http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-HD-8850M-vs-GeForce-840M the AMD one is better, both GPUs are weak, but I think you should be okay playing on low-medium on the 1080p with the 8850M, the 768p resolution is just bad imo.
It even runs:
Diablo III
1920 x 1080 - High + AA
Radeon HD 8850M 43.75 fps VS GeForce 840M 17.7 fps barely running it.
Seems you will be able to play some games even on high, Dead Space 3 runs good too, 42fps.
Comment has been collapsed.
If 1920x1080 was too much I could just lower the resolution anyway so it wouldn't hurt to have the higher resolution available right?
Thanks for the detailed feedback, by the way.
Comment has been collapsed.
56 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by jojo1241
285 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by CapnJ
863 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by DaveFerret
640 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by CalamityUP
30 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by TinTG
902 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by InSpec
1,051 Comments - Last post 9 hours ago by sensualshakti
6 Comments - Last post 57 seconds ago by McZero
94 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by Aoryl
150 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by windows10hacker
6,401 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by igel2005
48 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by BreizhAtao
519 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by FatG
56 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Naviis
I'm trying to decide between a couple that are almost identical except one has a touchscreen, 1366 x 768 resolution, and a 2GB 840M, whereas the other has no touchscreen , 1920x1080 resolution, and a 2GB 8850M. The touchscreen doesn't really make much difference to me but it's one of the only distinguishing factors between the two so I listed it anyway. They're even priced within $20 of each other. The laptop will mostly see light use for work (some video editing and playback would be the most strenuous demands work will be making of it) and either could handle that easily so the only time it'll make a difference is when I game on it.
Comment has been collapsed.