo, has a slower base clock rate, and it spends more of its time at slower speeds to keep the power consumption and heat generation down, but its basically identical otherwise ( I think the desktop version has twice the cache, too). A laptop CPU isn't going to beat the best desktop CPU in sustained performance, no, but its a closer fight than you might expect. My laptop keeps pretty close pace with the top-end quad-core i5, in multithreaded workloads, as hyperthreading in my laptop makes up for the clockspeed advantage on the desktop, and cache numbers are pretty comparable. Its maybe 20%-25% slower than my 4770k desktop CPU, which is nearly as good as you can get without going to Socket 2011.

And my laptop CPU is two notches down from the best you can buy. If I were willing to drop another $500 or so I could have had 400Mhz better base/turbo, and doubled my cache. That would very nearly close the gap with my Desktop CPU.

Beside from the fact that mobile CPUs are crippled in terms of features and performance in comparison to desktop ones, also they lack proper cooling of even stock fan of desktop ones substituted by copper pipe. This also creates a performance boundary which I witnessed when having a 18.4" i7 laptop, it wasn't Haswell but Sandy Bridge though

Not true. I've got a quad-core with hyperthreading in my laptop, and its the same 4th generation i7 architecture as in my Desktop. It doesn't spin up quite as fast in turbo, has a slower base clock rate, and it spends more of its time at slower speeds to keep the power consumption and heat generation down, but its basically identical otherwise ( I think the desktop version has twice the cache, too). A laptop CPU isn't going to beat the best desktop CPU in sustained performance, no, but its a closer fight than you might expect. My laptop keeps pretty close pace with the top-end quad-core i5, in multithreaded workloads, as hyperthreading in my laptop makes up for the clockspeed advantage on the desktop, and cache numbers are pretty comparable. Its maybe 20%-25% slower than my 4770k desktop CPU, which is nearly as good as you can get without going to Socket 2011.

And my laptop CPU is two notches down from the best you can buy. If I were willing to drop another $500 or so I could have had 400Mhz better base/turbo, and doubled my cache. That would very nearly close the gap with my Desktop CPU.

Ok, so I was not specific enough... I was talking about MOBILE CPUs... what you got there in your Laptop, most probably is NOT a mobile CPU... it might be a lower power Desktop CPU (well, okay, thats definition now if this qualifies for a "mobile" CPU or not)...

That means of course Desktop replacement Laptop, which means most of the time > 15" size and < 3h runtime off the power outlet. Which, in my book, is not a REAL laptop (as in machine that lets you work on the road), more like a PC you can move between offices and work in different rooms while keeping it hooked to a power outlet.

But I digress... yes, of course, that makes for a good third option I actually forgot about (hardly surprising with 80% of new laptops being "Ultrabooks" and what other stupid title style-centric ultra-thin laptops are sold under at the moment).

If the TO wants to be able to work in multiple rooms, work at home and at the office, and wants to work for a VERY SHORT TIME on the road (and doesn't mind the size and weight), a desktop-replacement Laptop might be a good choice.

Just get a sturdy backpack and don't try to stuff your 17" monster in your messenger bag...

Beside from the fact that mobile CPUs are crippled in terms of features and performance in comparison to desktop ones, also they lack proper cooling of even stock fan of desktop ones substituted by copper pipe. This also creates a performance boundary which I witnessed when having a 18.4" i7 laptop, it wasn't Haswell but Sandy Bridge though

which is why most laptops get quite hot under stress, and why the more powerful laptops (aka desktop replacement laptops) are generally much bigger than the "ultrabooks"... its not the size of the CPU that is different (well, not by much anyway), besides the GPU that might be bigger most of the bulk is created by the cooling system.

And yes, CPU throttling can be a very real performance issue, you will not find any mentioning of that in the spec sheet, that is why reading reviews of anything you are thinking of buying is mandatory IMO.

I bought an MSI GS60 2QE for this purpose today. :)

I bought an MSI GS60 2QE for this purpose today.

Desktop replacement...

Sounds like a pretty sensible configuration... for once at least an upper midrange / low highend card served with the "gamer laptop" mandatory i7 CPU, instead of either the obligatory GTX 860M for sub 1500$ laptops, or a jump directly into dual GPU configs combined with a ridicoulos price hike. And the price actually also looks quite sensible. Looks are quite subtle for a gaming laptop, which is good.

Reviews are favorable, only noting heat and short battery life as cons (which I personally would expect to be a cons in any desktop replacement laptop).

Yes, sounds like a pretty good deal. I would go for something like that, if I would be in the market for a gaming laptop.

Currently the only laptop that competes with the GS60 is the Razer Blade, of which I have heard good things from other game devs, but I would wait for the 2015 model on that one the 870M is a GPU that runs really hot where as the 970 is a lot cooler and more powerful.